Slashdot Mirror
The Shadow of Kong
The BBC is reporting that the makers of the Kong game recommend against purchasing the 360 version of that title. The article states that an Ubisoft rep, Yves Guillemot, stated that the 360 version is just too dark to play well on a non-HD screen. However, Voodoo Extreme got in touch with Ubi for the official party line, and they had something very different to say. From the article: "Ubisoft is actively investigating isolated reports of resolution issues on specific plasma screens, which should be easily resolved by adjusting/increasing the settings. Ubisoft believes that King Kong offers one of the best gaming experiences available on the Xbox 360 and encourages gamers to check it out for themselves."
Although I understand your sarcasm, what I find amusing is that the "something different" that they supposedly said is little more than a claim of "out of context!", followed by "it got good reviews!" and "buy our game! (it's better than the other XBox360 ones)".
Oh yeah, and a single line acknowledging that there is an issue on some televisions.
So read from other news sites that are paid to write glowing, positive reviews of the piece of turd that is the 360?
We've had power supply problems, subpar games, and graphics that have yet to exceed the worst of the last generation of game systems. How is the XBox 360 *not* a disaster?
[Since this is obviously flamebait, I'm posting as AC. -- sc]
This is a sig. Deal with it.
Oh, never mind, since I missed checking the Post Anonymously button.
;)
Mod me down as flamebait -- unless you think it is insightful..
This is a sig. Deal with it.
25% of the TV's sold in the US were hidef in 2004. Estimates for 2005 are roughly 50% of the TVs sold. And it is looking like sales of hidef TV's will reach critical mass in 2006.
Percent of sales of TVs means nothing, because people do not buy a new TV every year. Hell, most peopole buy a big TV maybe once every 15 years.
Every single person who came of age in the 90s and spent $500 or more on a 32+ inch TV is *not* going to rush out and replace it with an HDTV until absoltely necessary. Why? Theres a multitude of reasons. First of all, they're 40-some years old now with kids to feed, and don't have thousands of dollars of disposable income to drop on a luxury item. Second, they dont give a shit, to them their current TV is just fine.
Main point - the percent of TV sales in any given year is an infentessimal amount compared to the number of TVs in current use. Hell, I have two 14 inch TVs in my house from 1982-1984 with cable boxes, one on the porch and one downstairs. Why should I have go out and blow $800 bucks on two HDTV-compat. models of simmilar size? You think twice the res makes a huge difference on a 13" screen? You think I can fit a TV any larger on my porch? Think again.
One in every 3 customers will have a hidef tv in their house
I would like to know what this statistic is based on - but even if it is true, it still means that 66% of households will *not* have an HDTV. You think any government will piss off 66% of its voting base to push some technology they are not ready for down their throats? It would be political suicide.
And one more point - all those people in that 66 percent,the ones who wont have HDTVs when the Revolution comes out? All the ones with kids to feed, middle class, etc? Thats the Revolution's target market - cheaper console, lots of kids. Nintendo has never marketed to the 16-24 year old market like the Xbox, they target the 6-18 year old market. You still think it's such a bad move?