"We pay to be in Best Buy's flyers," he said. "We pay market development funds. Publishers drive gaming traffic to these stores. To have them resell the games, with developers having no participation, that's just wrong. That's just fleecing us."
Taking Epic's advertising money but then selling a similar product (the used game) that they make no profit on is ripping them off.
Has Nintendo even announced any FPS games yet for the Revolution? Have they publically shown any? Or are you just buying into their hype?
I'm all for the Revolution controller if it ends up as effective as their fake gameplay videos suggest. But let's be a little realistic until we actually, you know, play or even see some of the games in development for it. Some journalists that actually played the demos (ie 1up) have suggested it won't be particularly useful for FPS games unless they are pretty slow-paced like Metroid Prime. So let's wait and see what the Revolution can actually do before we claim it will replace current control standards...
The N64, Gamecube, and (though you didn't mention it) Dreamcast didn't do any better than the more expensive competitors. The N64 was easily beaten by the PS1 ($300 in 1995), the Gamecube was soundly outsold by the PS2 ($300 in 2000) and to a much lesser extent the Xbox ($300 in 2001), and the Dreamcast ($200 in 1999) was crushed by the PS2.
As long as the price is within certain limits it doesn't appear that it has any real effect on console sales. The real issue is always the games, and it's very hard to make any prediction about the Revolution's strength and (more importantly) appeal in that area, since none have been revealed in any way. For that matter, neither has a price or solid release date (how much will the X360 cost when that date comes?).
And though most gamers will probably grab the $400 version of the 360, the $300 version will play the vast majority of games released for the system (basically everything but the MMORPGs it looks like right now). It's pretty fanboyish to essentially ignore that there is a perfectly functional and more cost-effective version available to those that find $400 to be too expensive. But I guess it being cheaper than the NES at release would sort of destroy your argument, huh?
You obviously have missed some good Sega titles over the last ten years or so if Nights was the last awesome one you played. Even pitiful Sonic Team has made a couple of great games (Chu Chu Rocket and Samba De Amigo for example). They hardly need to give it to Miyamoto - he isn't the only good game developer in the world! I think giving it to some newer Sega devs might be a good idea though. Give us something a little more fresh.
It sounds like for SNES and N64 games you may have to use one of the special controller attachments for the main unit. No pictures have been released of it yet, but Nintendo has said that you will fit the normal Revolution controller inside a case that more resembles traditional gamepads (useful for backwards compatibility and possible multiplatform releases).
None of these magazines have even played real games with it yet, and I am pretty sure the demos they did play were in a controlled situation (they didn't get to take it back to their hotel rooms and try it out). And how much time did any of them really get to play with the controller? A lot of times problems don't manifest themselves until after you've gotten a hang of the hardware (which certainly didn't seem to be the case, since many of the journalists noted that they had trouble adapting). Videogame journalists in general are also notorious for buying into hype and/or giving very gentle previews of new products.
All of this is ignoring the fact that many of the "game magazines" did actually mention concerns and possible problems with the controller. Most of them sounded cautiously optimistic, which is probably appropriate for the situation, but very few of them are raving that this is absolutely amazing and perfect...
I don't entirely disagree with your point, but you should probably be aware that Square-Enix was actually planning on releasing FFXI on the Xbox1. MS asked them to wait for the 360 (which was a smart move, IMO). 'S-E' has mentioned this in at least one or two interviews, though I don't have links handy. They are a smart enough company that they want to be in on the (rather large) Xbox market, same as the Playstation and Nintendo markets.
They might even be smart enough to realize that Sony being on more or less equal footing with MS or Nintendo is more advantagous for third parties, (especially ones with S-E's clout). They've certainly made a big deal publically about a multiplatform approach being better for the next-generation, though obviously this could just be psychological warfare to get a better deal with Sony...
But since it was a mistake in an already pretty stupid insult it really made you look more than a little immature. You can't flame somebody using terrible grammar and then expect them to ignore that fact.
A small benefit is that companies do sometimes tweak, fix, or even add content to the later releases of the games. Here in the US we generally get a little of that (especially fixes), but it seems pretty common from what I've seen for Europe to get higher difficulty levels (which is partially a cultural thing) and/or extra bonus content added.
