Hints at the Future of the Xbox 360 Emerge

CES has brought out quite a bit of news, for subjects across the tech industry. The future of the Xbox 360 seems to a subject Microsoft can't talk enough about. Gates' keynote touched on new media partnerships for Live Marketplace, like the collaboration with Disney/ABC. A post-keynote email to several games writers noted that 2008 will be the company's year to capitalize on strong hardware and software sales from the holiday season, and that several as-yet-unannounced exclusive 360 titles are in the works. Fans of the platform might still have some anxiety this year; a rumour on the 1up site indicates Microsoft is already working on a game for the next-next-gen console to bear the Xbox name.

Comments

I Have Seen the Future

[eldavojohn]

Gates plans to market the XBox 360 as an alternative to the OLPC. While the price is not $188 yet, his CEO voodoo math has predicted that by 2010 it will be $188. It will have two straps added to it so that it can be worn like a backpack and come with heads-up display helmets which he bought at reduced cost from Lucas after all of his scenes with clones in Star Wars. Freakish looking shock troopers will poor forth from 3rd world countries and create waves of ultra intelligent Xbox live users chanting for more NASCAR and looking to 'kick some ass.'

No longer concerned with rice and potable water, they will demand badges and strive to be atop a point ranking system. Several dictators will realize that equipping the outfits with actual weapons and removing the heads up helmets make them perfect mindless warriors with twitch movements that would put Ali to shame.

All hippie wii players will be destroyed in the great cleansing while PS3 players will live it out safely, unknowingly in their basements.

After that, the XBox 360 will be useless. Used and marketed in more ways than a Singapore whore, the XBox 360 will shave its head in a desperate cry for attention. Then it will start dropping babies all over the place and release an album with the title track ripping into Gates.

The XBox 360 will then spend the rest of eternity in the old consoles home with the NeoGeo, TurboGrafix 16 and Jaguar 32 playing pong and solitaire. Visiting hours will be from noon to 5pm Monday-Friday.

Re:I Have Seen the Future

[downix]

What in the world is a Jaguar 32?

**pets his Jaguar 64**

The Atari 32-bit system was the Panther, get it right.

Re:I Have Seen the Future

[SnarfQuest]

It will have two straps added to it so that it can be worn like a backpack

Will it come complete with a month's supply of burn cream?

Re:I Have Seen the Future

[Creepy]

heh - probably the name it should have had - the Panther was never released and the Jaguar wasn't exactly a 64 bit system, it was a 32 bit CPU (the motorola 68000) and 32 bit coprocessor (essentially a GPU) with a 64 bit ALU (essentially an integer math coprocessor). Using the same argument, many of the 32 bit machines with 64 bit FPUs (like my mom's mac circa 1996) were also 64 bit machines.

Re:I Have Seen the Future

[downix]

It depends on how you measure. Atari's main claim was because the memory system was 64-bit, as well as the math unit. Much like how GPU's were classified as 64-bit in that same time period. I'd classify the Atari as a first-step to a 64-bit platform, moreso than some other claims of 64-bit before and since.

Re:I Have Seen the Future

[Creepy]

Computers of that era could move memory in larger blocks than the processor would allow, as well - in fact, I (and others - it was documented in The Black Art of 3D Game Programming, or some other book in that era) exploited that fact to copy blocks of aligned 'short' data using cast to double to quadruple the memory move speed for software blitters. Even more fun was using asynchronous floating point units in parallel with integer units on some processors (macs and many UNIX machines first, later Intel, though Intel had its serial MMX unit by that point which gave equivalent or better speed) to process.

Next-Next-Gen

[Some guy named Chris]

Please tell me we aren't going to start using the term "next-next-gen".

Can't we just start calling the current consoles "current gen"?

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[mathletics]

Next gen isn't current gen until the current gen dies, and my PS2 is still kicking.

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[Anonymous Coward]

How about we call it "the successor to the Xbox 360" instead of "the next-next-gen console to bear the Xbox name". See how much easier that is?

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[KillerBob]

Coincidentally, my FamiCom still works....

(Also known as the original 8-bit Nintendo Entertainment System)

Doesn't change the fact that I now own a Wii.... It's not "next gen" any more, because it's on the market now. They aren't still selling *new* PS2s. Whether games are still being made or not is irrelevant. They aren't still making them, therefore it's not still the current generation.

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[rootofevil]

Doesn't change the fact that I now own a Wii.... It's not "next gen" any more, because it's on the market now. They aren't still selling *new* PS2s. Whether games are still being made or not is irrelevant. They aren't still making them, therefore it's not still the current generation.

sure they are. its just called the pstwo now. big box stores have them for 129.

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[BitwizeGHC]

We could call it "the eighth console generation" according to the convention used by Wikipedia (current gen is the seventh).

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[KillerBob]

Just because they're selling them doesn't mean they're *making* them....

While I don't speak for Sony, it's not exactly in their best interest to keep building them, as that detracts from PS3 production.

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[CambodiaSam]

Perhaps people are lumping the Wii in there with "next-gen" (regardless of technical prowess). Then based on the availability I guess it's fair to call it that. When you see a Wii on the shelf with some dust on it, then they can all be called "current".

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[the computer guy nex]

"Next gen isn't current gen until the current gen dies, and my PS2 is still kicking."
I have exponentially more titles I still play on NES compared to my PS2. Is PS2 "next gen" still?

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[Orange Crush]

They aren't still selling *new* PS2s.

Yes they are.

Last/Current/Next/Latest Generation vocab aside, the PS2 has built an enormous library of titles and new titles continue to be released for it. PS2s will remain on many store shelves for some time to come. There are quite possibly still more PS2s out there, functioning, and connected to TVs (not packed away in a closet) than all 3 "new gen" consoles combined. It's in decline, to be sure, game studios have finally (and very recently) begun shifting their primary focus away from PS2 to the new consoles. But there's definitely still some life left in the old girl.

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[mOdQuArK!]

Boy, are you behind the marketing curve - obviously we're going to call it "next^2 gen".

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[Chris Burke]

Please tell me we aren't going to start using the term "next-next-gen".

Can't we just start calling the current consoles "current gen"?

No! Because then you give up the idea that these devices are The Future(tm), which is much more exciting than admitting that they are nothing more than the boring old Present.

The "next gen" will only become "current gen" when the companies selling these things want us to get excited about their next product that will be out in a year.

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[edwdig]

They actually remodeled the PS2 recently. In late November they announced a revision of the slim version that includes the power supply inside the unit.

I'd take that as a sign that they're still making them.

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[Skreems]

Given that the PS2 was still the best selling console on the market under a year ago, and sold more than the PS3 in December, I would have to guess that they are still making them. Heck, it's the only console on the market that can compete with the Wii on price.

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[donaldm]

The PS2 is still alive and some great games are being made for it. I have never regretted buying my PS3 since it is backwards compatible and smooths and upscales PS2 games which IMHO give many PS2 games a second life so much so that I am not really worried about buying native PS3 games. This has two benefits for me, 1) I save money over buying PS3 games and 2) many new PS2 games are really good. This was great when there where few PS3 games I liked but now that there are some PS3 games I like I find I am still playing and enjoying those PS2 games and even some new ones which means that I am am quite happy to wait till the PS3 games that I like come down in price.

Now the downside??... Hmm can't think of any.

Currently playing FFX11, Dragon Quest, Phychonauts (odd but really fun) and many other great PS2 games and oh yes "Oblivion". Sigh I really should get out more.

Re:Next-Next-Gen

[ivan256]

Wait, the PS2 isn't "next-gen" anymore? But it has a "2" right in the name!

Let me get this straight...

[lutz7755]

Microsoft is going to try to continue to market the xbox 360? And write games for it? As well as collaborate with other companies to enhance it's live features?

This is truly remarkable news.

Re:Let me get this straight...

[moogaloonie]

I know! Microsoft collaborating? Can you believe it?!

Re:Let me get this straight...

[TheRaven64]

Microsoft always collaborates when it enters a new market until it has divided existing players into three categories:

• Those that are going to die without help.
• Those that are a threat to their existing business models and need to be killed.
• Those that complement their existing business models and need to be bought.

