Slashdot Mirror
86 games for the 360, 45 for the PS3
MBCook writes "Joystiq has posted lists of 86 Xbox 360 and 45 PS3 games that are expected to be released in 2006. They contain expected games (Halo 3, Killzone), ports (Burnout Revenge, Half-Life 2), sequels (SSX 4, Armored Core 4), and more. As for the Revolution? From the third link: 'For those who are wondering: the Nintendo Revolution list is just 8 titles long right now. Nintendo is being characteristically tight-lipped about their plans for the Revolution.'" The word seems to be that some of the mystery around the Revolution will be revealed at this year's GDC.
...121 will be sports.
Alright, all Nintendo fanboys start uniting about how the 8 games are quality over quantity in 3... 2... 1...
GO!!
I'd rather have quality than quantity when it comes to console games. I'm pretty sure that FFXII is worth about 20 xbox360 games...
Where the Music Matters
If the games are good, it shouldn't really matter who has more titles. This is nothing more than the console version of measuring penis length. Now, when you include previous-generation titles that play on the new system, who comes out ahead?
My vote is still for the PC.
The number of games expected to be released for one system in 2006 is far greater than the others. Only one system has been released already. Guess which one it is?
Is this anything other than an obvious function of stage of development? Or just some pro-360 spin?
Hasn't the mountain of discount no-hoper PS2 titles taught the industry to go for quality not quantity?
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
One decent game that kept me engrossed for hours and hours than 100+ rubbish games that I wish I'd never spent my money on. I suppose the problem for the developers though is tat they want to make a game that is just good enough to make you want to buy more but not so good that you never want to buy another one. It's a tricky problem and personally I think they have been failing badly for a number of years.
I used to have a better sig but it broke.
Here's one so far: Magical Tree
--
"Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
"Open source is evil." - Microsoft
DNF
Is that box 360 has less than double the number of titles planned this year than another console which has not even been released yet. Geez, Microsoft, you'd think the developers were shunning you.
As the author of the original article states on the very first line:
This list shouldn't really be compared to the list of Xbox 360 titles that are to be released in 2006 because the PlayStation 3 isn't out yet and because we still don't know a whole lot about the system or the games that are scheduled for it.
Now compare that with the headline for this story. I can't wait to see if the dupe headline is any better :)
From the link I followed to get to this story:
Games: 86 games for the 360, 45 for the PS3 16 of 3 comments
That's... weird.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
The PS3 is going to be using games that come on blu-ray disks, wich can hold a lot more data than the DVDs that the X-Box currently uses. No, there are no HD-DVD games for the x-box. Besides, Sony doesn't intend to sell the PS3 at a loss, so the profits won't have to be made back in the games. The games will cost less for the amount of resources it took to create them than they would for the X-Box 360.
are just part of the 2006 EA Sports lineup that the PS3 won't have (the 2007 lineup will be ready when the PS3 is released).
*ducks*
The 360 manufacturing problems are supposed to have no end in sight. At least for the rest of this year. Publishers must be at the very least pushing back 360 titles/ports as far as they can or outright just canceling some of the more marginal titles if the installed base isn't going to grow significantly in 2006.
Publishers have to be seeing what is clear to anyone who has been following the 360 news:
1) Ebay prices are right around retail levels with many auctions going unbid.
2) People are reporting seeing stacks of 360s at major retailers - have to wonder if Microsoft is paying people to post online about not being able to find a 360 anywhere
3) 360 defect/crashing threads on console message boards are simply insane and have to be seen to believed. The amount of hardware and software problems 360 owners are having are mind boggling.
4) 360 product sitting unsold on shelves right now with only a million or so 360 sold.
It doesn't take long for game publishers to react to a situation like this one for the 360. The Dreamcast was doing significantly better than the 360 and they rapidly saw the writing on the wall for the doomed console.
Much bigger news (and news that one would think would appeal directly to the /. crowd) is that so many third-party developers have already commited to the Revolution and many more are very interested. Not only that but the fact that from day 1 Nintendo has pledged support for indie/single developers! What more could we ask for, and it gets *zero* coverage. Now, this may change once the full details are known, but with all the fluff and hype covered about everything else this has received NOTHING.