An obvious example is DOA3, where Europe clearly got the best playing and most balanced version of the game. The US release frankly sucks in comparison, lacking a large amount of moves, whole important gameplay features, a sweet prerendered intro movie, AI improvements, and lots of extra costumes (though this at least was available on bonus discs in the US). Many Konami games like MGS2 (IIRC higher difficulty levels and some special modes) and ZOE2 (the same, along with some really great extra bonus missions) end up with large amounts of bonus content for the Euro release. So there are small perks to the late release at least.
Part of this is because the Japanese market seems to be a lot more forgiving of buggy, poorly optimized, or even plain unfinished console games. They are also a lot more willing to then later buy special "International" versions of the games they already own.
That is probably the best reason for why the GC widely receives less support than the PS2 or Xbox. But another major issue related to that is that Nintendo still charges higher royalties than the other two. They've actually lowered their royalty rate since the GC's launch, but third parties will still make less money on a GC title than on a PS2 or Xbox title (assuming retail price is the same, which 99% of the time is the case).
Only a very small part of those development teams actually left Rare. It's funny how this rumor changes over time - it was initially that the whole GE team left Rare. Now apparently the PD developers left too?:D
I'm not blaming you or anything for this misinformation - it's a very common myth on the internet. But I think if you looked at the actual developer lists you would find this exodus has been massively overstated. Wikipedia has a good (though brief) list of the Free Radical founders. Four members of the GE team isn't bad, but that's hardly the whole team! Apparently one other member eventually founded Zoonami.
Also when is a console going to dump the whole idea of relying on 1960s (NTSC/PAL) technology for the all important display screen? I am seriously waiting for it. Just a measly VGA or DVI port.
Uh, around six years ago. Really out of the loop when it comes to consoles, huh? I've been using VGA support with consoles since 1999. The Dreamcast, Gamecube, and Xbox all feature excellent VGA support (though it is an unofficial attachment for the Xbox). You can do it with the PS2 as well, though it doesn't work for most games IIRC. All of the next-gen consoles should support VGA as well (though I am not positive it has been announced for the PS3 yet).
Except you are talking about a "majority" of a few percent tops in most cases. It simply isn't a 99-to-1 situation like you imply. A slight trend of voters leaning conservative (I'll pretend Kerry, Clinton, etc. aren't conservative to keep things simple) is still a slight trend. Obviously "liberal values" are still popular with a large amount of the country's population.
Maybe more importantly the real majority in this country doesn't even vote for either party (or anybody at all, for that matter). I don't remember the exact statistics off the top of my head, but only around 30% of all possible voters actually went for Bush in the last election. Conservative leaders and commentators need to be careful that they don't push this myth that most of America agrees with them too hard, as there will be a backlash from something like that.
They said the system will be about 2x as powerful as current systems in tha face of others claims of 10x+ power. That took balls and again it was the truth, not just for them but for everyone. The next gen systems will be about 2x as powerful. Just as is the normal case. Truth.
Huh? I can't think of a console example where this was actually true. The SNES was certainly more than twice as powerful as the NES, the N64 was far more than twice as powerful as the SNES, and the Gamecube was more significantly powerful than the N64. The same is true with Sega's various systems, Sony's systems, and by all accounts and visual media so far MS' systems. You can see this both in raw hardware console stats and/or actual game performance. Sequels are the best way to confirm this behavior - look at something like Mario Kart DD, which runs at more than double the framerate of MK64 with considerably more complicated and complex graphics. Assuming we can trust Bizarre Creations (and I think we can), one simple bridge in a specific PGR3 course has more polygons than an entire course had in PGR2 - it is also running at least double the framerate, a much higher resolution, with significantly higher texture quality, more special effects, and a ridiculously more complex lighting model. Sure, there are always underperforming games for every console, but those aren't the examples you use to determine how much stronger the hardware actually is. Can you list any actual major counterexamples?
It's even just a simple Moore's Law type of evolution. If new consoles come out every 4+ years they are simply going to be more than twice as powerful as their predecessor unless the manufacturer really screwed up somehow (or potentially went really cheap, which is what seems like the possible scenario with the Revolution).
