Putting aside the fact that "better controllers" is a subjective item... The DC controller is vastly superior to the PS.
Well, you didn't put that aside for long...
Triggers that are actually triggers are your friend.
Arbitrarily calling the R and L buttons "triggers" so that you can decry their non-triggerity: Not productive. You like triggers? Fine, I find them pointless. Buttons will do just fine, thank you very much.
Putting analog functionality into a button.. did anyone play test this 'feature'?
Yes, and it works like a charm. The amount of subtle movement that it allows in Metal Gear Solid 2 is amazing, it grants you the ability to creep around corners, move just the tiny amount you need to to see through air vents while you hide in lockers, etc.
the analog sticks were hacked on, they are obviously mis-placed.
Where the hell would you put them? They are fine where they are, the only problem with them is when you nick one when moving to the seldom used "select" and "start" buttons.
I was also never able to get the 'feel' of the sticks.
Your lack of l33t sk1llz does not equate to a design flaw;-)
using the analog functionality of the stick is frustrating.
Second time you've said that... and you also prefer a bigger controller. Has it occured to you that you might simply be all thumbs? No offense... I had a hard time learning to controll anolog functions after a lifetime of digital controllers too, but I did it with a few weeks of playing Mario64, now I can amaze my friends with my skillz. I guess that would be why we call them skills... Had a friend who would bitch and moan about analog controlls all the time, mostly because it was something that showed up after he had passed the age of 15, and therefore after the age where learning new tings comes naturally to us feeble humans.
I also prefer the Xbox controller. Just about the only drawback is that the sticks are also buttons. This is nice in theory, but in the heat of gameplay you end up pressing down the stick a lot more than you realize.
The playstation sticks are also buttons, but as part of the whole "better controller" deal, they don't click unless you actually push down on them, and since they are placed at an angle, you never do this accidentally (I didn't know they were buttons until Ape Escape told me to use them).
I also don't like the position of the black/white buttons on the 'S' controller, but I try to stay away from that one.
I don't like them on either model, they remind me of the Cube's Z button: feels like a last minute add-on, akward to use and rarely well implemented in games.
Now, let me complain:
The Dreamcast controller was almost as big as the console itself! Why not just put buttons on the damn thing?
And the + button had sharp corners and was really hard to move, my thumb actually turned blue from playing a fighter game on the damn thing! What a horribly painfull design!
And don't get me started on the wire coming out TOWARDS THE PLAYER! What the FUCK is wrong with these people? Do you plug the end of that wire on that side of the controller? No? Then have the wire come out in the direction it's going to go, idiots. Putting a little groove so you can place (and replace every 10 minutes as it falls) the wire in the right direction is a lame work-around to this huge design flaw.
I think (and I'm completely honest) that the original Xbox controller is the finest controller ever made for any game system.
The button placement made no sense: You can't reach all the buttons without shifting your hand. If you place your index on the right trigger, I can't see how your thumb could reliably move from the upper clear button all the way down to the analog stick to cover all the buttons you could have to press.
I can understand how offering a big controller to people with big hands is a good idea, but forcing it on everyone was just arrogant (it's the Microsoft way!).
Now you may disagree with every word I just said, but guess what? It's all opinion. Telling me that my choice of controller is "wrong" or "inferior" is about as useless as telling an emacs user that his text editor is a "nightmare" and he should be using vi.
Ironically, your entire post was devoted to telling me my choice of controller is wrong.
All three of my third-party X-Box controllers are almost the exact same shape & size as the original controller, and I would have it no other way.
And yet, Microsoft did a 180 and gave in to public pressure to release the smaller controller in markets other than Japan, and went on to discontinuing the jumbo original controller.
And BTW, it's not just the size, the button placement made no sense, you have to shift your hands to get to the upper buttons. The redesign in the "s" controller (not to be confused with the "j" controller, which is almost identical, but japanese) button placement is part of the better deal.
You are part of that minority who prefers a bigger controller. There is no reason to snub you people, but the intelligent thing to do would have been to offer a choice (I know, not Microsoft's forte), not to force the bigger controller on a reluctant public.
No. Not out-of-the-box at least. The Xbox2 won't have a HD, and therefore will not be compatible with all the Xbox games that require a HD to save, or in many instances, run at all.