Of those supposed 86 Xbox 360 titles, how many will even be decent? Judging by the fact that out of the 15 or so launch titles, maybe 1 is decent that equates to about 5-6 decent games over the full spread. So in a year and a half you get 5 or so decent games. Now, how many of those are cross-platform or PC games? Oblivion, anyone? And the fact that the Oblivion system specs. were released and not too massive (2ghz, 512MB, common ATI/Nvidia cards, DX9).
Same for the PS3. Oh, but wait Sony has said time and time again that the PS3 is NOT a game console. They are banking heavily on the blu-ray angle. We are all aware of the standard Sony fare and the same proportions of decent:crap as MS. So they may have 3 solid titles out of their lineup.
To buy either the 360 or PS3 to play a handful of titles that are still a year out is a bit silly. Add to this the slow release schedules due to cost and dev. time and you have two expensive consoles that will be seeing more standby time than action. Unless you use your PS3 to play all the Blu-Ray discs you will be buying up like crazy to replace those "so-outdated" DVD's you just built up. I guess just like how we all own so many UMD movies and games... ooh, and mini-discs, don't forget the ubiquitous mini-disc in America.
Two powerhouse machines built around closed standards, DRM, and hype... or the Revolution, with close to open development, low cost, quick development time, standard media, and a back catalog a mile long... even if you are a fanboy it is hard to not see this.
http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
Disgaea
If you've got a PS2 and like tactical games, I highly recommend getting it. Also consider that it has intuitive controls, a great storyline, a fair amount of humor, and, of course, Prinnies*. Alas, it's kinda hard to find at times due to a small production run.
* - Basically a penguin that explodes when you throw it and has a propencity for shouting 'Dood!'
If there was one game out there that could make my ears perk up and get me to actually look forward to the PS3, it's a new AC title on a more powerful system. Here's hoping they really take advantage of that power. Oh, and if the release of AC4 results in Kotobukiya putting out more Armored Core kits, all the better.
The AC game for the PSP could have got me buying a PSP, if it hadn't been a big AI training game.
---GEC
I'm but the humble pupil, seeking to snatch the scratchbuilt pebble from the master's fully articulated hand
Sony has done one thing right with the launch of the original PS and then the PS2: they had quantity over quality. The more games out there, the greater chance for more hits people will gravitate to. MS and Nintendo have not taken this approach with their previous systems. It looks like MS is getting as many titles out as possible with the 360, a smart move on their part. If they have more titles, they're more likely to have greater market and mindshare by the end of the year than the PS3. This will just lead to even more games for their system, and a win for us.
I don't doubt Sony's ability to get developers for the PS3, but it does look like they will not have as many titles a year from launch compared to the 360.
The system that's most amenable to shovelware tends to win. First it was the Atari 2600, then it was the NES ("Seal of Quality" notwithstanding). In the min-90s Sony took the shovelware crown from Nintendo. Now it's Microsoft's turn. They have delivered a platform that's far easier to develop for than their competitors, and more developers are going to commit to a Microsoft console. That generally means more shitty developers, but people tend to buy the console with the most industry support, not the one with the most great games (or else Dreamcast would've been end-of-lifed around now instead of 5 years ago).
N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
"Besides, Sony doesn't intend to sell the PS3 at a loss, so the profits won't have to be made back in the games. "
Yes absolutely Sony intends to sell the console at a loss. Other Blu-Ray players being released later this year will be pushing $1500. There is no way they are selling an early (practically beta) version of a Blu-Ray player AND a gaming machine with a CELL processor at cost.
Sony will most likely be selling this at a substantial loss. PS3's release will coincide with the release of Halo3 and a Xbox360 price cut to around $250. PS3 must launch in the 400-500 range at most to have any chance of competing, and this is much less than the manfacturing costs.
because Konami, a Japanese game company I hold shares in, is producing them.
Think one is a soccer game, another one is a dance game, and can't remember what the other one is off hand.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Well, 255 are FPS clones that all are pretty much the same, 49 are game ports that are only there to use HDTV graphics, and 50 are sports games that are pretty boring, which leaves you with about 6 that are worth even looking at ...