An easy example is the PS2. As you know, the PS2 has 40 or so megs of RAM inside of it. The PS1 had a little more than 4 megs of total RAM. The CPU saw a similar boost, going from 34 to 295 mhz (while also being able to do more per mhz). That's just how hardware evolution over that kind of time period works. Sure, you generally won't get the 10X factor that the specs suggest for actual games (though you do occasionally get more), but that's the truth of all hardware spec comparisons. There's simply no way the PS2 is only 2 or even 3 times more powerful than the PS1 - even crappy Simple 2000 games manage to demonstrate this fact.
Witholding information about an unfinished product is not hype. Sure it generates interest, but that would be like the zen form of hype. "The hype is not to hype." They've basically stated the TRUTH from day 1. But people are so not used to this approach they have to read more into everything.
How is constantly bitching in public that gaming is getting stagnant ("oh, except for us, we care about INNOVATION!") and then naming your mystery console "Revolution" not hype? Teasing people with that kind of name for years while only giving small amounts of info out is completely and utterly a form of hype.
It's great that you obviously love Nintendo and that love makes you happy, but try and keep some basis in reality for the rest of us.
Massively used how? Various studies have shown roughly a third of all internet traffic is bittorrent related. You simply aren't going to get much more massive than that!
And then on the other hand, how many Street Fighter/Tekken/Soul Calibur/Virtual Fighter clones do we really need?
That's a really silly complaint coming from a post that celebrates how "original" the Final Fantasy series is. Sure, they generally do a new setting and storyline in every game, but until recently the series has seen such minor evolutions in gameplay for every release that praising it for originality over the years is ridiculous.
New settings and storylines are easy. The major fighting games certainly see more gameplay evolution on average, and that's what really matters. It just sounds to me like you just don't like fighting games and don't understand them (not getting the title right of the best one you list is also a good indicator, now that I think about it).
I agree with your basic argument, but I really think you are looking for gaming innovations in the wrong areas if a Dragon Quest clone like Final Fantasy is what you hold up as a role model. It's about the gameplay, not the story!
This is exactly why I'll be buying the next Nintendo. Sony and Micorsofts licences are so expensive that publishers are risk averse, which can only be bad for gamers.
Are you sure? I know that Nintendo charges a higher royalty rate than MS and Sony do (they've lowered it this generation, but it's still easily higher than the other two), but maybe you are referring to a different licensing fee?
I know I'm not the original poster you were asking, but I just wanted to say that Ninja Gaiden is amazing. For my money it's the best 3D action game ever made. The difficulty level is set fairly high (though a lot of people exaggerate it), but the game is thankfully completely fair about it (unlike vaguely similar games like the DMC series). It's easily one of my favorite games of this console generation, and I recommend that absolutely nobody miss it. Assuming you have decent taste in games you'll have a blast with Ninja Gaiden.
There isn't any information whether it will play on the Xbox360 yet. It should eventually, but we don't know if the backwards compatibility will be far enough alone at launch. But there is a newly upgraded version coming in September, so I would wait for that anyway. It's called Ninja Gaiden Black, and here's a webpage with an awesome trailer for it (specifically grab the HD debut trailer). Not only does it have a lot more content, but the graphics have been improved and it will be more accessible since they added an easier difficulty level for those that couldn't handle the original.
The quote you give simply doesn't state that the Xbox will be able to do Toy Story graphics.
(And the reason people keep pushing it as a Sony quote is because when the PS2 was announced you kept getting different people suggesting that it could do that. There's no official quotes because Sony wisely didn't make them, but it isn't a secret that they obviously fed that kind of comparison to the media somehow. There's no way all sorts of places would start making that comparison just out of the blue.)
The GI interview that the article quotes had a lot more information about things like the HD and the HD-DVD drive. I hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but it's almost like they intentionally left out clarification stuff like this to generate fake controversy:
"Backwards compatibility is going to require a hard drive. We've been talking a little bit about la-la land, and saying, "Maybe there's someday that [an Xbox360] doesn't come with a hard drive."
Actually, the very first one we sell is going to have a hard drive. It doesn't mean the hard drive is always going to be attached. The owner can take it to a friend's house, and the other people [in the owner's house] can still use the 360 to play games."