So maybe they could release an add-on HD that might perhaps allow you to run old games on the new console, but I don't see think so.
Compare NFS Underground on the PS2 with the xbox or gamecube. I keep running into walls on the PS2 because I can't tell that there's a turn up ahead. The graphics on the PS2 are awful. I'm not even talking about poly count.. i'm talking about how fucking *dirty* the graphics are.
That, aside from you outrageous exagerations, isn't caused by the PS2, it is caused by having a game develloped for one console and then inexpertly ported to other consoles, in a rush.
I don't think Sony is playing a waiting game at all.
Neither do I, I think they're just being steady Neddies. It just so happen that by not-rushing, they are also (in a way) waiting to see what the rushers release.
Lastly, I somewhat disagree that this tactic of coming out early is beneficial to gamers.
I didn't mean that the early part is good for gamers at all. I meant that having a 3 way competition is good for gamers. It prevents the companies from having a complacent "our console is good enough, lets milk it and not waste money on R&D" attitude.
I know the PS2 supports 5.1 too, but I don't know first-hand how many games support it, so maybe that's not a big differentiator, either.
None. The PS2's 5.1 support is for movies and cinematics only, it doesn't support 5.1 in-game audio.
And since I don't have 5.1 audio at home, and in fact, I know very few people who do, it's not a great loss on their part. This is what I called "slightly better stats".
The Xbox advantages are... inconsequential to most people. The differences in graphics are subtle at best, the difference in high-end format support is only of importance to people who have a high-end setup, by definition a small percentage of the market, and those people have enough disposable income to buy more than one console, so they won't make a difference in market share.
So maybe Microsoft learned a lot from their first console venture, but their initial effort betrayed a fundamental misunderstanding of what matters to their target consummers, they focused on things that didn't matter to most of us (oh, you have an extra rendering layer that gives you "shiny" effects? Whoopdeedoo!). They might have matured, but this move makes me think they haven't, and Ballmer's comments cement that impression.
When the PS3 arrives 1 year later, the Xbox 2 will be (much?) cheaper, have a nice line of games, a larger base of players etc. Sure, the PS3 will have slightly better specs, but what will you pick when you're presented with the choice between a 699 machine and a 349 machine? Where everything else (eventually) points to the 349-machine..
Replace "PS3" with "PS2" and "Xbox2" with "Dreamcast", and we're 5 years all over again.
The DC was cheaper, had a bigger base of games, and yet, here we are, a few years later, and Sega's hardware division is history. Not that MS would ever stop, but their strategy has been tried before, and I don't think the result will be any different.
The Dreamcast wasn't a bad system. But Sony then released a better system: backwards compatible, better controllers, plays DVDs, etc.
Wait and see what the competition releases.
One-up them.
Profit!
Microsoft attempted that strategy the first time around, but focused on system stats as their definition of "better". Their original controller was a nightmare (and how long did they deny it? Now it's a collector's item, despite their repeated claims that it was perfect), you had to pay extra to unlock the built-in features (Sony did that too, but quickly realised the error of their ways, and by the time of the north american launch, DVD playing was standard out of the box).
Of the current gen, none are utter crap. The Xbox does have slightly better graphics, if you're looking real close, and the Cube has a bunch of lil' gems of games. But since they're in a pissing contest, I think Sony's strategy will get them ahead again.
On the whole, aside from the backroom exclusivity deals, the console wars are good for us gamers, they're trying damn hard to get the best hardware they can, and so devellopers get a good base on which to devellop (hopefully) good games.
Why do people buy one game console over another? As we say around here, 'Duh, it's the games.'... Partly they're great games because they have great graphics, they have great processing, they have great this, they've got great that, but it's about getting great games. [...] What is 'Halo 2?' It's the greatest video game ever written.
I'm sorry, no. Graphics are nice, but gameplay is what counts. And Halo 2 is just another multiplayer FPS.
I still replay Super Metroid and Castlevania: Symphoy of the Night about once a year, and every few months I get an urge to replay Rez intensly for a couple of weeks. The graphics were an important part of the initial experience, but they are just eye candy, and they get old fast. Why would I still play old games when the new ones have the better graphics? Gameplay? That's right.
they can't just fall back on old storylines like holodecks (not invented yet), Q continuum (won't meet them for centuries), the Borg (likewise)
And you wonder why we dump all over it? They DID a show with holodecks! And another with Borgs!
