I don't get why gamers always slam other genres so much. While I agree that gold/time grinds aren't exactly the best game design schemes, you can't argue that it just works for a huge number of players (myself included). If you're the type of player who hates the treadmill concept, then don't play the game! Maybe at some point, there will be an MMO that has evolved enough not to be one huge level/gold/time grind, and you'll find pleasure in that.
It seems like there's always RPG-fantics lambasting how every other genre sucks because they're all twitch-based. Then FPS fans claim that RPGs are awful because there's no skill involved, and they're just interactive movies with bad plots. And everyone slams MMOs for being just really long treadmills. Whine, whine, whine.
Look, I'm all for innovation, and I love it when games go beyond what other titles in a genre typically do. But even if they don't, there are more than enough gamers to satisfy each little niche in the game industry. (And if not, then the genre sadly dies - like the 2D arcade shooter) What you might think are poorly implemented and derivitive systems in one game, is just the way it's supposed to be for a genre, and that's just how that particular audience likes it. There are titles that try to innovate and break the old ways of a genre, but often it just ends up being too complicated or something that no one wants (even fans of that genre).
I guess what I'm trying to say is that we're all masochists in somebody else's eyes.
The fact that gold farmers exist, the fact that leveling services exist, these things speak to deficiencies in the game design. There's this game, that people are paying millions each month to play, and yet on top of the monthly fee many of them feel that it is worth additional money to pay others to essentially play part of the game for them. Why? Because that part of the game isn't fun.
The problem is that fun is (obviously) highly subjective. What you deem as fun may be entirely different than what I think. The vast majority of gamers in WoW don't buy gold. The process of slowly accumulating wealth (which includes gold, equipment, and other loot) is supposed to be challenging and rewarding. That's just a part of the game design.
Now the issue is always going to be "how much is too much?". I'll take WoW as an example. From most people that I've interacted with in the game, accumulating the 90 gold or so necessary for a mount at level 40 is a challenge, but it's something that everyone achieves. However at level 60, the epic mount costs around 800-900 gold, and that's something that many people (myself probably included) will never reach. So I can understand the argument that the cost of the epic mount is too high, and that might be considered bad game design. But that's not the problem.
All it takes for one person to think that the normal mount cost is too much, and bingo, the gold farmers have a business. Heck, you can say having any type of economic system is going to invite farmers, since there will always be those lazy individuals where ANY amount of work is too much. These gamers are probably the same folks who cheat and hack their way through every single-player game, blowing through them in a fraction of the time that it's supposed to take. In my opinion (and many others would agree), that's a poor way to play a game. But all it takes is a few of these gamers to generate a business. I think of it the same way with spam. The only reason we still get e-mail spam is because there are a few idiots who still fall for the "Former King of Nigeria" tricks or buy Viagra through their inbox.
I think TFA makes a good point. It usually is obvious when you've got someone who just paid his way to a high level character. Make it so they never want to do it again (don't group with them, ban from guild invites, etc). It should be the same stigma as someone who cheats in real life: cutting in front of a long line, snags a few dollars from a donation box, takes credit for other people's work, etc. General asshole behavior, even in on-line games, should not be tolerated.
I understand what you're saying, however I think there is a big difference between GameTap and a console with similar abilities.
GameTap is a service offering only old content that can easily be obtained for free.
With Nintendo, you have already purchased a new system for playing new games. The ability to serve up some classics is a bonus.
Yup, I can see that. It's one reason why the Xbox Live Arcade is doing pretty well (although it's not just limited to classic titles). But some Nintendo fanbois seem to think that this alone is going to revolutionize the industry and vault Nintendo back to the #1 spot. It's definately a good idea, but the general concept is has been done before. As I mentioned earlier, what's really going to set Nintendo apart is the games library and pricing.
The real question, is why bother with getting both the Xbox 360 and the PS3? Almost every major game made right now is being released for multiple consoles anyway. This, of course, is really bad for sony with it's apparently much higher price, lateness to the game, and DRM shenanigans. The only way for the PS3 to come out a winner is because of anti-microsoft mentalities, sony fanboyism, or a really killer exclusive title. One of the big reasons Sony came to the forefront of consoles is because it effectively stole the Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest franchises away from Nintendo. Unless they can invent a breakthrough franchise a-la GTA or Halo that will be exclusive to them, they're essentially dead in the water.
Umm, hello? In the past console generation, Sony WAS the king of console exclusivity. Sure, Nintendo has all of its Nintendo characters (Mario, Samus, Link), Microsoft has Halo and Rare, but Sony still has a really sweet deal with Square-Enix, Namco, Capcom, Konami... you name it. Let's name a few of the exclusives (1st and 3rd party): God of War, Soul Caliber 3, Devil May Cry, Tekken, Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Katamari, Gran Turismo, Metal Gear Solid. I'd say you should even count GTA, since that game was exclusive to the PS2 for many months before it finally showed up for the Xbox.
As much as I dislike Sony for all the marketing shenanigans that they pull (as well as the infamous rootkit), I still admit that I played my PS2 far more than any console thanks to those exclusives. Granted, most of it was simply due to them having far and away the #1 market share. If they don't repeat that again, I'm sure many of those formerly exclusive titles will start becoming multi-platform, but I don't see it happening yet (unfortunately).
Nintendo, on the other hand, has essentially re-invented the console for the Revolution. Not only is the controller revolutionary, but also the game distribution and game compatability platforms. The idea that I can buy one console, play both new games and old games, and not even have to go to the store to buy many of the games is going to put both the Xbox 360 and PS3 to shame. Because of this Nintendo doesn't compete directly with Sony or Microsoft.
Again, I must call BS. Game compatibility? I believe the PS2 was the first console to have backwards compatibility. (Or maybe the GB->GBA did it first, I don't know). In any case, it's not something new with the Revolution. Game distribution? MS launched the Xbox Live Arcade with the original Xbox, although the 360 version is the one that's really kicking ass now. And even though they're playing "catch up", Sony's already announced similar plans for the PS3.
Is the Revolution going to be revolutionary? Sure it is, and primarily because of the controller and its pricing strategy. You can pimp those too all you want, but let's not forget what the other guys have been doing as well.
Nintendo has more exclusive franchises, more backwards compatability, and will cost less. Even when you compare the 360 and PS3 directly Nintendo comes out ahead. Screw polygon count and cpu speed; give me my Revolution.
Exclusive franchises are primarily through Nintendo's own IP. If you dig Mario, Metroid, and Zelda games, then that's great. Unfortunately, I don't think they've done a good job securing 3rd party exclusives (and neither has MS either). Hopefully that should change, as we see games that will ONLY work with the Revolution-style controller. However, on the flip side, there may unfortunately be developers who don't think the Revolution specs are good enough for their more "traditional" games, so only the PS3 and 360 will be getting those "prettier" games.
As for backwards compatibility, just chill. There's a big difference between what's announced and what we'll actually experience once the thing ships. It sounds great, but let's see it in practice. I have faith that they can pull it off, since they've done a great job with backwards compatibil
HDTV has what? Higher resolution period. Whoa, paint me impressed.