Once those in the first category are dead, those in the second category have been killed through anticompetitive practices and those in the third category have been bought, then it stops collaborating.

Where does it leave the PC?

[AndGodSed]

Not to start a flame war, but will this console orgy mean the end of PC gaming? And how will DRM be integrated into the whole mess? HD gaming disabled because you dared buy a new tv? I seem to remember a recent slashdot story about that...

Re:Where does it leave the PC?

[blahplusplus]

"Not to start a flame war, but will this console orgy mean the end of PC gaming?"

Doubtful, PC gaming has had it's ups and downs, I think the real problem now is software quality in games has leveled off and market saturation is taking effect. PC games still have MMO's, RPG's, FPS and racing, it's just more cross platform.

How can you say the last year has been bad for PC gaming? You'd have to be pretty out of the loop, thats for sure.

Re:Where does it leave the PC?

[Erwos]

The low sales of Crysis are troubling. Doom 3 sold very well, and it was equally a system-killer. There is legitimate concern that PC game piracy is reaching epic proportions, enough to actually make game development unprofitable.

Re:Where does it leave the PC?

[PrescriptionWarning]

I think you're leaving out some very important information about the lack of sales when compared to doom 3:

first off, it had been like 10 years since the release of doom 2, which as we all know doom to be a very popular old time favorite for many of us. on the other hand, far cry was never as popular, and even though it was pretty fun, had nothing new to bring to plate that we hadn't already seen in the likes of halflife and whatnot

second, most people's PCs can run crysis, but at the Low settings. the low settings make the game look exactly like farcry, so whats the point.

third, there's just nothing else notable about crysis besides the graphics (if you have the hardware for it). And even there its only for the effects, take a look at call of duty 4: sure the graphics aren't near crysis, but the presentation is tremendously powerful and makes it work.

fourth, the single player in crysis was fun, kinda, but really really short. combine that with a poorly designed multiplayer and you have a game with no longevity. in essence you have a 50 dollar sink hole for anyone except those who have a powerful new computer.

Re:Where does it leave the PC?

[__aaqvdr516]

Every time a new set of consoles come out there are the people that predict that it's the end of PC gaming. In this gen, besides the Wii, the consoles have become much more computer like. At the same time our PC's are becoming increasingly "home theater" PC's. So the real question is, will the next gen system end up being your console + home theater. If MS and Sony had their way, you'd be doing it right now on your 360/PS3.

Re:Where does it leave the PC?

[blahplusplus]

"The low sales of Crysis are troubling."

Which is not surprising given that game developers have over-saturated the market with FPS clones for some time now, the industry has done it to itself.

Supreme commander sold well enough to engender an expansion and talk of a second game. One star falls, anothers rises. Must be something to do with not flooding the market with crap people don't want to pay for maybe? hmm.. I think so! Just because dev's/pubs make a game does not mean I am obligated to buy it just because it exists and was made.

"Doom 3 sold very well, and it was equally a system-killer."

Doom 3 was a recognizable brand from a recognizable company "Crysis" and "Far cry" were never on the level of Doom 3 in terms of being *known*, there are so many FPS that I have passed a lot of them by, at some point you 'reach your fill', because you know it's going to be more of the same in some (most likely crappy rip off) of something you've seen before in the last 10 years. Game dev's / publishers are doing it to themselves being the myopic about the state of the industry and the market. So I'm not going to shed a tear, many other game dev's are doing just fine. Some win, others lose, that's life.

"There is legitimate concern that PC game piracy is reaching epic proportions, enough to actually make game development unprofitable."

Have you ever considered the economics of making games is broken? Game developers and industry pushed the new consoles, consumers don't control these companies, they sped up the development and pushed the graphics angle faster and faster, the drove up their *own* dev costs. Gamers have absolutely no control over these companies, and the decision making.

Re:Where does it leave the PC?

[ucblockhead]

It's not piracy. It's consoles being able to run more and more of the sorts of games PCs are known for, and being able to run them without all the hassles of PC gaming rigs. The death-knell of PC gaming is games like Orange Box, Bioshock and Unreal Tournament running on consoles.

Re:Where does it leave the PC?

[edwdig]

Game developers and industry pushed the new consoles, consumers don't control these companies, they sped up the development and pushed the graphics angle faster and faster, the drove up their *own* dev costs. Gamers have absolutely no control over these companies, and the decision making.

You do realize that the Xbox 360 and Wii came out when they did because their predecessors stopped selling, right? Consumers said they had enough of the Xbox and GameCube, hence the need for the newer systems. The PS2 was the only console of the previous generation still selling. And it's still selling better than the PS3 is. So far, consumers have said they weren't ready for the PS3.

Re:Where does it leave the PC?

[jcnnghm]

And that's exactly the reason I haven't got it. When I upgrade my video card, I'll pick up a copy, but until then I'll stick with my 360. The physics and their impact on game play look intriguing, but as I understand it you can't take advantage of that on lower settings.

Re:Where does it leave the PC?

[rtb61]

Consoles are all about tacking on a licence fee for the console manufacturer. At the end of the day, PC games can always discount to the actual licence fee the console manufacturer charges, and always win the price war.

Consoles were originally about selling hardware at a price point regular PC couldn't compete with, that is their only advantage, we cheap powerful PC reach that price point consoles are a dead end. Why limit yourself to a toy when you can get full free choice with a Linux PC.

Re:Where does it leave the PC?

[isntwargreat]

Why do you have to go and ruin some perfectly reasonable points with totally incorrect, misinformed statements? Most people can't run Crysis. Duh. The number of people who own graphics cards with 256 mb of memory is quite low relative to the total population who own a PC/Mac... You know what "majority" means, right?
Unless you're on AMD, you are going to need a pretty fast processor to meet the minimum specs. My Girlfriend's brand new intel core duo laptop is not up to par... she runs vista so her dual 2 ghz processor is .2 ghz short of the requirements.
Also, your assertion that the graphics are the only notable thing in the game is pretty far off... the physics in Crysis _are_ very impressive. very few games allow the level of atomization found in Crysis, and so far, it does it better than anything else I've played (havent played call of duty 4 yet...).
Having said that, it's impressive that Crysis scales as well as it does. With the level of physical interaction possible in the game, it's surprising that a typical gaming PC from a couple years ago will usually be able to play it, provided that it has an adequate graphics card.

Re:Where does it leave the PC?

[blahplusplus]

"Consumers said they had enough of the Xbox and GameCube, hence the need for the newer systems. The PS2 was the only console of the previous generation still selling."

Notice your first and second sentence, now ask you self *why* the ps2 is selling and why sony *needed* to release the PS3. The PS3 was to be released because they knew they had to release it, otherwise their competitors would release something else. The PS2 won the last console war BECAUSE it had all the good games. There was no actual *need* for a next playstation console if the other players were completely wiped out, but the loser companies were still competitive and are forced to do what they have to do because they are *stuck* with smaller and overall more crappy game library that can't compete with the PS2.

Re:Where does it leave the PC?

[Erwos]

How did this get modded informative? Doom 3 _exactly_ fits criterion 2-4.

Re:Where does it leave the PC?

[thepotoo]

The PC is doing just fine, thank you very much.

It's true that FPS games are now selling better on the console (I can only imagine because these are the kinds of games that require a great GPU), but for every other genera, the PC is doing better than ever.
In the last couple of years the PC had games that put anything on the consoles to shame; stuff like The Witcher, WoW: TBC, Company of Heroes, Galactic Civilizations 2, The Orange Box, etc, not to mention Oblivion, CnC3, Bioshock, which were better (gameplaywise and, IIRC saleswise) on the PC.

Consoles (this generation, anyway) will never replace the PC for RTS gameplay, and are several years behind in terms of RPG innovation and sales. Don't even get me started on mods, which make ancient games like Dungeon Siege continue to sell.

Neat.

[Ren.Tamek]

"Microsoft is already working on a game for the next-next-gen console to bear the Xbox name."

Sounds neat. The real question is, will they be controlling it with one of these?

