Past, Present, and Future of the 360
1up has a piece talking with Peter Moore about the past and future of the Xbox 360. Launch challenges, futures plans, and potential roadblocks are all discussed. From the article: "EGM: You really didn't need a Halo to launch the Xbox 360, did you? PM: No, I don't think we did. It was never really in the plans. Clearly, when you're shipping Halo 2 the year before the launch of a new platform, to expect [developer] Bungie to then immediately move on to a brand-new architecture and bring out a third iteration of a franchise worthy of being one of the greatest franchises in videogame history, it's unreasonable. So, we didn't believe we needed it."
I've never played Halo. I don't think I have seen it being played either. Could someone please tell me what is so great about Halo?
Honestly, I'm not trolling here. What does Halo offer that is different and improved from other platform-based FPS? Is it the weapons? The controls? The plot? The visials? The levels? What does Halo do that makes it so great?
*** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
Clearly, when you're shipping [cool power supplies, fun games] the year before the launch of a new platform, to expect [cool power supply makers, fun games makers] to then immediately move on to a brand-new architecture and bring out a third iteration of [cool power supplies, fun games] worthy of being one of the greatest [cool power supplies, fun games] in videogame history, it's unreasonable.
This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
Once in a far distant past there exist a shooter for the mac called Marathon. By far the greatest game in history. Now freely available, on many platforms under the projet Aleph one.
"Is it the weapons?"
Yes. The weapons are satisfying (especially in Halo 2 with the sword), and you have a realistic amount of them on you (2 max with a half-dozen grenades) when fully loaded.
The melee combat is not bad also. It's very satisfying to crack skulls.
"The controls?"
The controls do allow for fun head-to-head, as well as a good feel in general. You know what you're doing at any time.
"The plot?"
The plot is one of the better points; the novelizations are good. The novel that connects Halo 1 and Halo 2's story is well thought out, and enjoyable.
Bungie made Marathon. They know what they're doing with story.
"The visials?
The visuals are about what you'd expect from a Geforce 2.5. Not as good as the new fancy Unreal engine or Half-Life 2, but certainly better everything released up until 2001 simply because the framerate tends to be steadier.
Most of the stuff I saw out on the PC in 2002/2003 didn't take advantage of bump mapping like Halo 1 did. Halo 2's a bit updated, but you can tell they were pushing the hardware to its limit.
"The levels?"
No, Halo's level design is pretty much the biggest pile of crap. The levels are the worst part. If they could get good level design, they would have the best console FPS on their hands.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
The 360 has sold 600k. The DS sold 1,200k. The Dreamcast sold 1,800k.
Launch numbers aren't great.
Yeah, this is probably due to shortages. Just something I thought I'd point out as I found it interesting and I figured you guys would too.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
I've gotten to the point where I only get games that my small set of friends (erm, "clan" -- can you still use that term if you suck?) are also willing to get, because simply, I ain't got the time to be wasting with sub-par online games. If what you're saying is the case, it looks like PDZ will be taking a lower spot on the prospective list. COD2 has already dissapointed in this regard, only to be saved by the campaign mode.
The thing is, they really coudn't wait, because they were losing money on every original XBox they shipped, with no end in sight.
They're probably still losing money on the 360 at launch, but they should be able to break even and get into the black in the long run. The PS3 is not likely to be able to undercut them on price like the PS2 could, because it is coming out a year after the 360, and because it has more expensive components like the blue-ray drive in it.
The Revolution is going to be cheaper, but it may not really compete with the 360, because it's so non-traditional in its design. It seems more likely to go its own way and complement the other two consoles.
Jon Acheson
All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
Before someone starts pondering the past, present, and future of the 360, how about we wait a while (maybe more than 2 months???) so the rest of the bad bugs and whatnot can be discovered. Has the scratched disc problem been fixed? I've heard about several problems so far with the 360, and I haven't heard of too many resolutions. Let it run for a bit before you decide its fate. Can you tell who's going to win the Boston Marathon 5 seconds after the starting pistol? (Ok, maybe you can, that was a bad example!)
And they said zombies weren't real!
Greatest Franchises? I don't think two decent FPS's make it Zelda or Sonic.
I'll go ahead and come over to your house and play marathon for you.
I have mod points but had to put my opinion out there. I was amazed that Peter was interviewed by them since EGM are Sony and Nintendo fanboys. They are fair and balanced like Fox News. I have all 3 consoles so I don't consider my self a fan boy but it's obvious they hate MS and it shows.
....... Thus ends my attempt at wit or whatever
They *were* losing money? Last I checked, I saw no official announcement that Xbox1 production had ceased. That would be a disaster eh? It would be like MS said, hey, get your 360 now, cuz we're pretty much done with X1.
To me, that's the most dangerous thing MS has done, show that it thinks the usual console lifecycle we've all gotten used to should be a good year or two shorter.
Here's what I *don't* need: Upgrading my console more than my PC.
-- I have fans? Wow.
Sorry to nitpick, but I'd say Soldier of Fortune's or Counterstrike's loadout restrictions are a little more realistic. Hell, even Dues Ex is more realistic given the kind of cyborg character you're dealing with. Let me illustrate. Why is it that in Halo, a pistol takes up the same inventory space as a rocket launcher?
Sure, Halo 2 half-addressed that with dual wielding, but it still was far from realistic. You still couldn't carry a large primary (rifle or larger), a medium secondary (SMG, shotgun, etc), and a pistol all at once unless you dual wielded. And if you carried a huge ass rocket launcher and a high calibur yet non-recoil sniper rifle, you'd move just as fast as if you were carrying one human pistol and one covenant pistol. And you could only carry those two pistols (three if you dual wield!), yet they take up far less space, use totally different means of storage on your person, and weigh far less than the rocket launcher + sniper rifle combo. There are ways to make carrying capacities in FPSs more realistic. Halo's method was just as arbitrary as Half Life's allowing players to carry ~10 different weapons with no restrictions.