This is what I don't understand. The stereotypical computer geek will rave about his new huge LCD monitor, and how he can now tweak it to astronomical resolutions. At the same time, he has a high-end video card so that he can play Quake 4 at enormously high resolutions. 1024x768? Blegh, that's for n00bs. Crank it up higher! Digital is where it's at... screw analog!
But when it comes to TV, you're fine with the content displayed on your SD screen? As I mentioned in another post, I think this is because the stereotypical computer geek doesn't watch much TV at all, nor sports. As for me, I have a wife so she's gotten me sucked into (some) TV shows again. And my college is a football powerhouse, so I love watching NFL and college football on my HDTV. That alone makes it all worth it.
If that isn't your liking then I can understand. But a geek dissing higher resolution doesn't make sense to me.
I will kill your argument with only one proposition : You start paying the novelty tax, I'll root for you and call you the coolest kid on the block, and I'll buy a HDTV when it's dirt cheap.
Actually, I was extremely lucky to get my HDTV as a gift (a very expensive one at that), although I was about to purchase one anyway.:)
Anyway, I think we're both right. I'm not saying that HDTV adoption is going to be huge in the short term. But the cost is going down, so a few years down the line, you CAN buy a decent HDTV for dirt cheap (as you said). I guess what I'm trying to say is that HDTV is not some fad that's going to come and go. Nor is it something that's going to take 20 years to adopt. I give it 5-10 years when a majority of the population now has HDTV in some form. Didn't somebody say it's already 10% now? (Which actually seems high to me)
We geeks are tech-savvy, not drug addicts. HDTV can wait.
I don't know about that. I know plenty of geeks that will drop a grand to upgrade their system with the latest video card, or to buy the newest game console, or to get a shiny 21" LCD screen for their computer, or to get a new laptop, or a new PDA, etc., etc., etc. Most geeks I know that are tech-savvy also make decent money, so they CAN afford it.
I think the reason why most Slashdot geeks are hesitant to HDTV is because we stereotypically don't watch much TV. It's mostly filth, I agree. But I have a wife and thanks to her, I've gotten hooked to shows like Lost and Desperate Housewives (which are surprisingly good). But yeah, most of my other geek friends don't watch that much TV (probably because they aren't married!). Rather, they'd only see a need for HDTV for gaming purposes.
Nintendo games aren't aimed at children. They're aimed at everyone who wants to have fun and isn't so insecure that he can't play games without blood, gore and tits.
I probably should have pointed out that I have no problems with the titles Nintendo makes. Although I never got into Mario Sunshine, I play a healthy dose of Mario Kart DS and Animal Crossing DS. I agree, Nintendo does a great job of making games that appeal to people of all ages. I'm actually a big fan of casual games overall, which have that same goal.
That said, I was referring to the 20-something alpha males. Think of the frat guys in college who only played those blood/gore/tit games. Or those jocks in high school who picked on anyone in the computer lab. Halo is the b0mb, Burnout is the shitz, and GTA is the best game evah. Unfortunately (at least to me), they make a large part of that hardcore gamer audience. Why do you think GTA sold so many copies? True story: I was channel surfing on the radio, and came across some DJ talking about how awesome and cool GTA was. He got a lot of other folks calling in saying the same thing. At the same time, they dissed anything on Nintendo for being "that Pokemon system".
Do I like that comparison? No I do not. But I'm not blind to it either. That said, I don't think Nintendo needs to change anything. They're already on the right track, since they make games targeted to everyone AND they now let 3rd party developers make whatever titles they want (hence BMX XXX). I'd love to change people's perceptions, but that's not possible.
You'd think that of all sites, that Slashdot readers are future-thinking enough to see that HDTV adoption rate is only going to get better and better. I see it as the next DVD phenomenon.
For one, it's extremely obvious to people the difference between SDTV and HDTV. It instantly has the "wow!" factor. Next, HDTVs are becoming the next big-ticket item to get in a household. It's like the whole "keeping up with the Joneses" scenario. Once you've got a friend/relative/co-worker that has one and keeps boasting about it, it doesn't take that long before others start thinking about it. It's essentially just a huge trophy to brag about. Think status symbol.
So, are HDTVs costly? Sure they are, but the price is constantly going down. Plus, these are things that people do save for, even when they ought to be saving for something more important (house, college tuition, etc.). Every holiday season I run into more and more people bragging about their new sweet HDTV. And now that we're starting to get DVRs and video game systems that actually take advantage of the full resolution, it's only going to get better.
Am I biased? Sure am. After watching movies, HD TV shows, football, amd playing video games on my DLP HDTV, I can't help but think positively about it. Everyone who comes and checks it out always has their jaw drop... and more than a few people now have bought their own. Welcome to middle-class splurging people. Coming soon to a Walmart near you.
That said, Blu-ray/HD-DVD are technologies I DON'T see going very far. Primarily because you don't have a huge leap in quality anymore. It may end up becoming much like the Laserdisc, IMHO. Maybe a decade from now, when virtually everyone has an HDTV, it will really make a come-back.
Still doing? They never did. Bright colors does not mean kids game. Try something like Mario Sunshine sometime. The difficulty level is way to high for most kids. Things like Smash Bros & Mario Kart are big college dorm games. Pokemon, and to a lesser extent Kirby, are the only major things Nintendo really aims at kids.
While I agree with you that Nintendo isn't doing the "this console is for kids" thing anymore, those games you cited weren't exactly the best examples. How many 20-something males do you think will happily admit they played and loved Mario Sunshine? As for Mario Kart, yeah it's definately a fun game and I definately played a lot of it in college myself, but you can't deny there's still a lot of a kid-aspect to it. Given Mario Kart or Burnout Revenge, I'm willing to bet your average 20-something alpha male is going to go for Burnout.
Now if you really wanted to prove that Nintendo ain't kiddy anymore, check out BMX XXX. It was released for all three consoles, but it was the PS2 version that was actually censored. Yes, we're long gone from the "Mortal Kombat blood censoring" days of Nintendo.
It's not just Win2K... there are still a lot of users running Win98. That especially boggles the mind, since Win2K/WinXP made drastic improvements to the stability of the OS. (Blue screens were common for me on Win98, but very rare on my XP machines)
At work, we regularly take a look at the number of people using certain browser/OS combinations on our web site, just to see what we need to keep supporting for our compatibility tests. It's surprising how many people remain on Win98/IE5. Sure, they're not the majority by any means, but it's enough to still warrant a test pass on that config.
I think the idea of MMORPGs coalescing is interesting, but not because of the conclusions a lot of people are jumping to. I agree it's ridiculous to expect a character from EverQuest to suddenly just show up in World of Warcraft, with migrated skills and whatnot. It's not something game developers would really want to do.
However, for those that play a lot of MMOs and regularly jump from game to game, there often is the notion of having "one on-line persona". Already there are guilds that span multiple games. A lot of people have friends that they've made in one MMO that they'd like to continue to hang out with in another.
