Slashdot Mirror
2005's Console Hardware In Review
Next Generation is running an examination of the 2005 hardware announcements from the big three console companies. They look at details and benchmarks released so far for the next-gen consoles. From the article: "The wraps were taken off the PlayStation 3 at Sony's pre-E3 press conference. Non-playable demos and canned footage games in development (over which arguments still rage over what was 'real' and what were renders made to be 'representative') wowed the media and stole a good bit of thunder from the somewhat underwhelming Microsoft presentation that followed."
OK, I'll feed the troll...
And what exactly are you doing by buying an Xbox? Oh, that's right, Microsoft is the 'happiest place on earth' and doesn't do anything evil...
For the most part, big corporations are evil. You can't get that big, and stay that big, without doing something wrong once in a while.
So, I pick my evil. And that evil is Sony. They were here before Microsoft, and they were my first gaming system I owned. So I'll stick with them.
And, I just don't like Microsoft as a gaming console. They have enough already with basically running 90% of the PC's out there (mine included). They don't deserve to get my living room too.
Check out the best P2P sharing website: MEDIACHEST.COM
The GP didn't even mention Microsoft. You did. If you want to look at evil, none of the Big 3 are exactly blameless. Way back in the day, Nintendo engaged in anti-competitive behavior (which was later deemed illegal) to keep 3rd party companies from releasing games on multiple platforms, basically strangling the SMS and TG16. MS engaged in anti-competitive behavior with Internet Explorer and elsewhere through the Windows operating system. Sony is the more recent evildoer with their rootkits and whatnot.
"So, I pick my evil. And that evil is Sony. They were here before Microsoft, and they were my first gaming system I owned. So I'll stick with them."
I'm glad eveyone doesn't share your view or most of us would be stuck playing Atari Jaguars or some new-fangled Intellivision right now. I loved the first gaming system I owned (Atari 2600) but the Atari 7800 was just inferior to the NES. I switched systems and quite frankly don't regret it (Though I do wish they would've made a Proline-style controller for the NES.). Why not look for the better (in terms of both hardware and software available) system and ignore who made the thing? MS can have the honor of having their logo visible on a plastic box in my living room if they put out the best gaming system out there.
Let's not get carried away with arguing about these systems. You can compare performance all you want but in this case that shouldn't be the reason you buy one of these systems. They are all aimed at different audiences.
Nintendo puts out a new system not much more powerful than the last but has the most innovative controller. (Remember kids don't point it at your eye)
Sony. They know consoles. They've proven it, to me at least. Their new system is supposed to dominate. I just hope it is more like the first xbox in regards to being so easy to mod.
Microsoft. Of course the xbox 360 will be good. This company has literally tons of money lying around just ready to be thrown at a new project. Although, like all things from Microsoft we have to wait for them to patch all the bugs.
Personally, I will stick with Sony then grab a new xbox when the price drops. As far as Nintendo is concerned. I lived without a gamecube so i can do without anything else the put out. Especially if Resident Evil is going to be multi platform from now on.
--
res ipsa loquitor
You know there is an alternative to both evil corperations: NINTENDO!
(Though I do wish they would've made a Proline-style controller for the NES.).
If you're still an NES gamer, then try to hunt down an Epyx 500XJ joystick. (I think the NES version was marketed by Konix.) It was an excellent controller that was similair to Atari's ProLine, but MUCH more comfortable to hold. I still own a pair of the Atari/Commodore version of the stick, and they are the best of the classic controllers, period.
Must... think up... something... clever!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4517362.stm
...to see them quote Sony's "shipped" numbers as "user base," which assumes that stores have entirely sold out their stocks already.
" Non-playable demos and canned footage games in development (over which arguments still rage over what was 'real' and what were renders made to be 'representative') wowed the media and stole a good bit of thunder from the somewhat underwhelming Microsoft presentation that followed."
1) The Playstation3 footage was not created by PS3 hardware. This has been confirmed dozens of times, there is no 'argument'. 2) The Microsoft presentation had actual playable software. I was there, and people cared about the Microsoft presentation a ton more.
Dont hate the playa....hate the game.
If it wasn't for C, we would be stuck using BASI, PASAL and OBOL.
No sony is just still a padawan, MS is the true dark lord of the sith.
What would be real scary if the two join up.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Hell, even if they put a game system out there that has a decent supply of must-play games. Or one history-setting game. I got a PSX for FF7. (I ended up with a lot more titles of course, but that was the seller for me.) I got a Cube, not because it had better graphics, or had a funky controller... it had Mario, Zelda, Metroid, and some others. Enough to make it worth owning.
Microsoft doesn't get a place in my livingroom because, their being Microsoft aside, they don't have any games. That's all it's about. Halo was---maybe---an A title, maybe a B+ title. It's a FPS, and it didn't do anything special, other than being the only top exclusive title on its system. You don't buy a system for a single A/B+ title. You may buy it for a AAA title, or if it has a lot of B-A titles. But the XBOX had neither. Nor, as of yet, does the 360.
This is, perhaps---probably---why people give Sony the benefit of the doubt and bank on their systems. The PS1 had tons of good games. The PS2 had tons of good games. The PS3 already has a ton of good games. (And contrary to popular slashdot opinion, the PSP also has tons of good games.) So they're safe to bank on.