They crap all over established Trek lore, because they made very lame time travel stories so the history was changed. And they call THAT "perfectly following continuity"! How you can gobble up that shit is beyond me.
And this season, [...] reliable Transporter technology
It's TOO EARLY! Watch The Menagerie... I sure wish Berman would! When the NCC 1701 first flew, transporters were still unreliable and phasers were new! He's writing a prequel to THAT with better tech! How dumb are they? How dumb do they take us for?
If you don't like Trek, don't watch it.
I loved Trek, Enterprise simply isn't it. It's (was, I haven't seen any of the current season) a very badly written sci-fi show abusing the copyrighted names of the Trek franchise without living up to it.
We want it cancelled because we can't stand it! We're tired of those fuckers pushing crap down our throats because Trekkies will buy anything with "Star Trek" written on it.
We're putting down these people for doing exactly that. It's not right! Galactica is surprisingly good, Firefly was amazing, but when we turn to what is labelled as trek , we get jungles on a planet with no sun, we get a Ferengi attack recorded on surveillance cameras with a good deal of cultural background explained to the captain, and yet, the race managed to be elusive until Picard's time? WHAT THE HELL??? There is NO EXCUSE for making something that ming-numbingly bad, and we want it to stop.
I love sci-fi, I wish producers didn't think all they need to do is have a babe with a phaser gun to have a sci-fi audience. We are upset that we are treated like second-class TV viewers, and we're ashamed of those of us who bend over and ask for more.
Dan Simmons included this idea in his Hyperion book series, where evolving digital life spead into the "infosphere" and became artifically intelligent.
Right. Enterprise. I'm sure it's a perfectly good show. Maybe even good. But am I the only one who instinctively turns their TV off before the end of the theme tune? It could be the worst theme on television. Ever.
You are not alone, but after a few tries I managed to teach myself to put it on mute instead of changing the channel or turning off the TV (which I literally did).
The video montage is quite good. I've been looking for an mp3 to play over it instead of the "it's been a long road" crap they're subjecting us too. If anyone has a good sugestion... hint, hint.
If Picard was in the nexus wouldn't it be a pleasant dream instead of the horrifying nightmare that Enterprise is?
The Nexus, much like the Matrix, tried to give him a pleasant dream. But Picard has issues, so he needs a darker fantasy world to keep him occupied. ; )
Nobody in their right mind would ever accuse Hollywood producers of being people. An analysis of their DNA places them more properly within the genus Mustela (Short-Tailed Weasel).
Well, that's Informative. Here I was thinking they were lizard men... or mole people;-)
Hell as far as I know they don't even have a Holo-deck, surely that cuts the series length in half without the "OMG SAFEY HAS BEEN REMOVED" episodes.
They managed to meet an alien race with holodeck technology (damn you Berman), and one of the hicks got pregnant in it. Boy was he surprised.
I'm not a HUGE Trekkie, but I'll happily watch anything EXCEPT Enterprise.
I don't even consider Enterprise to be Trek.
As far as I'm concerned, continuity ended in Generations: Picard never made it out of the Nexus and all the lame series and movies since have been a nightmare he's having in there.
I remember when the Super Nintendo, Genesis and Pentium were next-generation--not to mention the AMD K6-2 ("with 3DNow! technology!"). The first game I ever played was that Super Mario Bros./Duck Hunt dual pak. I miss teh old days...
I remeber when 8bit was next-gen!!!
Man, I had to walk uphill, barefoot in the snow to play it too!
Slashdot Mirror
They didn't force anything on anybody. First of all, you certainly didn't need to buy and X-Box.
Sigh.
Force if you wanted an Xbox. Duh!
Putting aside the fact that "better controllers" is a subjective item...
;-)
The DC controller is vastly superior to the PS.
Well, you didn't put that aside for long...
Triggers that are actually triggers are your friend.
Arbitrarily calling the R and L buttons "triggers" so that you can decry their non-triggerity: Not productive.
You like triggers? Fine, I find them pointless. Buttons will do just fine, thank you very much.