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
http://xbox360.ign.com/objects/772/772076.html
And raise you one Elder Scrolls. I spent more time with Morrowind than any other non-MMORPG game ever. If anything were to convince me to buy a 360, that would. Seems kind of silly to drop that much money for one game though, and I've no intention of ever hooking the thing up to the Internet so I'll probably end up giving both consoles a miss (I'll be damned if I ever buy another Sony product.)
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
...or do both lists look like it's going to be a slow year of console gaming.
So far, I'm only interested in Halo 3, Winning Eleven, Lost Odyssey, the Rockstar game, and Jade Empire 2 (which is only rumored). I'll be playing Elder Scrolls IV on my PC (who wants to pass up all that fan-made goodness?). What happened to Playstation RPGs? There doesn't seem to be a single one on the list, which is highly disappointing.
I wish Nintendo would get with publishing info about upcoming games on their system. The controller just isn't enough... in fact, I don't really care much about it. Give me some games!
I'm glad the Xbox 360 is getting some games. It's been hilarious watching the magazines salivate over the launch titles. Imagine Publishing's 360 magazine (UK) launched four months prior to the launch of the console. I bet they were tired of filling the entire mag with previews.
The price of an electronic device can be divided into a fixed development cost for the first unit, plus a marginal cost for each additional unit. The fixed development cost is usually spread out over each "expected" sale for an initial period. Which is why the cost fall drastically after that period.
It is quite likely that the PS3 will be sold for a price above the marginal cost, especially since Sony is co-developer of both the CELL processor and the blue-ray disc technology. Since they have alreaady paid directly for the development of these technologies, they will not have to pay for it again through a unit license fee. Unlike other providers of CELL or blue-ray based devices.
They will still have to regain the development cost for all three technologies, most likely in game licensing fees.
*grumbles about title/console exclusivity*
For those that would die defending it, Freedom
has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.
-Super Smash Bros. = Rev.
-Mario Kart Revolution = Rev.
-Super Mario 128 = Rev.
-Metroid Prime: Reborn = Rev.
-The Legend of Kid Icarus = Rev.
-Xenias = Rev.
-Killing Day = Rev.
-Psychopath = Rev.
-Animal Crossing = Rev.
-The Legend of Zelda = Rev.
-Star Wars Rogue Squadron 4 (no title as of yet Q4 2006) = Rev.
-Madden 2007 = Rev., DS
-Eternal Darkness: Insanity Fulfilled = Rev.
-Capcom title (Not Resident Evil 5) (Q3 2008) = Rev.
-Advance Wars: Annihilation = Rev, DS
-Burnout 4 = Rev.
-Flat Out 2 = Rev.
-F.E.A.R.: Everything Objective Foretold = Rev.
-Stalker: Shadow of the Chernobyl = Rev.
-Guts N' Glory = Rev.
-Umehas Ookieyara = Rev.
-Ichi the Killer (slated for Japan possible U.S. release) = Rev.
-Donkey Kong = Rev
Here I'm reading "AC" and "AC4" as "Ace Combat 4." Oh well, the already fun photo realistic AC4 and AC5 are almost as much fun as SOCOM to me.
If you don't like upgrading your PC, then don't do it ... If you don't want the new functionality that requires the faster PC hardware, then you can stick with games without it.
Will games without it continue to be released?
Historically Nintendo has been the most closed of all the games console companies, just go check out their developer requirements at WarioWorld some time.
ivan256 seems to think that anybody who knows how to write the simplest business plan can satisfy those requirements. If you disagree, see this discussion and help me out if you can.
Why? No actual Revolution games have been announced. None. Nintendo has said that there "will be" a Metroid for the Revolution. And they have shown two seconds of pre-rendered footage. That's no announcement.
We don't know how many Revolution games will come out. There will most likely be more than 8, but we don't know yet. There's no reason to argue either way. There's no reason to "defend" Nintendo for "only having 8 games", because we don't know how many (or, more importantly, which) games they will have.