Re:Neat.

[elrous0]

Ha, that's so last-gen. Here's a pic of the Xbox 720 controller. Drill and big hat not included.

Re:Bollocks!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong! As Sony has informed us previously, next-gen doesn't begin until Sony says so!

Fill in the lineup gaps

[Sciros]

The 360 would benefit a bit from filling in gaps that other consoles currently do. Sure, it can't release a "Wii Sports" kind of title but there are certain genres in which it's quite weak and doesn't have to be.

One is fighting games. These are really popular despite not really having "progressed" much in something like a decade (even more for some subgenres). Don't give fans a sub-par Guilty Gear and a Dead or Alive and leave it at that. Give folks a *solid* 2D fighter. A Smash Bros competitor couldn't hurt, either, since as fantastic as that series is, it's all too easy to improve on.

Another is JRPGs. Even Americans play these, believe it or not (duh, PS2 RPGs sell brilliantly here after all), and you don't need to be a Japanese developer to whip these up. You just need good art direction and the rest will fall into place assuming the combat system isn't a total disaster. One shoddy attempt with Dragonball Z character design doesn't cut it.

Thirdly, where are the platformers? We got Kameo early on, but that's it! I know Rare can't be bothered to make many games anymore, but there are certainly other developers that can be asked to do the job.

The way things are now are good enough for the 360, but I would rather see less of a total saturation of shooters and rubbish racing games and a bit more diversity in the upcoming game lineup.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[Pojut]

I can tell you exactly why there haven't been more fighting games on the 360...because second only to every playstation controller, the 360's controller has THE WORST d-pad ever concieved. I love the 360 controller to death, but the d-pad appears to have been designed by someone who had their mushroom tea spiked with GHB...

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[dj_tla]

For JRPGs, I would suggest Eternal Sonata. Wonderful music, visuals, and gameplay that JRPG fans will find familiar but still interesting. I haven't finished it, but so far I've been very happy with it.

Mass Effect is also amazing. It's North American, but I think it still appeals to fans of JRPGs.

For platformers, The Simpsons Game is surprisingly decent. The real strength of the game is its humourous writing, but platformer fans should similarly find the gameplay familiar but still interesting. Give it a try if you haven't yet.

I'm not saying that I don't want to see more games in these categories, but there are some already, and they shouldn't be overlooked.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[the computer guy nex]

"Give folks a *solid* 2D fighter" Why? There isn't enough market to justify the cost. Fighting games have become a niche market since the death of the arcade. They are too twitchy to perform well over the Internet, it is boring against the AI, and it is hard to find competitive matches among friends.
"Another is JRPGs." Take out Final Fantasy and you won't see many JRPGs in the list of best selling video games.
"The way things are now are good enough for the 360, but I would rather see less of a total saturation of shooters and rubbish racing games and a bit more diversity in the upcoming game lineup." Sports, shooters, and racing dominate console sales. In the end, companies are looking to make profit, not necesarily new innovative games. Nintendo took a huge risk with the Wii and it paid off, hopefully proving to the powers at be that Sports/Shooters/Racing aren't the only sellers.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[Sciros]

I still haven't opened my Bioshock copy for PC, but I will once I have more free time, haha.

If there are many 2d fighters for the 360, then they certainly aren't marketed well. But I'd say there just aren't many at all. Killer Instinct 3 would make headlines and the cover of every gaming magazine. A proper port of Melty Blood couldn't hurt, and like I said before a Smash competitor would be nice. People complain about the D-Pad, but it's just fine for me as a DOA player, and something like Smash doesn't use it except for taunts anyway. The rest do fine with joysticks, much like arcades (Playstation folks like their D-pads but never say anything abot joysticks, but that's where the 360 makes up ground in the fighting game UI department IMO).

But see, you tell me to get a Playstation for RPGs and a Wii for platformers. That's exactly what I'm saying Microsoft should *address* regarding the 360's upcoming lineup! Give people what they want and they hand their $ over to you rather than to a competitor ^_^

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[Sciros]

There isn't enough market to justify the cost An announcement of KI3 would erase any such sentiment, I'd say. Also, Smash Bros made an absolute killing on the Gamecube. So, I disagree. It's about the game, not the genre.

Take out Final Fantasy You'd have to take out FF, Kingdom Hears, and Dragonquest. And the point isn't to create blockbuster hits to dethrone GTA, it's to diversify a game lineup to keep folks from getting a PS2 and sticking with just a 360.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[Pojut]

I 100% agree with your first two choices...but the Simpsons game had one big issue that prevented me from playing any further than the 3rd level: It has, without a doubt, the most frustrating camera I have ever seen in an otherwise decent game (the Wii controls are crap too, the epitome of tacked-on waggle)

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[C0rinthian]

There is a SSB-type game available on live arcade - Small Arms.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[dj_tla]

I can't disagree with you there. The camera was insanely annoying whenever you were in a cramped or even semi-cramped space.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[NeutronCowboy]

Two games: Virtua Fighter 5 and Psychonauts. Yes, one's 3D and the other's an XBox game, but both are solid games.

More to your point - XBox Live Arcade games are what differentiate the XBox 360 from other consoles. I've probably bought as many Arcade games as I have full games.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[xero314]

Take out Final Fantasy and you won't see many JRPGs in the list of best selling video games. I guess that's true if you ignore the Number 1 best selling game, and 4 others in the top 20. Hate to inform you of this but Pokemon is a JRPG (look at your own references break down by genre). So as it turns out 6 of the top 20 best selling Console games are JRPGs. Heck take out Gran Turismo and Mario and you end up with the majority of the top 20 being JRPGs.

Sports, shooters, and racing dominate console sales. Again using your own reference the top 20 contains 4 racing games (all Gran Turismo), no shooters and no sports games. I'm all about people having opinions on things, but please know what you are talking about before wasting anyone else's time.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[edwdig]

Another is JRPGs. Even Americans play these, believe it or not (duh, PS2 RPGs sell brilliantly here after all),

Actually, they don't sell very well here. The top handful of them do, but once you get past that, sales aren't very good. There is a reason the vast majority of them never see life outside of Japan.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[Moonpie Madness]

What's wrong with getting a PS3? Frankly, everyone sticking with the 360 is the last thing you should want if you like novel games. MS is probably not going to go about dominating the game world the way Sony did, with so many oddball games.

the 360 is certainly the best system now, and it's sure humbled an arrogant Sony, but the Japanese are better at this, and I think that's ok. German cars and Japanese electronics. The best thing for you and me is for there to be three strong competing console brands, so gamers don't get ripped off by MS's subscription model or whatever they have planned to get all those billions back.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[naoursla]

Don't forget about Blue Dragon.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[ookaze]

The 360 would benefit a bit from filling in gaps that other consoles currently do. More easily said than done. Most of the different genres hits come from Japanese companies, which is why MS needed Japan so much. All the western devs know how to do are FPS/TPS, racers and sports (and not even all of them).

One is fighting games. These are really popular despite not really having "progressed" much in something like a decade That's your flawed opinion though. The Dairantou (Smash Bros) series proves you wrong anyway.

Don't give fans a sub-par Guilty Gear and a Dead or Alive and leave it at that. Give folks a *solid* 2D fighter. Once again, a japanese company, Capcom, may grant your wish.

A Smash Bros competitor couldn't hurt, either, since as fantastic as that series is, it's all too easy to improve on. Yet another flawed opinion. You bet if it was so easy, someone else would have done it already. Instead, the next Dai Rantou is still from the same Nintendo devs, and yes, it's improved in every way.

Another is JRPGs. Even Americans play these, believe it or not (duh, PS2 RPGs sell brilliantly here after all), and you don't need to be a Japanese developer to whip these up. Wrong, wrong and wrong.
2 JRPG were released on the XB360 to date, both bombed hard in western countries, especially in NA.
The 3rd one is on its way to bomb in NA too. Surely Americans play these, but not on XB360. That's the worst console to sell your JRPG, or at least that's the actual trend. Perhaps Lost Odyssey will prove this trend wrong.
For now, Blue Dragon sold less in NA than in Japan, and Eternal Sonata did the same.
And yes, you need to be a Japanese dev to whip these up, or at least understand Japanese culture.
I've yet to see a western dev make a decent JRPG. Enchanted Arms is the sole example I know, and it's beyond crap.
No JRPG fan would enjoy playing such a bad game.