Putting analog functionality into a button.. did anyone play test this 'feature'?
Yes, and it works like a charm. The amount of subtle movement that it allows in Metal Gear Solid 2 is amazing, it grants you the ability to creep around corners, move just the tiny amount you need to to see through air vents while you hide in lockers, etc.
the analog sticks were hacked on, they are obviously mis-placed.
Where the hell would you put them? They are fine where they are, the only problem with them is when you nick one when moving to the seldom used "select" and "start" buttons.
I was also never able to get the 'feel' of the sticks.
Your lack of l33t sk1llz does not equate to a design flaw
using the analog functionality of the stick is frustrating.
Second time you've said that... and you also prefer a bigger controller. Has it occured to you that you might simply be all thumbs? No offense...
I had a hard time learning to controll anolog functions after a lifetime of digital controllers too, but I did it with a few weeks of playing Mario64, now I can amaze my friends with my skillz. I guess that would be why we call them skills...
Had a friend who would bitch and moan about analog controlls all the time, mostly because it was something that showed up after he had passed the age of 15, and therefore after the age where learning new tings comes naturally to us feeble humans.
I also prefer the Xbox controller. Just about the only drawback is that the sticks are also buttons. This is nice in theory, but in the heat of gameplay you end up pressing down the stick a lot more than you realize.
The playstation sticks are also buttons, but as part of the whole "better controller" deal, they don't click unless you actually push down on them, and since they are placed at an angle, you never do this accidentally (I didn't know they were buttons until Ape Escape told me to use them).
I also don't like the position of the black/white buttons on the 'S' controller, but I try to stay away from that one.
I don't like them on either model, they remind me of the Cube's Z button: feels like a last minute add-on, akward to use and rarely well implemented in games.
Now, let me complain:
The Dreamcast controller was almost as big as the console itself! Why not just put buttons on the damn thing?
And the + button had sharp corners and was really hard to move, my thumb actually turned blue from playing a fighter game on the damn thing! What a horribly painfull design!
And don't get me started on the wire coming out TOWARDS THE PLAYER! What the FUCK is wrong with these people? Do you plug the end of that wire on that side of the controller? No? Then have the wire come out in the direction it's going to go, idiots. Putting a little groove so you can place (and replace every 10 minutes as it falls) the wire in the right direction is a lame work-around to this huge design flaw.
I think (and I'm completely honest) that the original Xbox controller is the finest controller ever made for any game system.
The button placement made no sense: You can't reach all the buttons without shifting your hand. If you place your index on the right trigger, I can't see how your thumb could reliably move from the upper clear button all the way down to the analog stick to cover all the buttons you could have to press.
I can understand how offering a big controller to people with big hands is a good idea, but forcing it on everyone was just arrogant (it's the Microsoft way!).
Now you may disagree with every word I just said, but guess what? It's all opinion. Telling me that my choice of controller is "wrong" or "inferior" is about as useless as telling an emacs user that his text editor is a "nightmare" and he should be using vi.
Ironically, your entire post was devoted to telling me my choice of controller is wrong.
All three of my third-party X-Box controllers are almost the exact same shape & size as the original controller, and I would have it no other way.
And yet, Microsoft did a 180 and gave in to public pressure to release the smaller controller in markets other than Japan, and went on to discontinuing the jumbo original controller.
And BTW, it's not just the size, the button placement made no sense, you have to shift your hands to get to the upper buttons. The redesign in the "s" controller (not to be confused with the "j" controller, which is almost identical, but japanese) button placement is part of the better deal.
You are part of that minority who prefers a bigger controller. There is no reason to snub you people, but the intelligent thing to do would have been to offer a choice (I know, not Microsoft's forte), not to force the bigger controller on a reluctant public.
will the XBox-2 be backwards compatible?
No.
Not out-of-the-box at least. The Xbox2 won't have a HD, and therefore will not be compatible with all the Xbox games that require a HD to save, or in many instances, run at all.
So maybe they could release an add-on HD that might perhaps allow you to run old games on the new console, but I don't see think so.
Compare NFS Underground on the PS2 with the xbox or gamecube. I keep running into walls on the PS2 because I can't tell that there's a turn up ahead. The graphics on the PS2 are awful.