Here are some ideas: - Shared friends list across MMOs: I log into EQ2 and none of my friends are online. However, my friends list shows that they're all in EQ. I send a message why and they reply that they're feeling nostalgic and wanted to raid a few dungeons, so I jump over to EQ and join them. - Shared achievements: I love crafting. No matter what MMO I jump into, I really enjoy going to the top its crafting professions. When I move from Star Wars Galaxies to EQ2, I want people to check my uber-profile (separate from the in-game one) and see that I'm a master crafter in several SWG professions. Maybe they'll trust me more in EQ2, after seeing my "MMO resume". - Gameplay history: Similar to the above, I love PVP experiences in my MMO. Again, I'd like to show fellow gamers that no matter what game I'm in, I have a history of being good at PVP. You can do the same thing with many other gameplay mechanics too. For example, I love being a caster in whatever MMO I'm in, and I want people to see that as well.
Granted, some people DO want to keep their MMO personas distinct. Maybe I like being a PVP asshat ganker in WoW, but I want to be a pure goody-two-shoes crafter in SWG. In that case, I won't want to share my MMO resume to anyone else. There are definately folks like that, but as long as you make it optional what you want to share, then that should be fine.
I think it's a lot more likely that the features above will happen for companies that make multiple MMOs, which is why I focused on EQ, EQ2, and SWG (all developed by Sony Online). Granted, it's a huge leap to then getting Blizzard, Sony, Origin, etc. to all cooperate, but no one said it was going to happen any time soon.
And if you're still skeptical about this happening, then all I need to do is point to console gaming. Xbox Live already has a common platform with a unified friends list and achievements, across a number of developers. Sony and Nintendo are apparently planning the same thing. Now it'd be even cooler, if we could get Sony, Nintendo, and MS to agree on a common platform for this, but that's not going to happen anytime soon either.
You're right in pointing out that several of them are "Japaneese RPGs" but you'll notice that the vast majority of big sellers in Japan could be described as games that Microsoft isn't interested in Developing, doesn't encourage other people to Develop for the XBox, and would not advertize for a third party who produced a game like that.
If you take a look at the list, a large majority of the list is composed of Nintendo titles (many of them being Pokemon). Obviously MS (nor Sony) can't get any of those games. Also, I'm not sure where you get that MS isn't interested in developing those types of games, or wouldn't advertise for a third party that made those games. I think part of the problem may be that Nintendo and Sony are both primarily Japanese companies, and a large number of the games on that list are titles we don't even see in the US. Quite a few are anime-inspired (Naruto, DBZ, Gundam, etc.), for example. Nintendo and Sony have much better access to those types of games, and that's probably one large reason why those consoles fare better in Japan than the Xbox or 360.
Now there IS a MS game studio in Japan that's supposed to be focused on making games for the Japanese audience. So either it's not doing a good job, or they're just having a difficult problem acquiring developers, etc.
For the most part, if some developer approached Microsoft with Animal Crossing, Nintendogs, Brain Training, or Katamari and wanted Microsoft to publish it for the XBox, Microsoft would have replied "It's a cute game, but we really don't think that our audience (12-30 year old insecure North American Males) is all that interested in a game like that".
A few weeks ago, I would have agreed 100%. But it looks like that attitude is changing. See Viva Pinata, Rare's newest game. I think MS is finally understanding that it needs to do more than just appeal to the hardcore audience. (Xbox Live Arcade is certainly helping there... I've heard of a lot of wives getting addicted to Zuma on the 360)
In order for Microsoft's XBoxes to survive in Japan they'd need exclusive support from several of Nintendo, Bandai, Namco, Capcom and Konami; and this point in time they don't have exclusive suport from any of those companies.
Well obviously they can't get support from Nintendo.;)
But I agree. The key is getting exclusives. Currently they're doing a good job of at least getting multi-platform support from said companies, but they'll have a hard time beating Sony, as long as they keep getting titles like God of War, Tekken, Soul Calibur, Katamari, etc.
Nothing really new except confirming rumors
on
GDC - Sony Keynote
·
· Score: 1
Hmm, it doesn't look like there's really any new information, other than confirming a bunch of rumors that have already surfaced. Yes, there's a delay. Yes, they're working on an online service. Yes, more dev kits should be coming out. Yes, there are a lot of developers on board.
I think what most people are really interested in now is the price. I would imagine that will be announced at E3.
I think the low sales of the 360 in Japan really has to do with the lack of Japanese RPGs on the system. Anything with the name "Final Fantasy" and "Dragon Quest" are usually big sellers. I imagine MS has been working with Square-Enix on getting more titles to the 360. They've already started with FFXI, but that's been out for years and I can't really see it being a big seller. But its a start. Having Mistwalker Studios on board though, could be big. We'll just have to see how those games turn out.
Yeah, oops, I totally meant Gnomeregan. I've been in Gadgetzan the last few days, doing quests in Un'goro, so that's been fresh on my mind (plus it also begins with G).
Anyway, I wish I were able to mod you up. Here's one reason why:
The basic problem with quests in World Of Warcraft is that they have to be accessible to the average player, and by that I mean that they have to be pretty much idiot-proof. Any quest that wasn't would only:
1. Cause a disproportionate number of GM tickets (support requests from a Blizzard employee); 2. Be ignored by most players unless it offered particularly good quest rewards; 3. Be completed by 95 percent of players only after they looked up the complete solution on a site like thottbot.com or allakhazam.com.
I'm always surprised by how a lot of folks seem to have problems with these relatively simple quests. People just don't read. The quest notes almost always give you a general area to head to.
Now I'm as guilty as anyone for using Thottbot, but I use it for those quests which do require some searching (yes, I could find it myself, but I'm lazy), or to find quests that I have missed. If Thottbot weren't around, I would survive just fine. However, I get the feeling a lot of people wouldn't, from all the "WHERE DO I FIND X!?!" questions in General Chat.
I agree. I love Achievements as much as any other 360 owner, and I'll admit to sharing my clips and recommending them to a friend in order to get the "freebie" achievements. (After all, I got one of the "spams" myself from a friend) But it is rather dubious and if I were an editor/tester for EA (or whoever is in charge of this), I'd wag my finger and say this is a bad idea.
Then there are also those games which reward hundreds of points for doing very little. Most EA sports games, unfortunately, are set this way.
I hope there's a better process in the future for testing achievements. They shouldn't be lame to get. They shouldn't require spamming your friends. They shouldn't be TOO hard to get (playing the game at least one should net you half of the achievements).
Unfortunately, I don't know how MS can drive such requirements without pissing off developers. Maybe future developers will see that doing achievements RIGHT will generate more sales. Or maybe they'll see that doling out easy points for those achievement-whores out there, is actually the better business decision...
Yeah, I agree 100%. The whole ZF instance as a whole was much more fun than many other instances. As for the worst one, I'd have to suggest either Gadgetzen or Uldaman. Urk.
I wish the folks who knock the 360 for the "utter lack of good software" pointed out what type of games they're actually looking for. The 360 already has plenty of sports games, racing games, and a handful of FPS titles. They're pretty decent as well. It's only got one platformer game as far as I know (Kameo), only one fighting game (DOA 4), and no RPGs yet.