You just need good art direction and the rest will fall into place assuming the combat system isn't a total disaster. One shoddy attempt with Dragonball Z character design doesn't cut it. Your comment show that you don't understand one thing about JRPG or even Japanese culture, so I understand better how you could say such nonsense earlier. Blue Dragon is a JRPG by japanese devs, with Toriyama Akira character design. This is no DBZ character design, that doesn't mean anything anyway.
Besides, DQVIII, which had Toriyama character design, was a big success everywhere, so Blue Dragon has no excuse.
BTW, Blue Dragon was to be a direct competitor to DQVIII, that didn't happen though.
I guess Sakaguchi is not the legendary director some people make it out to be, and his studio's name, Mistwalker, is tarnished already.
There are more JRPG and even japanese SRPG coming for the XB360 though, so don't worry about that genre.
Just buy them this time, unless the console gets the stigma that JRPG don't sell on it.

The way things are now are good enough for the 360, but I would rather see less of a total saturation of shooters and rubbish racing games and a bit more diversity in the upcoming game lineup. Things are not good for this console, unless you think FPS/TPS, racing and sports tailored for the NA market, so that the console really sells well there only, is a good thing.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[ookaze]

Mass Effect is also amazing. It's North American, but I think it still appeals to fans of JRPGs. Usually, no, WRPG don't appeal as much to JRPG fans.
Besides, Mass Effect is more yet another third person shooter with RPG elements (like dialog trees, levels, skills, ...). Thus why it appeals to the heavy FPS friendly XB360 user base.
And these kind of games usually don't appeal to JRPG fans. In fact, they are completely different style of games.
The problem is not WRPG, as XB360 has those and they sell, it's specifically JRPG, that bomb very hard on it.
And this despite being published by MS, paid for by MS (in excess of $50 millions for two, including Blue Dragon), made by Mistwalker (Sakaguchi, Uematsu). Seriously, Blue Dragon will struggle to sell 400 000 worldwide, if it even gets there!

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[erdraug]

That's why everybody either plays on the analog stick (like i do, i don't know about other fighting games but at least Virtua Fighter 5 supports that) or does a simple d-pad "mod" a.k.a. sanding the plastic ring that surrounds the d-pad, as seen for example here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXG2aDn6ZYg ;)

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[erdraug]

Don't give fans a sub-par Guilty Gear and a Dead or Alive and leave it at that. Give folks a *solid* 2D fighter. Once again, a japanese company, Capcom, may grant your wish. Technically speaking, the street fighter series is owned by CAPCOM USA ;)

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[Sciros]

You really don't have a good idea of who you're talking to. Anyway, to say that the JRPG game design needs to draw on Japanese culture, well that's a rather baseless claim. For success in Japan, that may help (though to say the absense would hurt is merely an assumption), but for success in the US and Europe, hardly.

I'm well aware of the RPGs released so far on all consoles, and I know how poorly Blue Dragon did. That it's *not really a good game* isn't to blame, though, is it? ~_^ As for correcting me that it's not DBZ character design but rather Toriyama Akira design, how's that for disingenuity considering he designed both Dragon Ball characters and Blue Dragon characters and they are noticeably similar? My comment at least shined a light on the unoriginal design in the 360 game.

As for fighting games, my comment regarding the Smash Bros series is fully valid. To assume that if it's easy to improve on the game someone would have already done it is flawed because to date no competent developer has even bothered to. Why they haven't escapes me, but publishers aren't always in tune with *the whole* of what will sell and tend to go with what they are most comfortable with.

Smash Bros also doesn't prove me wrong about fighters not having progressed much. Brawl isn't out yet, and to say that we've seen a big jump from the original to Melee would be stretching the truth.

Regarding your last comment, the NA market is still the biggest gaming market in the world. Europe is a close-enough second. The XBox 360 is doing well in those regions so far, especially in terms of software sales. So yes, things are good for the console.

All the western devs know how to do are FPS/TPS, racers and sports (and not even all of them). Well, when Japanese developers outdo Starcraft, Baldur's Gate II and the Elder Scrolls games maybe I'll start taking what you say seriously but until then you merely make yourself seem biased and not very informed despite throwing Japanese game designers out there to give an illusion of the opposite.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[Sciros]

Mass Effect is not "yet another third person shooter with RPG elements." You either have a very narrow definition of "RPG" all the way down to the combat system, or you haven't played the game, or both. Mass Effect is a real-time RPG with a 3rd person shooter *combat system.* In terms of design it is no less an RPG than Baldur's Gate or KOTOR, and given the character customization and story immersion, arguably *more so.*

It's not "JRPG"s that bomb on the 360 I'd say but "bad games" on the whole. Whether they are JRPG or not doesn't matter. Blue Dragon was simply not a good enough game. Eternal Sonata is somewhat esoterically designed and it was hardly marketed as far as I could tell. When a *good* JRPG, something on the level of FFXII or a Golden Sun makes its way onto the 360 and despite being marketed does poorly, then your generalization would certainly have some weight to it. For now I believe it is unfounded.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[ookaze]

Mass Effect is not "yet another third person shooter with RPG elements." You either have a very narrow definition of "RPG" all the way down to the combat system, or you haven't played the game, or both. Mass Effect is a real-time RPG with a 3rd person shooter *combat system.* Excuse me? you just described a third person shooter with RPG elements. Thanks!
"real time RPG"? That doesn't even mean anything.
Anyway, the argument was that it had nothing to do with a JRPG, and uh, it doesn't, any way you look at it.
There is a japanese SRPG with optional 3rd party shooter stages, but more in a RPG like fashion, not like Mass Effect. Perhaps that will work better with the XB360 user base.

It's not "JRPG"s that bomb on the 360 I'd say but "bad games" on the whole. Bad games that happen to be all JRPG. OK right, whatever...

Blue Dragon was simply not a good enough game. Eternal Sonata is somewhat esoterically designed and it was hardly marketed as far as I could tell. When a *good* JRPG, something on the level of FFXII or a Golden Sun makes its way onto the 360 and despite being marketed does poorly, then your generalization would certainly have some weight to it. For now I believe it is unfounded. Except that Blue Dragon was directed by the director of the first 9 Final Fantasy, Hironobu Sakaguchi, and everything was paid for by MS, so it had huge production value.
It was made as a competitor to Dragon Quest, and used the same 'mechanics'.
DQ VIII was a big success on the PS2, in the west as much as in Japan, that's the appeal of japanese design and games. So they thought that would work.
Your reaction to this game (that was not bad, but above average) just proves further to me that JRPG are doomed on XB360.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[Sciros]

Excuse me? you just described a third person shooter with RPG elements. Thanks!
"real time RPG"? That doesn't even mean anything. If the combat system is enough for you to classify a game by genre and simply regard the rest of the gameplay as "additional elements" then
a) you're arguing from a position that's not common to most folks, especially w.r.t. RPGs
b) you make me laugh because at the same time you don't what 'real-time RPG' means. Let me help you out: it means 'not turn-based' with regards to combat. Morrowind as opposed to Mario RPG, for instance.

As for Blue Dragon, that game was also marketed terribly in the US. Halo, Gears, Mass Effect -- these games had a presence in retail stores. They had pre-orders being collected. They had TV ads on non-VG-dedicated channels. Blue Dragon, not so much. Besides that, it wasn't good enough to become a "sleeper hit" the way some other poorly-marketed-but-good games do. It just wasn't.

JRPGs *can and do* perform well in the US, just look at Playstation software sales. (And hardware sales driven by the JPRG games.) They just need to be marketed well (look at Kingdom Hearts), and there has to be something decent to market in order to keep the sales afloat and people with 360s interested.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[ookaze]

Anyway, to say that the JRPG game design needs to draw on Japanese culture, well that's a rather baseless claim. For success in Japan, that may help (though to say the absense would hurt is merely an assumption), but for success in the US and Europe, hardly.