I'm not even talking about poly count.. i'm talking about how fucking *dirty* the graphics are.
That, aside from you outrageous exagerations, isn't caused by the PS2, it is caused by having a game develloped for one console and then inexpertly ported to other consoles, in a rush.
I don't think Sony is playing a waiting game at all.
Neither do I, I think they're just being steady Neddies. It just so happen that by not-rushing, they are also (in a way) waiting to see what the rushers release.
Lastly, I somewhat disagree that this tactic of coming out early is beneficial to gamers.
I didn't mean that the early part is good for gamers at all. I meant that having a 3 way competition is good for gamers. It prevents the companies from having a complacent "our console is good enough, lets milk it and not waste money on R&D" attitude.
I know the PS2 supports 5.1 too, but I don't know first-hand how many games support it, so maybe that's not a big differentiator, either.
None. The PS2's 5.1 support is for movies and cinematics only, it doesn't support 5.1 in-game audio.
And since I don't have 5.1 audio at home, and in fact, I know very few people who do, it's not a great loss on their part.
This is what I called "slightly better stats".
The Xbox advantages are... inconsequential to most people.
The differences in graphics are subtle at best, the difference in high-end format support is only of importance to people who have a high-end setup, by definition a small percentage of the market, and those people have enough disposable income to buy more than one console, so they won't make a difference in market share.
So maybe Microsoft learned a lot from their first console venture, but their initial effort betrayed a fundamental misunderstanding of what matters to their target consummers, they focused on things that didn't matter to most of us (oh, you have an extra rendering layer that gives you "shiny" effects? Whoopdeedoo!). They might have matured, but this move makes me think they haven't, and Ballmer's comments cement that impression.
If there was an article about Bill Gates wiping his nose, he'd be criticised here.
With good reason! Have you seen the brand of tissues he's using? That stuff is made directly from trees!
Responsible people use tissues made from recycled paper. He's clearly mad with power!
Halo2 may be just another multiplayer FPS, but it happens to be the current best multiplayer FPS on any console
THAT I can agree with.
"Current best multiplayer cosole FPS" is, however, a tad different from "best game ever written".
When the PS3 arrives 1 year later, the Xbox 2 will be (much?) cheaper, have a nice line of games, a larger base of players etc. Sure, the PS3 will have slightly better specs, but what will you pick when you're presented with the choice between a 699 machine and a 349 machine? Where everything else (eventually) points to the 349-machine..
Replace "PS3" with "PS2" and "Xbox2" with "Dreamcast", and we're 5 years all over again.
The DC was cheaper, had a bigger base of games, and yet, here we are, a few years later, and Sega's hardware division is history. Not that MS would ever stop, but their strategy has been tried before, and I don't think the result will be any different.
The Dreamcast wasn't a bad system. But Sony then released a better system: backwards compatible, better controllers, plays DVDs, etc.
Microsoft attempted that strategy the first time around, but focused on system stats as their definition of "better". Their original controller was a nightmare (and how long did they deny it? Now it's a collector's item, despite their repeated claims that it was perfect), you had to pay extra to unlock the built-in features (Sony did that too, but quickly realised the error of their ways, and by the time of the north american launch, DVD playing was standard out of the box).
Of the current gen, none are utter crap. The Xbox does have slightly better graphics, if you're looking real close, and the Cube has a bunch of lil' gems of games. But since they're in a pissing contest, I think Sony's strategy will get them ahead again.
On the whole, aside from the backroom exclusivity deals, the console wars are good for us gamers, they're trying damn hard to get the best hardware they can, and so devellopers get a good base on which to devellop (hopefully) good games.
Why do people buy one game console over another? As we say around here, 'Duh, it's the games.' ... Partly they're great games because they have great graphics, they have great processing, they have great this, they've got great that, but it's about getting great games. [...] What is 'Halo 2?' It's the greatest video game ever written.
I'm sorry, no.
Graphics are nice, but gameplay is what counts. And Halo 2 is just another multiplayer FPS.
I still replay Super Metroid and Castlevania: Symphoy of the Night about once a year, and every few months I get an urge to replay Rez intensly for a couple of weeks.
The graphics were an important part of the initial experience, but they are just eye candy, and they get old fast. Why would I still play old games when the new ones have the better graphics? Gameplay? That's right.