So, is the problem that you love a certain genre and it's not there? (And as an RPG fan, I can agree on that point) Or is it that you've played the 360 games and just don't like them? Or are you just a Sony fanboi who will 3 Sony 4EVAH!!!!
For the X360, you either already have it, you're going to buy it within 6 months or you don't care about it. Who's gonna get a 360 for XMas? Hardly anyone. It's "old" by then.
I'm sorry, but that's just a pathetically stupid argument. The PS2 "was old" by the time the first Xbox and the GC rolled around. Yet you can't argue how massively popular it was. Heck, you've still got a lot of people buying current-gen systems today.
Your argument only holds true for those ultra-hardcore gamers that really do care about buying the latest and greatest. But you know what, they'll already have their 360s by then. It's really the mass audience that MS/Nintendo/Sony really care about. Plus we don't even know how available the PS3 is going to be, as well as how much it retails for, as well as how much the 360 or Revolution will be.
I have no doubt the PS3 and Revolution will be the "hot item" that everyone talks about this Holiday season. But it's stupid to think no one will buy 360s simply because it's "old".
I'll probably get modded down for making this post, but hey what the hell.
It's been a lot of fun seeing all of the Sony fanbois in disarray. For months they've been claiming and hoping that Sony would "drop the bomb" on everyone and make their Spring release. That surely all of the secrecy MUST be a sign that Sony is just that confident. In the meantime, they'll broadcast whatever FUD they can against the 360 and the Revolution. The PS3 is just around the corner! It'll be 100x better than anything MS or Nintendo can ever offer! Blu-ray for all! Next-gen won't start until SONY says so!
Umm, sure, whatever. Go ahead and ignore all the signs and advice all the rational folks are giving. Look, I play my fair share of PS2 games (thanks mostly to the fine folks at Square-Enix and Nippon Ichi), and I can't wait to see the next RPGs for a next-gen system. But even I could see the signs a mile away. I guess I'll just have to wait and see what shows up for the 360 and Revolution for this year. (I wonder how many PS2-exclusive developers are now knocking on MS and Nintendo's doors?)
I agree. I've never had a problem with gold in WoW. I did everything you're supposed to: Upgrade your bags as soon as you can, auction ALL greens that you get at a decent price, look for things to buy low/sell high on the AH, don't spend too much (or anything) at AH, etc. When I hit 40 on two characters (both on different realms, so I couldn't transfer gold), I had more than enough for a mount by then.
Conversely, my wife was always low on funds. Funny thing is she was able to get her mounts from friends who were more than willing to give her gold, just because she was a girl.:P
I always wonder if those who have problems accumulating gold in MMORPGs also have the same problems managing their real life wealth. A lot of WoW players are still kids, who don't have to worry about things like mortgages, college savings accounts, retirement, etc. And there are also many adults who are horrible at saving, what with their massive credit card debt, tanked credit report, etc. It wouldn't surprise me at all if they're also the ones complaining about saving for WoW gold.
(Not that my wife is also bad at managing real life wealth... boy if she saw me write that, she might kill me)
Smart move I guess. I doubt this will affect US Release
I don't know about that. We all know how shipping in the US, Japan, and Europe in roughly the same time has affected 360 availability. Loads of 360s in Japan, but scarce everywhere else. If it shipped in the US first, and then everywhere else a month or two later, then the availability problems probably wouldn't have been as bad for those in the US.
If Sony is aiming to ship in US and Japan around the same time (and it'd be crazy to miss the holiday '06 season for the US), I imagine they're going to have the same availability problems. Then again, the holidays are a long ways off so who knows...
I haven't had any problems with my 360 console itself. It sits happily in my entertainment shelf, with the power brick sitting behind the TV on the carpet. No disc reading problems, which plagued me on the Xbox and PS2. (With the PS2, I did the whole "tilt it vertical" to get it to work with some games)
I did have an issue with a controller charger. I had to get a new one and now it works fine.
I know a few other folks with 360s, and no one has had any problems either. Either we're just lucky, or they know the proper way to keep it ventilated and such. I'm also on a listserv with probably over 100 360 owners too, and only a few people have reported problems. I don't know exactly how many 360 owners there are, since it'd be pretty annoying to have a "raise your hand if you own a 360!" thread going.
I see a lot of complaints about the 360 hardware, but it seems like it's so anecdotal. Usually it's folks complaining that don't even have the console... they just read about it on the Internet. And obviously, those folks are going to be a lot more prevalant on sites like Slashdot, which aren't friendly to MS by any means. *shrugs* I imagine we'll see the same complaints when the PS3 ships, since there are plenty of Sony haters as well (rootkit anyone?).
For those who care, here's my philosophy with defects: Are there occasional problems with the hardware? Absolutely! Every hardware product is going to have some defect rate. That's what return departments are for. Unfortunately, it's pretty common to happen in the console space. Anyone remember the PSP "dead pixel" problem? Or the rants about the original GBA's bad design (lack of backlighting)? Or the many "dirty disc" errors with the PS2 and Xbox? What WOULD be nice is to see actual statistics on how often 360s have to be returned, and then compare it to how other consoles fared (especially when they first started). However, I can't imagine that being made public information by MS, Sony, or Nintendo.
So, why not make a product that is 100% guaranteed to work every single time, in whatever situation you put it in? Well, you COULD do that, but either the cost of the unit will go up, or it'll take a lot longer to go out. Meanwhile, you have a lot of enthusiasts which will take whatever you have and run with it. I'd say the ideal is to get something that works the vast majority of the time, for the vast majority of cases. Let's say 95%. For the 5% that get screwed, again, that's what return departments are for. It's cheaper to funnel those folks through returns, instead of making the product absolutely idiot proof and NASA-safe.
But that's just me. Then again, I'm not one of those unlucky 5%, so to each his own. (And it seems to me that the defect rate for the 360 is lower than 5%, but that's just my own guesstimate)
The interesting thing is that having the highest sale price in the market can be a GOOD thing -- it can make the product seem more elite and powerful than the competition. How many gamers will buy a PS3 BECAUSE it's $200 more than the 360 and Revolution, assuming that it must therefore be $200 better than those consoles?
Ehh, the increased price and power didn't really help the first Xbox surpass the PS2 did it? I'll grant you that it may help a bit. With cross-platform titles, I tended to choose the Xbox versions since they seemed to be prettier than their PS2 siblings.
However, I imagine there will be far more budget-minded individuals that will make their decision with "saving money" more as a primary motivation. Folks who want the latest and greatest are the hardcore gamers, and many of them probably are multi-platform already. I think there's more money, though, in the more casual crowd. These are the folks that only have one console, think that EA is great thanks to games like Madden, buy anything with GTA on it, think FF7 is the best RPG "evaaah11!!!", and generally shun games like Shadow of the Colossus or those "kiddy Nintendo games".:\
One of the biggest problem is probably the interface. Can Blizzard make changes to the interface so that's its more controller friendly? Perhaps... but the experience may not be very good. When I played FFXI, another MMORPG, for the 360, I had lots of beef with the control scheme as well. And this is for a game that was ALSO developed with the PS2 in-mind.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't get why gamers always slam other genres so much. While I agree that gold/time grinds aren't exactly the best game design schemes, you can't argue that it just works for a huge number of players (myself included). If you're the type of player who hates the treadmill concept, then don't play the game! Maybe at some point, there will be an MMO that has evolved enough not to be one huge level/gold/time grind, and you'll find pleasure in that.