There you go. You buy a 360 at launch, it comes with a hard drive. MS has already said this at least half a dozen times, but it was even right there in the interview the article decided to excerpt. A lot of these rumors are just anti-MS nonsense. All that is being said is that down the road there might be a cheaper Xbox360 without a hard disk (the rest of the interview goes into more detail about this, talking about how the required HD in the Xbox1 prevented them from being able to offer a much cheaper model later in its lifespan, but I think I have quoted enough).
The interview also offered a good defense on why you actually don't want HD-DVD or Blu-ray in your game console just yet (largely that it is much slower at reading thant the 360's 12X DVD drive), but that's another rant entirely...
MS is supposedly going to be making an announcement of 360 pricing and launch details in the next couple of days, so hopefully this article is just one last gasp of Sony astroturfing.
Really? Nintendo never sold the Gamecube for a loss and Sony only take a loss in the first few shipments. Yup, sounds like a loss leader to me. Oh, wait...
Bullshit all around. Nintendo has sold the Gamecube for a loss several times (ex: both at the initial launch and for a while after the system dropped down to $99). Ignoring that Sony selling the early PS2 for a loss is exactly backing up what you are arguing against, Sony hasn't just released the PS2 in the last five years. The PSP has been sold at a pretty significant loss ($100 is very possible), and more importantly Sony has already gone on record as saying the PS3 will be sold for a similar or even larger loss.
No, they don't. At best they're apathetic, at worst they worry it'll make the revision they own obsolete.
The success of the GB's various revisions (both aesthetically and technologically) over the years means nothing? How can countering actual factual arguments (Nintendo doesn't constantly refresh its portable hardware because it doesn't sell well) with merely a silly clueless opinion get modded up so high?
And obviously none of these discussions need facts to be rewarded (since you couldn't manage to even present one complete piece of factual information), but here's some quotes for you about the Gamecube's losses (merely copied and pasted from my "Information about Reality for Nintendo Fanboy Myths" file, so feel free to search for links yourself): May 24, 2001 In the GameCube business, industry specialists estimate the company will lose 5,000-10,000 yen per console, each carrying a 25,000 yen price tag, at least for the first year.
Spaceworld 2001 "We expect to incur a small loss on the GameCube hardware initially, and you're right that it hasn't been our habit in the past but we expect it to turn okay early next year." - Peter Main, Nintendo
January 14, 2004 Perrin: I would say that our losses are really negligible. It's such a small amount. Plus with the amount of software that's being sold we're still definitely in a solid profit situation.
Slashdot Mirror
Taking Epic's advertising money but then selling a similar product (the used game) that they make no profit on is ripping them off.
Has Nintendo even announced any FPS games yet for the Revolution? Have they publically shown any? Or are you just buying into their hype?
I'm all for the Revolution controller if it ends up as effective as their fake gameplay videos suggest. But let's be a little realistic until we actually, you know, play or even see some of the games in development for it. Some journalists that actually played the demos (ie 1up) have suggested it won't be particularly useful for FPS games unless they are pretty slow-paced like Metroid Prime. So let's wait and see what the Revolution can actually do before we claim it will replace current control standards...
The N64, Gamecube, and (though you didn't mention it) Dreamcast didn't do any better than the more expensive competitors. The N64 was easily beaten by the PS1 ($300 in 1995), the Gamecube was soundly outsold by the PS2 ($300 in 2000) and to a much lesser extent the Xbox ($300 in 2001), and the Dreamcast ($200 in 1999) was crushed by the PS2.
As long as the price is within certain limits it doesn't appear that it has any real effect on console sales. The real issue is always the games, and it's very hard to make any prediction about the Revolution's strength and (more importantly) appeal in that area, since none have been revealed in any way. For that matter, neither has a price or solid release date (how much will the X360 cost when that date comes?).
And though most gamers will probably grab the $400 version of the 360, the $300 version will play the vast majority of games released for the system (basically everything but the MMORPGs it looks like right now). It's pretty fanboyish to essentially ignore that there is a perfectly functional and more cost-effective version available to those that find $400 to be too expensive. But I guess it being cheaper than the NES at release would sort of destroy your argument, huh?