Any amount of knowledge of japanese culture would show you otherwise as for the "baseless claim". And the previous japanese hits that were released outside Japan weren't tailored for western audience, except for the usual censorship.

I'm well aware of the RPGs released so far on all consoles, and I know how poorly Blue Dragon did. That it's *not really a good game* isn't to blame, though, is it? ~_^

It's strange, really. Every XB360 owner that has this game want to tout it as the best JRPG of its kind.
But when I hear every other XB360 owner that don't want this game, they all say it's a bad game.
Myself, I wouldn't buy this game, I think it's a poor DQ clone, but I would never say that to the XB360 owners that have this game. It's very interesting how blinded some of the XB360 owners can be.
And this is a game paid a fortune by MS money to boot.

As for correcting me that it's not DBZ character design but rather Toriyama Akira design, how's that for disingenuity considering he designed both Dragon Ball characters and Blue Dragon characters and they are noticeably similar? My comment at least shined a light on the unoriginal design in the 360 game.

Thus why I was disingenuous. You wouldn't have done that for a successful game that uses his design, like DQ VIII. So, NO, the design was not the cause of this game being "bad", or at least sell poorly, as you claim. Or you'll further my feeling that all JRPG are doomed on XB360.

As for fighting games, my comment regarding the Smash Bros series is fully valid. To assume that if it's easy to improve on the game someone would have already done it is flawed because to date no competent developer has even bothered to. Why they haven't escapes me, but publishers aren't always in tune with *the whole* of what will sell and tend to go with what they are most comfortable with.

I rather think that the reason is that it's developed by Nintendo. Most developers are scared to go againts them. See Capcom and its Okami. They must have insured with Nintendo that it was no problem to put it on Wii, as they previously said it would never happen, for fear of competing with Zelda.

Smash Bros also doesn't prove me wrong about fighters not having progressed much. Brawl isn't out yet, and to say that we've seen a big jump from the original to Melee would be stretching the truth.

Except that I was talking about Melee, which was the evolution you say never happened in 10 years. It did, it was Melee. And you can have your opinion that there wasn't a big jump from Melee to Brawl, but excuse me to think otherwise, when I see the histery that follows each "big" revelation of new feature on the Brawl website.

Regarding your last comment, the NA market is still the biggest gaming market in the world. Europe is a close-enough second. The XBox 360 is doing well in those regions so far, especially in terms of software sales. So yes, things are good for the console.

I'll let you believe that then... I've no need to argue.
If I was to argue that would be on Europe only anyway.
And if you think that a console brand that lost $7 BILLIONS ($3 BILLIONS for the XB360 alone) is fine with decent *3rd party* software sales in one gaming region, the biggest one, well, good for you.
I'll keep my view that this is very bad.
I would go as far as to say that it is very dangerous for 3rd party, to rely solely on good sales in one region, on a console that is on life support since the start from a company that can pull the plug whenever it deems necessary (PlayForSure.... You'd better pray for Playstation brand long survival then...
Unless you think MS is losing billions for your pleasure,

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[ookaze]

If the combat system is enough for you to classify a game by genre and simply regard the rest of the gameplay as "additional elements" then
a) you're arguing from a position that's not common to most folks, especially w.r.t. RPGs
b) you make me laugh because at the same time you don't what 'real-time RPG' means. Let me help you out: it means 'not turn-based' with regards to combat. Morrowind as opposed to Mario RPG, for instance. OK right. And I can tell the sole reason people are even calling this game a RPG, is because it's made by Bioware. The game plays and feels exactly like a 3rd person shooter, when you move or when you combat.
With a cover system... OK, and I'm the one arguing from a position not common to most folks w.r.t. RPGs.
Just tell me it's made by Bioware, try to be honest at least.
I don't want to argue this with you anyway, except that it has nothing to do in replacement of a JRPG.

As for Blue Dragon, that game was also marketed terribly in the US. Halo, Gears, Mass Effect -- these games had a presence in retail stores. They had pre-orders being collected. They had TV ads on non-VG-dedicated channels. Blue Dragon, not so much. Besides that, it wasn't good enough to become a "sleeper hit" the way some other poorly-marketed-but-good games do. It just wasn't. OK right. But I can tell you every JRPG fan knew about this game, I know this at least.
Which confirms to me that the JRPG fans on XB360 is ridiculously small, and that these games will all fail.

JRPGs *can and do* perform well in the US, just look at Playstation software sales. (And hardware sales driven by the JPRG games.) They just need to be marketed well (look at Kingdom Hearts), and there has to be something decent to market in order to keep the sales afloat and people with 360s interested. So basically, every JRPG outside of FF will fail on XB360. Thanks for the confirmation.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[Sciros]

For starters, I know a lot more about Japanese culture than you'd think. I also know that it has basically no bearing on how well a Japanese-developed game does outside of Japan. The term "JRPG" doesn't need to imply a cultural theme, and usually doesn't. Just because JRPGs can draw on specifically Japanese culture doesn't mean they do or that it is this cultural infusion that drives their commercial success.

I'm not going to argue numbers with you and how much of a future Microsoft's gaming division has. It's not even the point of this discussion.

As for the last bit of your response, you really ought to be ashamed of yourself. First you claim that Western devs can only make shooters, racers, and sports games. A subjective and baseless claim. I provide counterexamples with commercially and critically successful games from RPG and RTS genres, but that goes right over your head and you assume I'm talking only about sheer numbers when those games have set standards for their respective genres or sub-genres as far as all developers across the world are concerned. You further continue with "games on XBL" which has *nothing* to do with the games I presented, showing that you don't actually have a clue about what you're discussing. Let me make it clear: Western game developers have, either in the past or recently, revolutionized a number of mainstream genres, including fighting games, and your ignorance of the majority of these contributions is inexcusable if you choose to go toe-to-toe with me like this.

Frankly I'm surprised you entered the conversation to begin with given your knowledge of basically nothing here. It seems to me you're basically a troll who dislikes non-Japanese games.

360 owners in general aren't like me, because I play a lot more games and genres than just on the 360. As for the 360's future in Japan, if you understand Japanese culture the way you act like you do, you should already know what it would be. If not I can always give you a hint.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[Sciros]

I guess you just have a very narrow idea of what an RPG is, an idea inconsistent with developers and publishers and most gamers, I might add. The *combat* is 3rd person shooter. That's it. If you're going to tell me that Mass Effect is only about the combat, then you haven't played it. Its ratio of combat-to-everything-else is no greater than in most JRPGs that I have played, particularly the better ones.

As for what JRPGs might succeed/fail on the 360, that's open to speculation. Certainly a good Final Fantasy (not trash like FF:CC or Revenant Wings) might do well. A KH game might as well. And there can always be new properties. See, one thing that sets Western gamers apart from the Japanese (in general) is there is less brand and franchise loyalty. So something new is more likely to succeed in the US and Europe than in Japan.

The JRPG fanbase on the 360 is indeed small, but that makes perfect sense when this fanbase is completely unsatisfied by the 360! From the beginning I have been talking about diversifying the 360's lineup. Naturally this doesn't mean with crappy games or games that aren't marketed, since I'm considering the 360's livelihood here.

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[ookaze]

For starters, I know a lot more about Japanese culture than you'd think. I also know that it has basically no bearing on how well a Japanese-developed game does outside of Japan. The term "JRPG" doesn't need to imply a cultural theme, and usually doesn't. Just because JRPGs can draw on specifically Japanese culture doesn't mean they do or that it is this cultural infusion that drives their commercial success.

Wow! And as you resort to name calling, excuse me if I avoid a troll like you from now on.
I shouldn't even have answered the constant strawmen you put in all your posts.
I see you love putting words in other peoples mouth. And you call me disingenuous.
In case you didn't notice, I saw your scheme from the start.

I'm not going to argue numbers with you and how much of a future Microsoft's gaming division has. It's not even the point of this discussion.

It wasn't mine either. My point was, as far as we got, the sole future of JRPG genre on the XB360.