It seems like there's always RPG-fantics lambasting how every other genre sucks because they're all twitch-based. Then FPS fans claim that RPGs are awful because there's no skill involved, and they're just interactive movies with bad plots. And everyone slams MMOs for being just really long treadmills. Whine, whine, whine.
Look, I'm all for innovation, and I love it when games go beyond what other titles in a genre typically do. But even if they don't, there are more than enough gamers to satisfy each little niche in the game industry. (And if not, then the genre sadly dies - like the 2D arcade shooter) What you might think are poorly implemented and derivitive systems in one game, is just the way it's supposed to be for a genre, and that's just how that particular audience likes it. There are titles that try to innovate and break the old ways of a genre, but often it just ends up being too complicated or something that no one wants (even fans of that genre).
I guess what I'm trying to say is that we're all masochists in somebody else's eyes.
The fact that gold farmers exist, the fact that leveling services exist, these things speak to deficiencies in the game design. There's this game, that people are paying millions each month to play, and yet on top of the monthly fee many of them feel that it is worth additional money to pay others to essentially play part of the game for them. Why? Because that part of the game isn't fun.
The problem is that fun is (obviously) highly subjective. What you deem as fun may be entirely different than what I think. The vast majority of gamers in WoW don't buy gold. The process of slowly accumulating wealth (which includes gold, equipment, and other loot) is supposed to be challenging and rewarding. That's just a part of the game design.
Now the issue is always going to be "how much is too much?". I'll take WoW as an example. From most people that I've interacted with in the game, accumulating the 90 gold or so necessary for a mount at level 40 is a challenge, but it's something that everyone achieves. However at level 60, the epic mount costs around 800-900 gold, and that's something that many people (myself probably included) will never reach. So I can understand the argument that the cost of the epic mount is too high, and that might be considered bad game design. But that's not the problem.
All it takes for one person to think that the normal mount cost is too much, and bingo, the gold farmers have a business. Heck, you can say having any type of economic system is going to invite farmers, since there will always be those lazy individuals where ANY amount of work is too much. These gamers are probably the same folks who cheat and hack their way through every single-player game, blowing through them in a fraction of the time that it's supposed to take. In my opinion (and many others would agree), that's a poor way to play a game. But all it takes is a few of these gamers to generate a business. I think of it the same way with spam. The only reason we still get e-mail spam is because there are a few idiots who still fall for the "Former King of Nigeria" tricks or buy Viagra through their inbox.
I think TFA makes a good point. It usually is obvious when you've got someone who just paid his way to a high level character. Make it so they never want to do it again (don't group with them, ban from guild invites, etc). It should be the same stigma as someone who cheats in real life: cutting in front of a long line, snags a few dollars from a donation box, takes credit for other people's work, etc. General asshole behavior, even in on-line games, should not be tolerated.
I understand what you're saying, however I think there is a big difference between GameTap and a console with similar abilities.
GameTap is a service offering only old content that can easily be obtained for free.
With Nintendo, you have already purchased a new system for playing new games. The ability to serve up some classics is a bonus.
Yup, I can see that. It's one reason why the Xbox Live Arcade is doing pretty well (although it's not just limited to classic titles). But some Nintendo fanbois seem to think that this alone is going to revolutionize the industry and vault Nintendo back to the #1 spot. It's definately a good idea, but the general concept is has been done before. As I mentioned earlier, what's really going to set Nintendo apart is the games library and pricing.
The real question, is why bother with getting both the Xbox 360 and the PS3? Almost every major game made right now is being released for multiple consoles anyway.
... you name it. Let's name a few of the exclusives (1st and 3rd party): God of War, Soul Caliber 3, Devil May Cry, Tekken, Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Katamari, Gran Turismo, Metal Gear Solid. I'd say you should even count GTA, since that game was exclusive to the PS2 for many months before it finally showed up for the Xbox.
This, of course, is really bad for sony with it's apparently much higher price, lateness to the game, and DRM shenanigans. The only way for the PS3 to come out a winner is because of anti-microsoft mentalities, sony fanboyism, or a really killer exclusive title. One of the big reasons Sony came to the forefront of consoles is because it effectively stole the Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest franchises away from Nintendo. Unless they can invent a breakthrough franchise a-la GTA or Halo that will be exclusive to them, they're essentially dead in the water.
Umm, hello? In the past console generation, Sony WAS the king of console exclusivity. Sure, Nintendo has all of its Nintendo characters (Mario, Samus, Link), Microsoft has Halo and Rare, but Sony still has a really sweet deal with Square-Enix, Namco, Capcom, Konami
As much as I dislike Sony for all the marketing shenanigans that they pull (as well as the infamous rootkit), I still admit that I played my PS2 far more than any console thanks to those exclusives. Granted, most of it was simply due to them having far and away the #1 market share. If they don't repeat that again, I'm sure many of those formerly exclusive titles will start becoming multi-platform, but I don't see it happening yet (unfortunately).
Nintendo, on the other hand, has essentially re-invented the console for the Revolution. Not only is the controller revolutionary, but also the game distribution and game compatability platforms. The idea that I can buy one console, play both new games and old games, and not even have to go to the store to buy many of the games is going to put both the Xbox 360 and PS3 to shame. Because of this Nintendo doesn't compete directly with Sony or Microsoft.
Again, I must call BS. Game compatibility? I believe the PS2 was the first console to have backwards compatibility. (Or maybe the GB->GBA did it first, I don't know). In any case, it's not something new with the Revolution. Game distribution? MS launched the Xbox Live Arcade with the original Xbox, although the 360 version is the one that's really kicking ass now. And even though they're playing "catch up", Sony's already announced similar plans for the PS3.
Is the Revolution going to be revolutionary? Sure it is, and primarily because of the controller and its pricing strategy. You can pimp those too all you want, but let's not forget what the other guys have been doing as well.
Nintendo has more exclusive franchises, more backwards compatability, and will cost less. Even when you compare the 360 and PS3 directly Nintendo comes out ahead. Screw polygon count and cpu speed; give me my Revolution.
Exclusive franchises are primarily through Nintendo's own IP. If you dig Mario, Metroid, and Zelda games, then that's great. Unfortunately, I don't think they've done a good job securing 3rd party exclusives (and neither has MS either). Hopefully that should change, as we see games that will ONLY work with the Revolution-style controller. However, on the flip side, there may unfortunately be developers who don't think the Revolution specs are good enough for their more "traditional" games, so only the PS3 and 360 will be getting those "prettier" games.
As for backwards compatibility, just chill. There's a big difference between what's announced and what we'll actually experience once the thing ships. It sounds great, but let's see it in practice. I have faith that they can pull it off, since they've done a great job with backwards compatibil
HDTV has what? Higher resolution period. Whoa, paint me impressed.
... screw analog!
