When I did the same search, it brought me to a page that basically listed both systems. I clicked on the older Xbox picture, and it brought me to this page.
My question is: If you are only interested in three year old games, then why bother getting a new Xbox? Buy the older one which WILL run those games. Keep it, enjoy it...then in 4 years buy a 360 (again, for about $50) and play those games.
The only ones who should be stupid enough to buy a console in its first year of existance (I put myself into this stupid category) should be:
- People who don't own ANY console, and are just getting into it. - People who want what is NEW and can't stand to wait a year
When the console has been on the market for two years, you have a much bigger library of games. The older games are much cheaper, the console will be cheaper, the peripherals will be cheaper.
You'll know which games are good- which aren't...without having to deal with launch hype.
Really...if he is only interested in 3 year old games, then why bother spending $400 on a new console? Spending $50 on an old console, and $30 bucks on two games would make him happier.
I've never seen such a large collection of self-rightous poor people since the last U.N. convention. Slashdot really brings them out of the woodwork.
If you don't have an HDTV you don't get the benefits of an HDTV. For those of us with HDTVs, we are looking forward to more and more devices that support it. It seems like your post was saying; "This is not fair, I cannot afford an HDTV, and they should not be supporting things I cannot afford." Well, not all of us are poor.
I believe that Nintendo has said that their next console will max out at EDTV support. That is their decision. Microsoft has gone with HDTV, but it is also compatible with 480i. Personally, I prefer the console that will utilize the higher resolutions on my television.
I also traded in my Radio Shack FlavoRadio to get nice shiny MP3 player.
I agree with Gizmo Toy (one of my brother posts) but the one I was most disappointed in was Links 2004.
Tiger Woods...to put it frankly...sucks. When compared to Links that is. I was really hoping for a new Links, which would just absolutely seal up the likelihood of me buying an Xbox 360 on launch day.
Now, I will make an attempt to buy one on launch day...and maybe I'll get one- but probably not. I won't go through the extra effort that I would have, if it looked like a new version of Links was coming out. (I would have pre-ordered some ridiculous bundle if I had to.)
Links was a GREAT game- in fact it pushed me into buying an HDTV (at least for the 480p). If they could come out with the same game at 1080i, I would be thrilled...
(Yes, someone is going to reply, and tell me that they don't care about ME...I know, I know...)
Rainbow Six 3 Xbox- 88% (pretty good) Rainbow Six 3 PS2 - 72.1% (even lower if you take out the PS2 fanzines)
Rainbow Six 3 was another game that was essentially Xbox only (for the consoles).
And another game I liked.
Sure...go buy the PS2 version...it just isn't the same. Here is what Gamespot had to say about the PS2 version:
Unfortunately, the online multiplayer mode is stripped down from the Xbox version. It supports up to six players in a match (down from the Xbox's 16 players) and offers just three modes of play (down from the Xbox's five), all of which are variations on the deathmatch.
So if you want to play Rainbow Six (a multi-platform game) you are just getting ripped off if you go with the PS2 version. No...all things are not equal.
If you want to play Grand Theft Auto- which console do you buy?
All the games have come out on the Xbox...but they are always on the PS2 first. If you want GTA- you buy a PS2.
Now go check your release dates for Splinter Cell and Top Spin on the Xbox and compare them to the PS2...then check the ratings of each game at GameRankings.com. You will see that the dates, and the rankings, aren't even close. Xbox is the superior platform for those games.
Then go look at the PC version of Crimson Skies...and compare it to the Xbox version. Totally different games.
This is one of the few conspiracy theories that I might actually agree with. Apple, and Sony have the need to push their own products- and damn anyone who wants them to change.
HP iPod? Dead Apple ][ Clones? Mac Clones?
Apple likes to be the only source..it's more profitable that way.
You are expecting to go on-line with no 'skill' at all and still be competitive.
Buying the game on day 1 does not mean that you have to be good.
Playing in the morning does not mean that you have to be good.
(those were two of my three suggestions)
Playing the game through on single player means you have to have enough skill to get through the single player game, in order to learn the controls and have at least a few hours with the game.
If you really think that I was saying that the only way to have a good game online was to be good...then you are mistaken. I'm 37 years old- and I know that my chances of being able to pick up Unreal Championship 2 at this point, and be a decent player, are zero...it's not going to happen. But if I get into Unreal Championship 3 early...and settle into my 'real' ranking...then I'll be able to play for a long time.