Remeber when Sega thought it would be a good idea to get a head start on the next-gen console race?
Wanna bet that Sony will once again win with their incredible "wait until we have a good machine" plan?
they can't just fall back on old storylines like holodecks (not invented yet), Q continuum (won't meet them for centuries), the Borg (likewise)
And you wonder why we dump all over it?
They DID a show with holodecks! And another with Borgs!
They crap all over established Trek lore, because they made very lame time travel stories so the history was changed. And they call THAT "perfectly following continuity"! How you can gobble up that shit is beyond me.
And this season, [...] reliable Transporter technology
It's TOO EARLY! Watch The Menagerie... I sure wish Berman would! When the NCC 1701 first flew, transporters were still unreliable and phasers were new! He's writing a prequel to THAT with better tech! How dumb are they? How dumb do they take us for?
If you don't like Trek, don't watch it.
I loved Trek, Enterprise simply isn't it. It's (was, I haven't seen any of the current season) a very badly written sci-fi show abusing the copyrighted names of the Trek franchise without living up to it.
We want it cancelled because we can't stand it! We're tired of those fuckers pushing crap down our throats because Trekkies will buy anything with "Star Trek" written on it.
We're putting down these people for doing exactly that. It's not right! Galactica is surprisingly good, Firefly was amazing, but when we turn to what is labelled as trek , we get jungles on a planet with no sun, we get a Ferengi attack recorded on surveillance cameras with a good deal of cultural background explained to the captain, and yet, the race managed to be elusive until Picard's time? WHAT THE HELL???
There is NO EXCUSE for making something that ming-numbingly bad, and we want it to stop.
I love sci-fi, I wish producers didn't think all they need to do is have a babe with a phaser gun to have a sci-fi audience. We are upset that we are treated like second-class TV viewers, and we're ashamed of those of us who bend over and ask for more.
Tom Ray's Tierra
Thanks for telling me about this.
Dan Simmons included this idea in his Hyperion book series, where evolving digital life spead into the "infosphere" and became artifically intelligent.
*cough*Wintermute*cough*
Right. Enterprise. I'm sure it's a perfectly good show. Maybe even good. But am I the only one who instinctively turns their TV off before the end of the theme tune?
It could be the worst theme on television. Ever.
You are not alone, but after a few tries I managed to teach myself to put it on mute instead of changing the channel or turning off the TV (which I literally did).
The video montage is quite good. I've been looking for an mp3 to play over it instead of the "it's been a long road" crap they're subjecting us too.
If anyone has a good sugestion... hint, hint.
If Picard was in the nexus wouldn't it be a pleasant dream instead of the horrifying nightmare that Enterprise is?
The Nexus, much like the Matrix, tried to give him a pleasant dream. But Picard has issues, so he needs a darker fantasy world to keep him occupied. ; )
Nobody in their right mind would ever accuse Hollywood producers of being people. An analysis of their DNA places them more properly within the genus Mustela (Short-Tailed Weasel).
;-)
Well, that's Informative.
Here I was thinking they were lizard men... or mole people
The problem with Enterprise is
The problem with Trek, in two words: Rick Berman.
Why the LA Times anyway, at least in USA Today more people would see it.
It's an ad aimed at Hollywood producers. Not at people in general.
Hell as far as I know they don't even have a Holo-deck, surely that cuts the series length in half without the "OMG SAFEY HAS BEEN REMOVED" episodes.
They managed to meet an alien race with holodeck technology (damn you Berman), and one of the hicks got pregnant in it.
Boy was he surprised.
I'm not a HUGE Trekkie, but I'll happily watch anything EXCEPT Enterprise.
I don't even consider Enterprise to be Trek.
As far as I'm concerned, continuity ended in Generations: Picard never made it out of the Nexus and all the lame series and movies since have been a nightmare he's having in there.
Let it die already!
Seriously!
I remember when the Super Nintendo, Genesis and Pentium were next-generation--not to mention the AMD K6-2 ("with 3DNow! technology!"). The first game I ever played was that Super Mario Bros./Duck Hunt dual pak. I miss teh old days...
I remeber when 8bit was next-gen!!!
Man, I had to walk uphill, barefoot in the snow to play it too!