You obviously have missed some good Sega titles over the last ten years or so if Nights was the last awesome one you played. Even pitiful Sonic Team has made a couple of great games (Chu Chu Rocket and Samba De Amigo for example). They hardly need to give it to Miyamoto - he isn't the only good game developer in the world! I think giving it to some newer Sega devs might be a good idea though. Give us something a little more fresh.
It sounds like for SNES and N64 games you may have to use one of the special controller attachments for the main unit. No pictures have been released of it yet, but Nintendo has said that you will fit the normal Revolution controller inside a case that more resembles traditional gamepads (useful for backwards compatibility and possible multiplatform releases).
None of these magazines have even played real games with it yet, and I am pretty sure the demos they did play were in a controlled situation (they didn't get to take it back to their hotel rooms and try it out). And how much time did any of them really get to play with the controller? A lot of times problems don't manifest themselves until after you've gotten a hang of the hardware (which certainly didn't seem to be the case, since many of the journalists noted that they had trouble adapting). Videogame journalists in general are also notorious for buying into hype and/or giving very gentle previews of new products.
All of this is ignoring the fact that many of the "game magazines" did actually mention concerns and possible problems with the controller. Most of them sounded cautiously optimistic, which is probably appropriate for the situation, but very few of them are raving that this is absolutely amazing and perfect...
I don't entirely disagree with your point, but you should probably be aware that Square-Enix was actually planning on releasing FFXI on the Xbox1. MS asked them to wait for the 360 (which was a smart move, IMO). 'S-E' has mentioned this in at least one or two interviews, though I don't have links handy. They are a smart enough company that they want to be in on the (rather large) Xbox market, same as the Playstation and Nintendo markets.
They might even be smart enough to realize that Sony being on more or less equal footing with MS or Nintendo is more advantagous for third parties, (especially ones with S-E's clout). They've certainly made a big deal publically about a multiplatform approach being better for the next-generation, though obviously this could just be psychological warfare to get a better deal with Sony...
Your ability to be so ignorant of videogames and their history continues to astound me.
But since it was a mistake in an already pretty stupid insult it really made you look more than a little immature. You can't flame somebody using terrible grammar and then expect them to ignore that fact.
A small benefit is that companies do sometimes tweak, fix, or even add content to the later releases of the games. Here in the US we generally get a little of that (especially fixes), but it seems pretty common from what I've seen for Europe to get higher difficulty levels (which is partially a cultural thing) and/or extra bonus content added.
An obvious example is DOA3, where Europe clearly got the best playing and most balanced version of the game. The US release frankly sucks in comparison, lacking a large amount of moves, whole important gameplay features, a sweet prerendered intro movie, AI improvements, and lots of extra costumes (though this at least was available on bonus discs in the US). Many Konami games like MGS2 (IIRC higher difficulty levels and some special modes) and ZOE2 (the same, along with some really great extra bonus missions) end up with large amounts of bonus content for the Euro release. So there are small perks to the late release at least.
Part of this is because the Japanese market seems to be a lot more forgiving of buggy, poorly optimized, or even plain unfinished console games. They are also a lot more willing to then later buy special "International" versions of the games they already own.
That is probably the best reason for why the GC widely receives less support than the PS2 or Xbox. But another major issue related to that is that Nintendo still charges higher royalties than the other two. They've actually lowered their royalty rate since the GC's launch, but third parties will still make less money on a GC title than on a PS2 or Xbox title (assuming retail price is the same, which 99% of the time is the case).
Only a very small part of those development teams actually left Rare. It's funny how this rumor changes over time - it was initially that the whole GE team left Rare. Now apparently the PD developers left too? :D
I'm not blaming you or anything for this misinformation - it's a very common myth on the internet. But I think if you looked at the actual developer lists you would find this exodus has been massively overstated. Wikipedia has a good (though brief) list of the Free Radical founders. Four members of the GE team isn't bad, but that's hardly the whole team! Apparently one other member eventually founded Zoonami.
Also when is a console going to dump the whole idea of relying on 1960s (NTSC/PAL) technology for the all important display screen? I am seriously waiting for it. Just a measly VGA or DVI port.