This is what I don't understand. The stereotypical computer geek will rave about his new huge LCD monitor, and how he can now tweak it to astronomical resolutions. At the same time, he has a high-end video card so that he can play Quake 4 at enormously high resolutions. 1024x768? Blegh, that's for n00bs. Crank it up higher! Digital is where it's at
But when it comes to TV, you're fine with the content displayed on your SD screen? As I mentioned in another post, I think this is because the stereotypical computer geek doesn't watch much TV at all, nor sports. As for me, I have a wife so she's gotten me sucked into (some) TV shows again. And my college is a football powerhouse, so I love watching NFL and college football on my HDTV. That alone makes it all worth it.
If that isn't your liking then I can understand. But a geek dissing higher resolution doesn't make sense to me.
I will kill your argument with only one proposition : You start paying the novelty tax, I'll root for you and call you the coolest kid on the block, and I'll buy a HDTV when it's dirt cheap.
:)
Actually, I was extremely lucky to get my HDTV as a gift (a very expensive one at that), although I was about to purchase one anyway.
Anyway, I think we're both right. I'm not saying that HDTV adoption is going to be huge in the short term. But the cost is going down, so a few years down the line, you CAN buy a decent HDTV for dirt cheap (as you said). I guess what I'm trying to say is that HDTV is not some fad that's going to come and go. Nor is it something that's going to take 20 years to adopt. I give it 5-10 years when a majority of the population now has HDTV in some form. Didn't somebody say it's already 10% now? (Which actually seems high to me)
We geeks are tech-savvy, not drug addicts. HDTV can wait.
I don't know about that. I know plenty of geeks that will drop a grand to upgrade their system with the latest video card, or to buy the newest game console, or to get a shiny 21" LCD screen for their computer, or to get a new laptop, or a new PDA, etc., etc., etc. Most geeks I know that are tech-savvy also make decent money, so they CAN afford it.
I think the reason why most Slashdot geeks are hesitant to HDTV is because we stereotypically don't watch much TV. It's mostly filth, I agree. But I have a wife and thanks to her, I've gotten hooked to shows like Lost and Desperate Housewives (which are surprisingly good). But yeah, most of my other geek friends don't watch that much TV (probably because they aren't married!). Rather, they'd only see a need for HDTV for gaming purposes.
Nintendo games aren't aimed at children. They're aimed at everyone who wants to have fun and isn't so insecure that he can't play games without blood, gore and tits.
I probably should have pointed out that I have no problems with the titles Nintendo makes. Although I never got into Mario Sunshine, I play a healthy dose of Mario Kart DS and Animal Crossing DS. I agree, Nintendo does a great job of making games that appeal to people of all ages. I'm actually a big fan of casual games overall, which have that same goal.
That said, I was referring to the 20-something alpha males. Think of the frat guys in college who only played those blood/gore/tit games. Or those jocks in high school who picked on anyone in the computer lab. Halo is the b0mb, Burnout is the shitz, and GTA is the best game evah. Unfortunately (at least to me), they make a large part of that hardcore gamer audience. Why do you think GTA sold so many copies? True story: I was channel surfing on the radio, and came across some DJ talking about how awesome and cool GTA was. He got a lot of other folks calling in saying the same thing. At the same time, they dissed anything on Nintendo for being "that Pokemon system".
Do I like that comparison? No I do not. But I'm not blind to it either. That said, I don't think Nintendo needs to change anything. They're already on the right track, since they make games targeted to everyone AND they now let 3rd party developers make whatever titles they want (hence BMX XXX). I'd love to change people's perceptions, but that's not possible.
I wish I could mod you up.
... and more than a few people now have bought their own. Welcome to middle-class splurging people. Coming soon to a Walmart near you.
You'd think that of all sites, that Slashdot readers are future-thinking enough to see that HDTV adoption rate is only going to get better and better. I see it as the next DVD phenomenon.
For one, it's extremely obvious to people the difference between SDTV and HDTV. It instantly has the "wow!" factor. Next, HDTVs are becoming the next big-ticket item to get in a household. It's like the whole "keeping up with the Joneses" scenario. Once you've got a friend/relative/co-worker that has one and keeps boasting about it, it doesn't take that long before others start thinking about it. It's essentially just a huge trophy to brag about. Think status symbol.
So, are HDTVs costly? Sure they are, but the price is constantly going down. Plus, these are things that people do save for, even when they ought to be saving for something more important (house, college tuition, etc.). Every holiday season I run into more and more people bragging about their new sweet HDTV. And now that we're starting to get DVRs and video game systems that actually take advantage of the full resolution, it's only going to get better.
Am I biased? Sure am. After watching movies, HD TV shows, football, amd playing video games on my DLP HDTV, I can't help but think positively about it. Everyone who comes and checks it out always has their jaw drop
That said, Blu-ray/HD-DVD are technologies I DON'T see going very far. Primarily because you don't have a huge leap in quality anymore. It may end up becoming much like the Laserdisc, IMHO. Maybe a decade from now, when virtually everyone has an HDTV, it will really make a come-back.
Still doing? They never did. Bright colors does not mean kids game. Try something like Mario Sunshine sometime. The difficulty level is way to high for most kids. Things like Smash Bros & Mario Kart are big college dorm games. Pokemon, and to a lesser extent Kirby, are the only major things Nintendo really aims at kids.
While I agree with you that Nintendo isn't doing the "this console is for kids" thing anymore, those games you cited weren't exactly the best examples. How many 20-something males do you think will happily admit they played and loved Mario Sunshine? As for Mario Kart, yeah it's definately a fun game and I definately played a lot of it in college myself, but you can't deny there's still a lot of a kid-aspect to it. Given Mario Kart or Burnout Revenge, I'm willing to bet your average 20-something alpha male is going to go for Burnout.
Now if you really wanted to prove that Nintendo ain't kiddy anymore, check out BMX XXX. It was released for all three consoles, but it was the PS2 version that was actually censored. Yes, we're long gone from the "Mortal Kombat blood censoring" days of Nintendo.
It's not just Win2K ... there are still a lot of users running Win98. That especially boggles the mind, since Win2K/WinXP made drastic improvements to the stability of the OS. (Blue screens were common for me on Win98, but very rare on my XP machines)
At work, we regularly take a look at the number of people using certain browser/OS combinations on our web site, just to see what we need to keep supporting for our compatibility tests. It's surprising how many people remain on Win98/IE5. Sure, they're not the majority by any means, but it's enough to still warrant a test pass on that config.
I think the idea of MMORPGs coalescing is interesting, but not because of the conclusions a lot of people are jumping to. I agree it's ridiculous to expect a character from EverQuest to suddenly just show up in World of Warcraft, with migrated skills and whatnot. It's not something game developers would really want to do.
However, for those that play a lot of MMOs and regularly jump from game to game, there often is the notion of having "one on-line persona". Already there are guilds that span multiple games. A lot of people have friends that they've made in one MMO that they'd like to continue to hang out with in another.
Here are some ideas:
- Shared friends list across MMOs: I log into EQ2 and none of my friends are online. However, my friends list shows that they're all in EQ. I send a message why and they reply that they're feeling nostalgic and wanted to raid a few dungeons, so I jump over to EQ and join them.