As for the last bit of your response, you really ought to be ashamed of yourself. First you claim that Western devs can only make shooters, racers, and sports games.

That's what they do best is what I said, yes.

A subjective and baseless claim. I provide counterexamples with commercially and critically successful games from RPG and RTS genres, but that goes right over your head and you assume I'm talking only about sheer numbers when those games have set standards for their respective genres or sub-genres as far as all developers across the world are concerned.

Yeah, a 10 years old RTS and 7 years old RPG which is no JRPG, but a WRPG. I see your point.
I'll even concede I left RTS out, on purpose, because the latest high profile one in the genre is a japanese one, so I've made it a tie. But as it's more represented on PC with western devs, I'll concede the point to you, even though we're not talking PC games here, but XB360 games.
I bet you would have felt better if I told you the same thing for japanese devs, or if I inverted the sentence : "japanese devs are really behind in genres like shooters and uh...". No, I couldn't decently write "racers and sports" because of Gran Turismo for example. I understand you like these pissing contests though, and take them very seriously to boot.

You further continue with "games on XBL" which has *nothing* to do with the games I presented, showing that you don't actually have a clue about what you're discussing.

I'll explain myself better (even though I know you're trolling). I was talking about the games most played online on the XB360, but I'm sure you understood that very well. And it had everything to do with what I was talking about, which are the most played genres on the XB360.
Anyway, I told you already, you're very transparent.
That you had to tell me about very old PC games when we're talking the XB360 game library is enough to me.

Let me make it clear: Western game developers have, either in the past or recently, revolutionized a number of mainstream genres, including fighting games, and your ignorance of the majority of these contributions is inexcusable if you choose to go toe-to-toe with me like this.

Wow! Now you're going to go as far as believeing I said your own strawmen?
You are the one who believe your own nonsense that I don't know what Starcraft or BG II is.
You must have wrongly believed that I was 15 and didn't know these games or Bioware, or that I hate western devs. I'd rather not tell you I have the two BG and their extensions, Neverwinter Nights and all the extensions except the online only ones (but I have the free one they rejected), you wouldn't believe me.

Frankly I'm surprised you entered the conversation to begin with given your knowledge of basically nothing here. It seems to me you're basically a troll who dislikes non-Japanese games.

It seems to me you're a troll that believes his own

Re:Fill in the lineup gaps

[Sciros]

This is funny now. But I noticed you at least dropped the 'knowing Japanese culture' line, since it bought you nothing. (Though how you thought that referring to that was "putting words in people's mouth" is beyond me, not that I care.)

That's what they do best is what I said, yes. You're not only trying to just hide behind your own wording rather than admit that you were just plain wrong, but you also forget what you said! Here it is again:

All the western devs know how to do are FPS/TPS, racers and sports (and not even all of them). Let me remind you that it was this nonsensical statement that bothered me in the first place. And it's completely acceptable to point out BG and Elder Scrolls as a counter, as those are two of the most respected RPG franchises in history. If you're going to start arguing about how the games I mentioned are old, then how about Oblivion being one of the most critically acclaimed games of 2006 or Starcraft 2 and Fallout 3 being two of the most highly anticipated games in the coming couple of years? I didn't even bring in the MMORPG genre, which is being utterly *dominated* by American developers (even if some are owned/funded by NCSoft). Oh and you said nothing of limiting the discussion to 360 when you said what western devs can and cannot do. Even if you did, Oblivion and Mass Effect disprove your claim. Even though you don't think Mass Effect is an RPG. I'll tell you, it's as much an RPG as Oblivion, or are you going to say that Oblivion is a "first/third-person-melee fighter with RPG elements" the way you described Mass Effect? Come on man, this is all laughable and I can't believe you'd rather try to weasel out of your BS when you should just admit you were making unfair claims!

Anxiety? Ummm OK...

[Is0m0rph]

"Fans of the platform might still have some anxiety this year; a rumour on the 1up site indicates Microsoft is already working on a game for the next-next-gen console to bear the Xbox name." You do know it takes years to develop new hardware right? They don't just produce it overnight. Of course MS as well as Sony and Nintendo are working on their next generation of consoles. It would be stupid of them not to be. Didn't Sony mention working on the PS4 before the PS3 was even released?

Re:Anxiety? Ummm OK...

[MBraynard]

Resolved - there will be a next generation - there always is.

So if there is going to be one, and you want to win it, you better start thinking about games that will help you win it now.

Sounds simple enough.

Promises of swimming while neck-deep in mud

[Anonymous Coward]

So while Xbox Live and Zune Marketplace are not working, they promise to put more stuff on it. I'm sure that will work.

What???

[Itchyeyes]

Fans of the platform might still have some anxiety this year; a rumour on the 1up site indicates Microsoft is already working on a game for the next-next-gen console to bear the Xbox name.

Morons might have some anxiety over this. High profile games take years to develop, particularly when they're trying to meet a tentative launch date of a console that doesn't even have firm hardware specs in place.

The original Xbox was cut short because 1) it was a money losing platform for Microsoft and 2) because Microsoft saw launching before the PS3 as crucial to their success. While Microsoft is still having trouble making the 360 profitable, it's doing significantly better than the original Xbox was. As for #2, Microsoft is in no hurry to beat out the other two machines, which are only a year old right now and probably won't be replaced for at least another 4 years, at which point the 360 would be 6 years old.

You can practically guarantee that the 360 has, at the very least, 3 more years of life before Microsoft decides to replace it.

Re:What???

[TubeSteak]

You can practically guarantee that the 360 has, at the very least, 3 more years of life before Microsoft decides to replace it. I imagine it'll be much longer than 3 years.

Remember all the fuss when MS launched the Xbox360 and everyone complained that they'd kicked off the next gen of consoles too early just to gain some market share?

The result has been poorly utilized processing power in the Xbox360 and PS3 because there wasn't enough lead time for developers. I don't think anyone really wants that to happen again.

Re:What???

[AbRASiON]

Actually most of us 'hardcore' gamers would still like to see longer periods between consoles.

It's my firm belief the last generation was cut short by at LEAST a year before it needed to be, the PS2, GC and Xbox all were quite capable of outputting some fairly nice graphics in their final days, also 2 of the 3 had network capability, 2 of them could hold full DVD sized data (9gb) they had digital audio out (in most cases) supported 5.1 audio or pro logic 1 / 2 and all 3 could (in most cases) output via component in progressive scan, infact there was a small selection of high definition games to boot.

They were close to the end but I'm sure another 12 months, maybe 18 could have been comfortably squeezed out of them.
The Xbox obviously couldn't for financial reasons, this doesn't change the fact ,...that sucks for us - it was by far the most powerful console and some of it's top end games just looked great
The PS2 while fairly weak, people figured out, look at Shadow of the Colossus, God of War 2 etc - damn fine looking games
Gamecube, I don't know much about but I do believe some of the games also looked quite nice.

The thing is, I don't like dropping 700$ on a console, 200$ on accessories, 150$ on a couple of launch games every 4 or 5 years, I'd much prefer 'milking' my dollar out with 6 / 7 or even 8 year cycles, this also ensures the next console is damn well NEXT gen.

The Xbox 360 and PS3 both do look nice, no doubt but I don't think the leap was that great.
The graphical capabilities of both new HD consoles is obviously better but is it leaps and bounds better?
We're not just upping the ante with texture detail, polygons, quantity of multi-textures per surface, we're also increasing the resolution which impacts us 4x slower (well approximately)

We're already seeing HD games which are rendered at a lower resolution and upsampled by the onboard chips.
If they had waited another year, we'd have seen several good changes, possible examples.
HD-DVD in the 360 (forget the movie war for a moment!, this means not only more room for games but more DENSELY packed data, meaning slower spin speeds, meaning a QUIETER SYSTEM ala the PS3)
Arcade model possibly not existing?
Movement control in all 3 next gen systems (to clarify, I personally couldn't care about this)
HD capability on the Wii
Digital audio out on the Wii (WTF?)
Better online infrastructure.
The first year of the next gen consoles not being crap! (1 or 2 great games per system :/ )
More consoles on shelves at launch, especially the PS3 with it's blue diode issues
HDMI across all 3, following STANDARDS
etc.