This is also why people give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt: there's always going to be Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Pokemon, Kart, and a legion of other Nintendo franchises. And even if there aren't a ton of them, they'll all be AAA titles.
So in the end, if your definition of "the best" means "the best library of games," then I think you're spot on.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
Secondly both the 360 and PS3 are far less impressive if you play them on your old fashioned tv. Real HD tv's aren't selling yet.
This bit comes from the struggle between those who wish to cancel analog tv broadcasts and go digital completly (saves cost and avoids dragging the conversion on for decades) vs those who do not with to burden every household with the costs of a new expensive hd tv.
What if the public (no not people who post here) decided to buy neither of these consoles? What if they remain with the current hardware and instead of buying a 360 and next christmas a PS3 instead give their kids a nice bundle of games? Games that can be played on the old console and the old tv in the kids room (so dad can watch soccer on the living room tv in peace).
360 sales have been limited to say the least. Of course there is a shortage but with the numbers mentioned in the article it would have to have been very bad for the 360 if there hadn't been a shortage.
Could the big number, the number of customers that made the PS2 stand so far ahead in sales stay away? Hardcore gamers will buy anything and they can be significant but not enough to make a profit. When you read that a 1:2 ratio for handhelds:games is not bad it explains those gamers I know that got a GBA in every color.
What if the x-box and nintendo sales were the core dedicated gamer market, who also own a PS2 and the difference between those and the PS2 sales was the rest of the market that is currently in the stores deciding what goes under the christmas tree? For how many x-box/gamecube owners was that their only console?
Not having the actuall 360 on the shelves makes it easy to decide not to buy that one this year. Next time for such a purchase in normal households would be a kids birthday. Only those kids lucky enough not to be born near the holiday season however. Then the PS3 will be coming closer and closer making it easier to postpone a 360 purchase to see what the PS3 will do. And then it will be time for the 360 to make a price cut so lets wait till then.
Is this likely? Well no perhaps not but I find it intruguing. It has happened with other replacement techs were the consumer just did not pick it up. Granted the 360 is not to the x-box what the mini-disc was to the cd but still. Wouldn't it be fun if all the consoles bombed.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Responsible: Yes.
Directly: No.
It's oversimplification that gets people to stick their fingers in their ears and ignore anything potentially insightful that might be said.
A corporation as large as Sony has diversified its interests such that if it doesn't get your money from you buying a Sony product, it will get your money through another, less direct channel. That's capitalism for you.
"Her idea of wit is nothing more than an incisive observation humorously phrased and delivered with impeccable timing."
I bet the failure of a whole generation of consoles would be almost as funny as inevitable market downsizing and reduction in future choices if such a downturn took place...
Exactly.
That is the reason I stick with playstation (I recently gave up on Nintendo, but I will probably buy the Revolution when the next Metroid comes out for it).
I am in fatuated with Gran Turismo. I've been playing it for what, 6 years now? So when I need to play Gran Turismo 5, and I need to buy a PS3 to do it, I will.
Check out the best P2P sharing website: MEDIACHEST.COM
Yup, Nintendo is always a safe bet if you enjoy Nintendo games and franchises. The thing is, none of the others really have that. Sony is mainly 3rd party support(with a few exceptions, like Gran Turismo, Ico, etc.), and that can fade or go cross-platform, diluting the importance of that. Everyone expected the N64 to get everything the SNES had when the PS was first released. Didn't work out that way because of cart limitations and nintendo's licensing scheme. FFVII propelled Sony into dominance, and Sony still can't stand on the strength of their first parties alone.
/. has a heavy oldschool gamer population(and apparently a high-proportion of us are BORED and want new stuff in our games given general reaction to stuff). I look at the PSP's lineup and I see poor console ports and basically the same old stuff(and no, I don't care if the titles are different, new brand != new game). Nothing to really get excited about outside of lumines, just your typical playstation filler-level junk. Oh, and I don't like Sony very much atm.
People here don't like the PSP's lineup because
They seem to really skimp on optics(or I have a karmic label on my soul reading give defective Sony merchandise), and have a low amount of QA(which MS apparently is trying to copy), a lot of people got screwed by that, and I really don't think the PS3 is all that safe of a bet. Partly because of that, partly because it's just current gen, +3 pretty, and partly because, well I don't like Sony very much atm.
I agree with you that Halo is very overrated. It's maybe a B game. *BUT* the one thing it has that's awesome is LAN play. LAN play is great, only needing one box/TV per four people and an off-the shelf hub is even better. That's what elevated an average FPS up into AAA/cult status. It's Goldeneye with LAN support. Apart from that and Ninja Gaiden, the XBox didn't have much except for cross-platform releases. That's why I didn't get one, even tho my MS dislike has been on the wane since Win2k came out.
The 360, as opposed to the XBox, has one of the best features I've ever seen in the form of Live Arcade. Take the garagegames/web-games market, make it so it can actually make money, and I'm positive we're going to see a ton of stuff go through live arcade. Same with the rev's download service. If both of those pan out the way I think they will, I would honestly be happy with a 360 and Rev even if no 360/rev games ever get pressed to disc. And that means they go onto the to-buy list. The PS3 otoh, is going to need to get some impressive games actually released before it enters consideration.
The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."