- Shared achievements: I love crafting. No matter what MMO I jump into, I really enjoy going to the top its crafting professions. When I move from Star Wars Galaxies to EQ2, I want people to check my uber-profile (separate from the in-game one) and see that I'm a master crafter in several SWG professions. Maybe they'll trust me more in EQ2, after seeing my "MMO resume".
- Gameplay history: Similar to the above, I love PVP experiences in my MMO. Again, I'd like to show fellow gamers that no matter what game I'm in, I have a history of being good at PVP. You can do the same thing with many other gameplay mechanics too. For example, I love being a caster in whatever MMO I'm in, and I want people to see that as well.
Granted, some people DO want to keep their MMO personas distinct. Maybe I like being a PVP asshat ganker in WoW, but I want to be a pure goody-two-shoes crafter in SWG. In that case, I won't want to share my MMO resume to anyone else. There are definately folks like that, but as long as you make it optional what you want to share, then that should be fine.
I think it's a lot more likely that the features above will happen for companies that make multiple MMOs, which is why I focused on EQ, EQ2, and SWG (all developed by Sony Online). Granted, it's a huge leap to then getting Blizzard, Sony, Origin, etc. to all cooperate, but no one said it was going to happen any time soon.
And if you're still skeptical about this happening, then all I need to do is point to console gaming. Xbox Live already has a common platform with a unified friends list and achievements, across a number of developers. Sony and Nintendo are apparently planning the same thing. Now it'd be even cooler, if we could get Sony, Nintendo, and MS to agree on a common platform for this, but that's not going to happen anytime soon either.
If you actually think that it is just "Japaneese RPGs" that are holding the XBox 360 down you should really look at this:
(Top 100 selling games in Japan in 2005)
http://the-magicbox.com/Chart-BestSell2005.shtml
You're right in pointing out that several of them are "Japaneese RPGs" but you'll notice that the vast majority of big sellers in Japan could be described as games that Microsoft isn't interested in Developing, doesn't encourage other people to Develop for the XBox, and would not advertize for a third party who produced a game like that.
If you take a look at the list, a large majority of the list is composed of Nintendo titles (many of them being Pokemon). Obviously MS (nor Sony) can't get any of those games. Also, I'm not sure where you get that MS isn't interested in developing those types of games, or wouldn't advertise for a third party that made those games. I think part of the problem may be that Nintendo and Sony are both primarily Japanese companies, and a large number of the games on that list are titles we don't even see in the US. Quite a few are anime-inspired (Naruto, DBZ, Gundam, etc.), for example. Nintendo and Sony have much better access to those types of games, and that's probably one large reason why those consoles fare better in Japan than the Xbox or 360.
Now there IS a MS game studio in Japan that's supposed to be focused on making games for the Japanese audience. So either it's not doing a good job, or they're just having a difficult problem acquiring developers, etc.
For the most part, if some developer approached Microsoft with Animal Crossing, Nintendogs, Brain Training, or Katamari and wanted Microsoft to publish it for the XBox, Microsoft would have replied "It's a cute game, but we really don't think that our audience (12-30 year old insecure North American Males) is all that interested in a game like that".
A few weeks ago, I would have agreed 100%. But it looks like that attitude is changing. See Viva Pinata, Rare's newest game. I think MS is finally understanding that it needs to do more than just appeal to the hardcore audience. (Xbox Live Arcade is certainly helping there
In order for Microsoft's XBoxes to survive in Japan they'd need exclusive support from several of Nintendo, Bandai, Namco, Capcom and Konami; and this point in time they don't have exclusive suport from any of those companies.
Well obviously they can't get support from Nintendo.
But I agree. The key is getting exclusives. Currently they're doing a good job of at least getting multi-platform support from said companies, but they'll have a hard time beating Sony, as long as they keep getting titles like God of War, Tekken, Soul Calibur, Katamari, etc.
Hmm, it doesn't look like there's really any new information, other than confirming a bunch of rumors that have already surfaced. Yes, there's a delay. Yes, they're working on an online service. Yes, more dev kits should be coming out. Yes, there are a lot of developers on board.
I think what most people are really interested in now is the price. I would imagine that will be announced at E3.
I think the low sales of the 360 in Japan really has to do with the lack of Japanese RPGs on the system. Anything with the name "Final Fantasy" and "Dragon Quest" are usually big sellers. I imagine MS has been working with Square-Enix on getting more titles to the 360. They've already started with FFXI, but that's been out for years and I can't really see it being a big seller. But its a start. Having Mistwalker Studios on board though, could be big. We'll just have to see how those games turn out.
Yeah, oops, I totally meant Gnomeregan. I've been in Gadgetzan the last few days, doing quests in Un'goro, so that's been fresh on my mind (plus it also begins with G).
Anyway, I wish I were able to mod you up. Here's one reason why:
The basic problem with quests in World Of Warcraft is that they have to be accessible to the average player, and by that I mean that they have to be pretty much idiot-proof. Any quest that wasn't would only:
1. Cause a disproportionate number of GM tickets (support requests from a Blizzard employee);
2. Be ignored by most players unless it offered particularly good quest rewards;
3. Be completed by 95 percent of players only after they looked up the complete solution on a site like thottbot.com or allakhazam.com.
I'm always surprised by how a lot of folks seem to have problems with these relatively simple quests. People just don't read. The quest notes almost always give you a general area to head to.
Now I'm as guilty as anyone for using Thottbot, but I use it for those quests which do require some searching (yes, I could find it myself, but I'm lazy), or to find quests that I have missed. If Thottbot weren't around, I would survive just fine. However, I get the feeling a lot of people wouldn't, from all the "WHERE DO I FIND X!?!" questions in General Chat.
I agree. I love Achievements as much as any other 360 owner, and I'll admit to sharing my clips and recommending them to a friend in order to get the "freebie" achievements. (After all, I got one of the "spams" myself from a friend) But it is rather dubious and if I were an editor/tester for EA (or whoever is in charge of this), I'd wag my finger and say this is a bad idea.
...
Then there are also those games which reward hundreds of points for doing very little. Most EA sports games, unfortunately, are set this way.
I hope there's a better process in the future for testing achievements. They shouldn't be lame to get. They shouldn't require spamming your friends. They shouldn't be TOO hard to get (playing the game at least one should net you half of the achievements).
Unfortunately, I don't know how MS can drive such requirements without pissing off developers. Maybe future developers will see that doing achievements RIGHT will generate more sales. Or maybe they'll see that doling out easy points for those achievement-whores out there, is actually the better business decision
Yeah, I agree 100%. The whole ZF instance as a whole was much more fun than many other instances. As for the worst one, I'd have to suggest either Gadgetzen or Uldaman. Urk.
I wish the folks who knock the 360 for the "utter lack of good software" pointed out what type of games they're actually looking for. The 360 already has plenty of sports games, racing games, and a handful of FPS titles. They're pretty decent as well. It's only got one platformer game as far as I know (Kameo), only one fighting game (DOA 4), and no RPGs yet.