I could speculate all day, to get back on point, it's my belief that yes, all 3 of these new consoles are too early (specifically the 360) and I'd like to NOT see a new system from anyone for at least 4 years from now, bare minimum or I simply won't be joining them.
(I also doubt the next gen will be backwards compatible, hence we need to milk this gen out thoroughly)

Re:What???

[ToasterMonkey]

The Xbox 360 and PS3 both do look nice, no doubt but I don't think the leap was that great.
The graphical capabilities of both new HD consoles is obviously better but is it leaps and bounds better?
We're not just upping the ante with texture detail, polygons, quantity of multi-textures per surface, we're also increasing the resolution which impacts us 4x slower (well approximately) I'll let someone else chime in for the 360, but the PS3 is quite a gigantic leap from a PS2, as far as features are concerned anyway.
It's really a beast if you compare the two. Hard drive, PS2 built in, bluetooth controllers standard, BT headset available, ethernet & wireless built in, plays one of the contending DVD replacements.

Graphically, I don't know what you're looking for, but at least compare the first year of PS2 titles to the current PS3 titles to be somewhat fair. The earlier games are rarely all that special. Even first party ones tend to get drastically better in later years of the console's life, look at the Zeldas. There's no reason I can think of that this wouldn't apply to the Xbox line also.

Hell, some of the early PS2 games were cross-platform titles with N64 ports, not even GC! Compare Madden NFL 2001 to Madden NFL 07 for example. I'm just speculating, but by the time NFL 2012 comes around, if it's still available for the PS3, it ought to be quite a bit better looking. The years between being incrementally better each time, hopefully.
We shouldn't have really scratched the surface of what these consoles can do already, but by any chance we already have for a certain console... well, suck it up, you all knew what you were buying into, and plenty of us warned you.

I think I understand your complaints. It was nice back when the big difference between major consoles was which letters were on the gamepads, or Sonic vs. Mario. Still, this is probably the most varied console lineup EVER, and it's neat how easily it is to justify having two out of three of these consoles, using them for two entirely different things.

Re:What???

[Itchyeyes]

Actually most of us 'hardcore' gamers would still like to see longer periods between consoles.

It's my firm belief the last generation was cut short by at LEAST a year before it needed to be

The original Xbox was on the market for 4 years before Microsoft cut it off. Correct me if I misunderstand you, but if you think last gen should have lasted at least another year, you're saying the Xbox should have made it to at least 5 years. That's exactly what I said. The Xbox 360 is now 2 years old. If it lasts another 3 years, it will have made it to 5 years. In all likelihood it will make it another year too, because I don't see Sony replacing the PS3 only 4 years into it's lifecycle and Microsoft won't feel so pressured to launch early in an attempt to cement their foothold in the industry.

If history is any guide, I think we'll pretty much see 5-6 year hardware cycles from here on out (unless it's a minor upgrade ala DS to DS lite). Sega tried short cycles in the 90's and discovered that you don't have enough time to build a library if your machine only lasts for 3 years. Sony pushed the envelope with the PS2 at 7 years and saw their competitor step in to fill the high-end void they left open at the end of their cycle. Microsoft cut the Xbox short at 4 years, but suffered problems with the 360 from rushing it out of the gate (RROD). The sweet spot for hardware cycles is most definitely 5-6 years.

Re:What???

[AbRASiON]

Yeah I was actually agreeing with you to an extent, however you did seem to be making the excuse for the news that MS is coding a new game for a next gen console, even factoring in 2+ years lead time on developing next gen games, I personally find this news far far too early.

I honestly don't even want to HEAR about next gen consoles for another 24 months, this transition online has been epic, the flame wars, speculation, discussion, hype, articles over the past 36 months in the gaming arena have been,.. frankly exhausting.
Now that I've finally joined the next gen (I waited as long as I could, only got them 2 weeks ago) I just want to sit back, relax and see more articles on the GAMES and stuff for this gen, rather than speculative things on the future :)

I agree that 5-6 years is nice, I believe with the cost of entry now though that we're going to see them try and milk as long as possible (and I won't be upset by that)
Also, the PS1 and PS2 may have dragged on but you need to keep in mind the PS2 is still kicking some ass and getting the occasional game for it too, this is what Sony mean when they claim 10 years.
The PS1 I think was 8 or 9, the PS2 will be likely utterly dead at 10 and the PS3, to my knowledge they'd also like to get a full 10 out of.
Sure they can replace it but unlike MS, ffsake, please please make it at least 6 years - my wallet and internet browsing time slice simply don't allow for anything sooner.

Re:What???

[ookaze]

Actually most of us 'hardcore' gamers would still like to see longer periods between consoles. Casuals too...

It's my firm belief the last generation was cut short by at LEAST a year before it needed to be, the PS2, GC and Xbox all were quite capable of outputting some fairly nice graphics in their final days, also 2 of the 3 had network capability, 2 of them could hold full DVD sized data (9gb) they had digital audio out (in most cases) supported 5.1 audio or pro logic 1 / 2 and all 3 could (in most cases) output via component in progressive scan, infact there was a small selection of high definition games to boot. Even if not a belief, everyone knows the last generation was cut short by MS. Besides, none of the competitors gave in, though Sony could have lasted 2 years more, but it was too dangerous for them.
And all three consoles had network capability and 5.1 audio, some through SPDIF, others through Dolby Prologic II.

The Xbox obviously couldn't for financial reasons, this doesn't change the fact ,...that sucks for us - it was by far the most powerful console and some of it's top end games just looked great The XB360 has as many financial problems, and a powerful console or games that look great are useless : you need fun games.

I'd much prefer 'milking' my dollar out with 6 / 7 or even 8 year cycles, this also ensures the next console is damn well NEXT gen. The only thing that ensures a console is NEXT gen is if it's out in the next generation. The number of years in a cycle have nothing to do with a generation. Like, all your kids are by definition the next generation, it doesn't depend on when you give birth to them. Well, almost...

We're not just upping the ante with texture detail, polygons, quantity of multi-textures per surface, we're also increasing the resolution which impacts us 4x slower (well approximately) But you're wrong. A few games use these resolutions. The flagship game of the XB360, Halo 3, is not even 720p!
And you can count on one hand the 1920x1080 games, which are only on PS3.

We're already seeing HD games which are rendered at a lower resolution and upsampled by the onboard chips. What do you mean? If they are rendered at lower than 720p, they are not HD games.
My HDTV upscales anything to 1920x1080 in progressive mode, which doesn't make the Wii games HD.

Movement control in all 3 next gen systems (to clarify, I personally couldn't care about this)
HD capability on the Wii
Digital audio out on the Wii (WTF?)
Better online infrastructure.
The first year of the next gen consoles not being crap! (1 or 2 great games per system :/ ) No chance on any of this. And indeed, WTF?

HDMI across all 3, following STANDARDS Wishful thinking!
Some people have problems understanding that Nintendo would never had gone HD.

I'd like to NOT see a new system from anyone for at least 4 years from now, bare minimum or I simply won't be joining them. Be prepared to play the end of this gen on the Wii then.

Re:What???

[LrdDimwit]

The last generation was teetering along very dangerously heading towards collapse **. If you were following Japanese market data, the Japanese companies were very worried about an ongoing trend where total games sales were slowly but steadily decreasing. They were very worried that people were just ... abandoning the hobby, that their total userbase was permanently eroding. Others were of the opinion it was generation fatigue, that a new console generation was needed because people were starting to get burned out on their PS2's.

I haven't seen that many stories about this period -- all the Japanese industry news I get is filtered thru Western news sources -- but I haven't seen ANY stories about that since next-gen hit, and I have seen plenty of stories about gangbuster sales for Nintendo.