Uh, around six years ago. Really out of the loop when it comes to consoles, huh? I've been using VGA support with consoles since 1999. The Dreamcast, Gamecube, and Xbox all feature excellent VGA support (though it is an unofficial attachment for the Xbox). You can do it with the PS2 as well, though it doesn't work for most games IIRC. All of the next-gen consoles should support VGA as well (though I am not positive it has been announced for the PS3 yet).
Hasn't "way out there" Obama basically voted Republican on most major votes so far?
Except you are talking about a "majority" of a few percent tops in most cases. It simply isn't a 99-to-1 situation like you imply. A slight trend of voters leaning conservative (I'll pretend Kerry, Clinton, etc. aren't conservative to keep things simple) is still a slight trend. Obviously "liberal values" are still popular with a large amount of the country's population.
Maybe more importantly the real majority in this country doesn't even vote for either party (or anybody at all, for that matter). I don't remember the exact statistics off the top of my head, but only around 30% of all possible voters actually went for Bush in the last election. Conservative leaders and commentators need to be careful that they don't push this myth that most of America agrees with them too hard, as there will be a backlash from something like that.
They said the system will be about 2x as powerful as current systems in tha face of others claims of 10x+ power. That took balls and again it was the truth, not just for them but for everyone. The next gen systems will be about 2x as powerful. Just as is the normal case. Truth.
Huh? I can't think of a console example where this was actually true. The SNES was certainly more than twice as powerful as the NES, the N64 was far more than twice as powerful as the SNES, and the Gamecube was more significantly powerful than the N64. The same is true with Sega's various systems, Sony's systems, and by all accounts and visual media so far MS' systems. You can see this both in raw hardware console stats and/or actual game performance. Sequels are the best way to confirm this behavior - look at something like Mario Kart DD, which runs at more than double the framerate of MK64 with considerably more complicated and complex graphics. Assuming we can trust Bizarre Creations (and I think we can), one simple bridge in a specific PGR3 course has more polygons than an entire course had in PGR2 - it is also running at least double the framerate, a much higher resolution, with significantly higher texture quality, more special effects, and a ridiculously more complex lighting model. Sure, there are always underperforming games for every console, but those aren't the examples you use to determine how much stronger the hardware actually is. Can you list any actual major counterexamples?
It's even just a simple Moore's Law type of evolution. If new consoles come out every 4+ years they are simply going to be more than twice as powerful as their predecessor unless the manufacturer really screwed up somehow (or potentially went really cheap, which is what seems like the possible scenario with the Revolution).
An easy example is the PS2. As you know, the PS2 has 40 or so megs of RAM inside of it. The PS1 had a little more than 4 megs of total RAM. The CPU saw a similar boost, going from 34 to 295 mhz (while also being able to do more per mhz). That's just how hardware evolution over that kind of time period works. Sure, you generally won't get the 10X factor that the specs suggest for actual games (though you do occasionally get more), but that's the truth of all hardware spec comparisons. There's simply no way the PS2 is only 2 or even 3 times more powerful than the PS1 - even crappy Simple 2000 games manage to demonstrate this fact.
Witholding information about an unfinished product is not hype. Sure it generates interest, but that would be like the zen form of hype. "The hype is not to hype." They've basically stated the TRUTH from day 1. But people are so not used to this approach they have to read more into everything.
How is constantly bitching in public that gaming is getting stagnant ("oh, except for us, we care about INNOVATION!") and then naming your mystery console "Revolution" not hype? Teasing people with that kind of name for years while only giving small amounts of info out is completely and utterly a form of hype.
It's great that you obviously love Nintendo and that love makes you happy, but try and keep some basis in reality for the rest of us.
Advance Wars and Warioware count as exclusive DS games but Wipeout Pure, the new Ridge Racer, Metal Gear Acid, etc., don't? Wow, fanboy alert!
Massively used how? Various studies have shown roughly a third of all internet traffic is bittorrent related. You simply aren't going to get much more massive than that!
And then on the other hand, how many Street Fighter/Tekken/Soul Calibur/Virtual Fighter clones do we really need?
That's a really silly complaint coming from a post that celebrates how "original" the Final Fantasy series is. Sure, they generally do a new setting and storyline in every game, but until recently the series has seen such minor evolutions in gameplay for every release that praising it for originality over the years is ridiculous.