So, is the problem that you love a certain genre and it's not there? (And as an RPG fan, I can agree on that point) Or is it that you've played the 360 games and just don't like them? Or are you just a Sony fanboi who will 3 Sony 4EVAH!!!!
For the X360, you either already have it, you're going to buy it within 6 months or you don't care about it. Who's gonna get a 360 for XMas? Hardly anyone. It's "old" by then.
I'm sorry, but that's just a pathetically stupid argument. The PS2 "was old" by the time the first Xbox and the GC rolled around. Yet you can't argue how massively popular it was. Heck, you've still got a lot of people buying current-gen systems today.
Your argument only holds true for those ultra-hardcore gamers that really do care about buying the latest and greatest. But you know what, they'll already have their 360s by then. It's really the mass audience that MS/Nintendo/Sony really care about. Plus we don't even know how available the PS3 is going to be, as well as how much it retails for, as well as how much the 360 or Revolution will be.
I have no doubt the PS3 and Revolution will be the "hot item" that everyone talks about this Holiday season. But it's stupid to think no one will buy 360s simply because it's "old".
I'll probably get modded down for making this post, but hey what the hell.
It's been a lot of fun seeing all of the Sony fanbois in disarray. For months they've been claiming and hoping that Sony would "drop the bomb" on everyone and make their Spring release. That surely all of the secrecy MUST be a sign that Sony is just that confident. In the meantime, they'll broadcast whatever FUD they can against the 360 and the Revolution. The PS3 is just around the corner! It'll be 100x better than anything MS or Nintendo can ever offer! Blu-ray for all! Next-gen won't start until SONY says so!
Umm, sure, whatever. Go ahead and ignore all the signs and advice all the rational folks are giving. Look, I play my fair share of PS2 games (thanks mostly to the fine folks at Square-Enix and Nippon Ichi), and I can't wait to see the next RPGs for a next-gen system. But even I could see the signs a mile away. I guess I'll just have to wait and see what shows up for the 360 and Revolution for this year. (I wonder how many PS2-exclusive developers are now knocking on MS and Nintendo's doors?)
I agree. I've never had a problem with gold in WoW. I did everything you're supposed to: Upgrade your bags as soon as you can, auction ALL greens that you get at a decent price, look for things to buy low/sell high on the AH, don't spend too much (or anything) at AH, etc. When I hit 40 on two characters (both on different realms, so I couldn't transfer gold), I had more than enough for a mount by then.
:P
... boy if she saw me write that, she might kill me)
Conversely, my wife was always low on funds. Funny thing is she was able to get her mounts from friends who were more than willing to give her gold, just because she was a girl.
I always wonder if those who have problems accumulating gold in MMORPGs also have the same problems managing their real life wealth. A lot of WoW players are still kids, who don't have to worry about things like mortgages, college savings accounts, retirement, etc. And there are also many adults who are horrible at saving, what with their massive credit card debt, tanked credit report, etc. It wouldn't surprise me at all if they're also the ones complaining about saving for WoW gold.
(Not that my wife is also bad at managing real life wealth
Smart move I guess. I doubt this will affect US Release
...
I don't know about that. We all know how shipping in the US, Japan, and Europe in roughly the same time has affected 360 availability. Loads of 360s in Japan, but scarce everywhere else. If it shipped in the US first, and then everywhere else a month or two later, then the availability problems probably wouldn't have been as bad for those in the US.
If Sony is aiming to ship in US and Japan around the same time (and it'd be crazy to miss the holiday '06 season for the US), I imagine they're going to have the same availability problems. Then again, the holidays are a long ways off so who knows
I haven't had any problems with my 360 console itself. It sits happily in my entertainment shelf, with the power brick sitting behind the TV on the carpet. No disc reading problems, which plagued me on the Xbox and PS2. (With the PS2, I did the whole "tilt it vertical" to get it to work with some games)
... they just read about it on the Internet. And obviously, those folks are going to be a lot more prevalant on sites like Slashdot, which aren't friendly to MS by any means. *shrugs* I imagine we'll see the same complaints when the PS3 ships, since there are plenty of Sony haters as well (rootkit anyone?).
I did have an issue with a controller charger. I had to get a new one and now it works fine.
I know a few other folks with 360s, and no one has had any problems either. Either we're just lucky, or they know the proper way to keep it ventilated and such. I'm also on a listserv with probably over 100 360 owners too, and only a few people have reported problems. I don't know exactly how many 360 owners there are, since it'd be pretty annoying to have a "raise your hand if you own a 360!" thread going.
I see a lot of complaints about the 360 hardware, but it seems like it's so anecdotal. Usually it's folks complaining that don't even have the console
For those who care, here's my philosophy with defects: Are there occasional problems with the hardware? Absolutely! Every hardware product is going to have some defect rate. That's what return departments are for. Unfortunately, it's pretty common to happen in the console space. Anyone remember the PSP "dead pixel" problem? Or the rants about the original GBA's bad design (lack of backlighting)? Or the many "dirty disc" errors with the PS2 and Xbox? What WOULD be nice is to see actual statistics on how often 360s have to be returned, and then compare it to how other consoles fared (especially when they first started). However, I can't imagine that being made public information by MS, Sony, or Nintendo.
So, why not make a product that is 100% guaranteed to work every single time, in whatever situation you put it in? Well, you COULD do that, but either the cost of the unit will go up, or it'll take a lot longer to go out. Meanwhile, you have a lot of enthusiasts which will take whatever you have and run with it. I'd say the ideal is to get something that works the vast majority of the time, for the vast majority of cases. Let's say 95%. For the 5% that get screwed, again, that's what return departments are for. It's cheaper to funnel those folks through returns, instead of making the product absolutely idiot proof and NASA-safe.
But that's just me. Then again, I'm not one of those unlucky 5%, so to each his own. (And it seems to me that the defect rate for the 360 is lower than 5%, but that's just my own guesstimate)
The interesting thing is that having the highest sale price in the market can be a GOOD thing -- it can make the product seem more elite and powerful than the competition. How many gamers will buy a PS3 BECAUSE it's $200 more than the 360 and Revolution, assuming that it must therefore be $200 better than those consoles?
:\
Ehh, the increased price and power didn't really help the first Xbox surpass the PS2 did it? I'll grant you that it may help a bit. With cross-platform titles, I tended to choose the Xbox versions since they seemed to be prettier than their PS2 siblings.
However, I imagine there will be far more budget-minded individuals that will make their decision with "saving money" more as a primary motivation. Folks who want the latest and greatest are the hardcore gamers, and many of them probably are multi-platform already. I think there's more money, though, in the more casual crowd. These are the folks that only have one console, think that EA is great thanks to games like Madden, buy anything with GTA on it, think FF7 is the best RPG "evaaah11!!!", and generally shun games like Shadow of the Colossus or those "kiddy Nintendo games".
One of the biggest problem is probably the interface. Can Blizzard make changes to the interface so that's its more controller friendly? Perhaps ... but the experience may not be very good. When I played FFXI, another MMORPG, for the 360, I had lots of beef with the control scheme as well. And this is for a game that was ALSO developed with the PS2 in-mind.