** -- Yes, collapse. In a hit-driven market, you need huge sales for the small percent of titles that make you money. If the sales for these big titles go down, it hits everything; and once companies start cutting back to make the financials work, the quality of the product goes down -- and this starts a downward spiral of suck. The industry is like a shark, dependent on continual forward motion or else it will drown. People demand AAA titles; they're horrifically expensive to make. And if everyone started making AA titles instead of AAA, customers would just stop buying -- sales collapse, console makers have to abandon their give-away-razors-to-sell-blades strategy -- then either console prices skyrocket (to make up the profit) or console specs stagnate for a decade while they wait for Moore's Law to make up for the hidden markup.

Re:What???

[AbRASiON]

And all three consoles had network capability and 5.1 audio, some through SPDIF, others through Dolby Prologic II. I wouldn't call the Gamecube's PL II 'proper' 5.1 to be honest, you might but it's not.

The only thing that ensures a console is NEXT gen is if it's out in the next generation. The number of years in a cycle have nothing to do with a generation. Like, all your kids are by definition the next generation, it doesn't depend on when you give birth to them. Well, almost... What I meant was simply more next gen, it was an attempt to emphasize the word.
Likely be a larger jump, more features, etc.
I don't care about the semantics of next gen, technically the Wii is next gen (well current gen but you know what I mean) - I would argue it's not 'next gen' at all.
Ultimately my point is the Xbox 360 and PS3 could've had an even larger leap if they kept them in the oven a bit longer.

We're not just upping the ante with texture detail, polygons, quantity of multi-textures per surface, we're also increasing the resolution which impacts us 4x slower (well approximately)

But you're wrong. A few games use these resolutions. The flagship game of the XB360, Halo 3, is not even 720p!
And you can count on one hand the 1920x1080 games, which are only on PS3

We're already seeing HD games which are rendered at a lower resolution and upsampled by the onboard chips.
What do you mean? If they are rendered at lower than 720p, they are not HD games.
My HDTV upscales anything to 1920x1080 in progressive mode, which doesn't make the Wii games HD.

Re:What???

[AbRASiON]

**(IGNORE THE OTHER POST)**
I'm learning how to use the quote feature of slashdot, why does submit need to be 3.1 pixels from preview?

And all three consoles had network capability and 5.1 audio, some through SPDIF, others through Dolby Prologic II. I wouldn't call the Gamecube's PL II 'proper' 5.1 to be honest, you might but it's not.

The only thing that ensures a console is NEXT gen is if it's out in the next generation. The number of years in a cycle have nothing to do with a generation. Like, all your kids are by definition the next generation, it doesn't depend on when you give birth to them. Well, almost... What I meant was simply more next gen, it was an attempt to emphasize the word.
Likely be a larger jump, more features, etc.
I don't care about the semantics of the term 'next gen', technically the Wii is next gen (well current gen but you know what I mean) - I would argue it's not 'next gen' at all.
Ultimately my point is the Xbox 360 and PS3 could've had an even larger leap and even more 'next gen' if they kept them in the oven a bit longer.

We're not just upping the ante with texture detail, polygons, quantity of multi-textures per surface, we're also increasing the resolution which impacts us 4x slower (well approximately) But you're wrong. A few games use these resolutions. The flagship game of the XB360, Halo 3, is not even 720p!
And you can count on one hand the 1920x1080 games, which are only on PS3

No, the old games were rendered at approximately 640x480 at most, generally lower, we're now 'apparently' at 1280x720 (see my next point)
Oh and you're wrong on the 1920 thing, there's several MS games rendered internally at 1920 (few but some) I believe there's a tennis game and one or two others.

We're already seeing HD games which are rendered at a lower resolution and upsampled by the onboard chips. What do you mean? If they are rendered at lower than 720p, they are not HD games.
My HDTV upscales anything to 1920x1080 in progressive mode, which doesn't make the Wii games HD.

You've just emphasized my original point, these 'next gen' systems are ALREADY too weak to run the games in the resolutions they claim, we're explaining the same thing to each other.
They don't all run at 1280x720, some render at 1024x576 - this tells me the graphical power of these 'next gen' systems isn't as good as it should be and - back to my original point these should have been left in the oven longer.

I'd like to NOT see a new system from anyone for at least 4 years from now, bare minimum or I simply won't be joining them. Be prepared to play the end of this gen on the Wii then.

That's a bit of a silly thing to say, you haven't been following the trends of the industry much or listening to your gametheory, egm, gamespot and 1up podcasts much now have you? :)

The Wii is the weakest of the current gen and making a good profit, if anything it'll be the first to get a new model coming out.
Further to this point, Nintendo have a tendency to iterate their systems, see the DS and Gameboy lines, there's a slim chance we'll see the Wii 2.0 or Wii HD (with backwards compatibility) within 2 years I believe, the other 2 - despite this article are in a world of hurt from the mammoth release of these 2 expensive behemoth consoles, they need to sit tight, hold ship and now milk us gamers for profit on games.

Sorry about the other post, someone move the damn submit button half an inch to the right.

Re:What???

[Zantetsuken]

I can see what he's thinking somewhat - I used to be stuck between console and PC, but then went largely PC only. Back when the PS3 and the Cell chip-set first started getting decent amounts of attention, I had figured the PS3 would be far better than it is, close to on par with high end desktop gaming pc's. That was about 4 or 5 years ago now - when the PS3's target specs would have been actually impressive. I played the crap outta Rainbow Six: Vegas, back when it came out on PC - so when I tried it on a relative's PS3 after recommending it due to the PC version, I noticed a number of downgrades over the PC version. Scenes such as flying over Vegas in a chopper textures are noticeably lower quality than the PC version.

Basically, for what the systems where hyped to be, it doesn't help when I had a better experience with the PC version of a game long before playing it on a PS3...

Re:Bollocks!!!

[Stormcrow309]

Bah! I think my Atari 2600 still works, even though it is in my attic. You kids and your realistic graphics, bah. In my time, we had ET and... well honestly, we hated it. Bah again.

Re:Bollocks!!!

[Amouth]

and whats not real about the 2600's graphics.. they ment to draw dots ont he screen and there they are.. anyone can do that..

now what i wnat is imaginable graphics - you know. where the image isn't real.. itis all in your imagination..

then we can jsut sell a black painted brick with a crome stripe to people and tell them to start playing and the imaginable graphics will knock them on their asses....

if they call and complain that it doesn't work then we inform them it is user error.. and that they need to kick start it.. providing they arn't whereing steal toed boots we can instuct them to toss it up in the air and put it like a football and *smack* a few broken toes.. and that sence of pain.. and if there lucky they would see the imaginable graphics .. (stars or what ever)

we could make billions.. maybe i could sell the idea to Sony.. it would be cheaper to produce than the PS3 and if we just sold none of them it would make them more money than the PS3 is doing...

Re:I care about the present

[geeknado]

I'm curious-- did your friend check the build date prior to purchase? You can actually check this with a closed package, or could with mine when I purchased it...I had two die on me, but the latest one, produced this summer/with the new heat system, seems far more stable. While it could be luck of the draw, I've heard a similar story from others.

I totally agree that it's ridiculous...At least the return program is pretty easy to deal with?

Re:Anxiety? Ummm OK...

[Is0m0rph]

Why am I modded off topic for commenting on something I quoted from the topic? That's about as on topic as you can be I would think. Retarded mods...

Re:I care about the present

[thopkins]

I beg to differ. I'm on my 3rd 360 (2nd one broke the same day they sent it to me). All 6 people I know with 360s have had to have them replaced. All of us take pristine care of our electronics, including providing good ventilation.

I like the 360, but it's a flawed system.

Re:I care about the present

[jcnnghm]

I thought the same thing, and then my launch 360 failed this week. I've only ever used it in completely open spaces, and it is currently sitting all by itself on top of a glass shelf. It's been suggested that the failure rate is as high as 33%, and I believe it given how easy it was to place the RMA.

Re:Bollocks!!!

[MrDoh1]

As it happens, I have a working Odyssey 2 tucked away in the closet.

Re:Anxiety? Ummm OK...

[Have Blue]

Sony, sure. But Nintendo has far less of an incentive to produce a new console. The Wii is profitable, tremendously popular, and its limitations don't seem to bother the market that much even with the other consoles available.