New settings and storylines are easy. The major fighting games certainly see more gameplay evolution on average, and that's what really matters. It just sounds to me like you just don't like fighting games and don't understand them (not getting the title right of the best one you list is also a good indicator, now that I think about it).
I agree with your basic argument, but I really think you are looking for gaming innovations in the wrong areas if a Dragon Quest clone like Final Fantasy is what you hold up as a role model. It's about the gameplay, not the story!
This is exactly why I'll be buying the next Nintendo. Sony and Micorsofts licences are so expensive that publishers are risk averse, which can only be bad for gamers.
Are you sure? I know that Nintendo charges a higher royalty rate than MS and Sony do (they've lowered it this generation, but it's still easily higher than the other two), but maybe you are referring to a different licensing fee?
Or it could just be some form of all-too-common brain damage.
I know I'm not the original poster you were asking, but I just wanted to say that Ninja Gaiden is amazing. For my money it's the best 3D action game ever made. The difficulty level is set fairly high (though a lot of people exaggerate it), but the game is thankfully completely fair about it (unlike vaguely similar games like the DMC series). It's easily one of my favorite games of this console generation, and I recommend that absolutely nobody miss it. Assuming you have decent taste in games you'll have a blast with Ninja Gaiden.
There isn't any information whether it will play on the Xbox360 yet. It should eventually, but we don't know if the backwards compatibility will be far enough alone at launch. But there is a newly upgraded version coming in September, so I would wait for that anyway. It's called Ninja Gaiden Black, and here's a webpage with an awesome trailer for it (specifically grab the HD debut trailer). Not only does it have a lot more content, but the graphics have been improved and it will be more accessible since they added an easier difficulty level for those that couldn't handle the original.
The quote you give simply doesn't state that the Xbox will be able to do Toy Story graphics.
(And the reason people keep pushing it as a Sony quote is because when the PS2 was announced you kept getting different people suggesting that it could do that. There's no official quotes because Sony wisely didn't make them, but it isn't a secret that they obviously fed that kind of comparison to the media somehow. There's no way all sorts of places would start making that comparison just out of the blue.)
The interview also offered a good defense on why you actually don't want HD-DVD or Blu-ray in your game console just yet (largely that it is much slower at reading thant the 360's 12X DVD drive), but that's another rant entirely...
MS is supposedly going to be making an announcement of 360 pricing and launch details in the next couple of days, so hopefully this article is just one last gasp of Sony astroturfing.
Really? Nintendo never sold the Gamecube for a loss and Sony only take a loss in the first few shipments. Yup, sounds like a loss leader to me. Oh, wait...
Bullshit all around. Nintendo has sold the Gamecube for a loss several times (ex: both at the initial launch and for a while after the system dropped down to $99). Ignoring that Sony selling the early PS2 for a loss is exactly backing up what you are arguing against, Sony hasn't just released the PS2 in the last five years. The PSP has been sold at a pretty significant loss ($100 is very possible), and more importantly Sony has already gone on record as saying the PS3 will be sold for a similar or even larger loss.
No, they don't. At best they're apathetic, at worst they worry it'll make the revision they own obsolete.
The success of the GB's various revisions (both aesthetically and technologically) over the years means nothing? How can countering actual factual arguments (Nintendo doesn't constantly refresh its portable hardware because it doesn't sell well) with merely a silly clueless opinion get modded up so high?
And obviously none of these discussions need facts to be rewarded (since you couldn't manage to even present one complete piece of factual information), but here's some quotes for you about the Gamecube's losses (merely copied and pasted from my "Information about Reality for Nintendo Fanboy Myths" file, so feel free to search for links yourself):
May 24, 2001
In the GameCube business, industry specialists estimate the company will lose 5,000-10,000 yen per console, each carrying a 25,000 yen price tag, at least for the first year.
Spaceworld 2001
"We expect to incur a small loss on the GameCube hardware initially, and you're right that it hasn't been our habit in the past but we expect it to turn okay early next year." - Peter Main, Nintendo
January 14, 2004
Perrin: I would say that our losses are really negligible. It's such a small amount. Plus with the amount of software that's being sold we're still definitely in a solid profit situation.