Of course, this still means that I will only come in first about every 20th game. But I won't be in the cellar very often.
If you are looking to WIN a lot of games...well, then you just have to be good. That's life.
If you don't want your ass handed to you, there are a couple of options:
#1- buy the game on the release date, and go on Live right away. You will be on an even playing field with the other players. I've done this quite a few times, and many of the best games I've played have been on day 1. Nobody knows the 'secrets' yet. Nobody knows where to hide, or what the shortcuts are (on a racing game) it's fair, and you can learn along with everyone else.
#2- Play the single-player mode all the way through. DO THIS! I really hate when people go on Live, and they don't even know how to work the controls of the game. Of course you get your ass kicked...you've never practiced!
#3- Start playing in the morning. Yes, it sounds stupid, but I've noticed I do much, much better in the morning...am I better then? No...but the people who are really serious about it usually play in the evening/night.
I too am very happy that the Xbox was NOT a home for many Japanese RPGs. It made a difference in the culture of the two consoles, and I also think it may have led developers to target a console based on the perceived clientele.
Games like Top Spin, Crimson Skies, Splinter Cell, Rainbow Six...those games interested me. And I think they did well on the Xbox, because of types of games they were, and the type of person who chose Xbox as their primary console.
Very rarely did I see a PS2 exclusive that interested me. But I saw a bunch of RPGs that were crowding the game space with titles I was not interested in. And yes, I think it makes a difference. Developers need to decide what platform to develop for (if not all platforms) and they kindof crowd together. And the ones I liked, crowded together on the Xbox.
Sure...have a look at my computer. You'll find out that I go to worldsex.com a couple times a week. You'd probably also learn this from analyzing the dried up goo on my keyboard.
You can read my e-mail, which is pretty boring. And maybe look at the Excel spreadsheet of my college credits, and see that I do very poorly in math. (And by viewing my e-mail, you'll see that I've been going to college since 1986 and still don't have my degree.)
Let's see what else...I lost about $6,000 in a really bad purchase of Krispy Kreme stock, but more than made up for it with big gains in Wells Fargo and Pepsi. You'll also find that I have recently moved a big chunk of money into a money market account, and a 2-year CD.
The money market account is actually to pay for in-vitro fertilization (already paid, but you'll see the record of that), and to off-set the first two years of my wife's income when she takes off work after in-vitro. The CD (higher return, longer commitment) will cover the following 3-4 years.
And finally, if you re-analyze the dried up goo from my keyboard, you will find that the reason we are going through in-vitro is that there is no sperm in my semen...due to a previous vasectomy.
That...and is about all you'll learn...unless you really dig into Worldsex, and you'll find out that I have a penchant for sites labeled 'hot young cutie' and the occasional 'blacks on blonde' sites which I am slightly embarassed about.
I just saved you the trouble of digging through my computer- that's the best stuff you'll find.
The problem with your nephew James and his testicles....is that nobody cares.
While yes, it is private- there is really no incentive for anyone to do anything with it. With potentially millions of customers, things like this just fall into the category of 'noise'.
First- what is this 'private data' that everyone is so worried about? Kiddie porn? It's not like anyone uses Quicken anymore- you can get banking info on-line. So I always wonder what the heck is so private.
Other than that, these on-line services provide a few advantages that typical desktop apps don't.
Portability for one. It would be nice to move around anywhere, and always have my files and applications available to me (with a net connection). Home to work, and to my mom's house for the holidays with all of my stuff available. Not that I would do any work from home, but if I had my pictures and everything else in a place that MADE SENSE then it would be great. I do NOT think it makes sense to put my files on a 'briefcase' type site, because I need to upload/download when I am working on them.
No install - always up to date. A lot of users would really benefit from this feature. And the $5 per month fee would be a good thing in many cases. Maybe you only need it for a while. Maybe you have a seasonal business and you hire extra workers for part of the year- there could be a lot of reasons. But this would take a big load of work off of the IT people. In fact, many small businesses IT space is in such a shambles, that this would be the only way they can get it together without spending big $$$.
With these advantages stated, I still think it would be a long time before this becomes standard operating procedure for many people. But with broadband connections becoming more prevalent (c'mon VOIP!) it will just make more and more sense for this stuff to be centralized.
I have NEVER seen a public school that had a decent IT setup. Every computer lab I've seen has been a disaster...they would be an excellent candidate for this type of service. And if the kids can easily bring their work home, then all the better.
This is a recipe for disaster. Linspire doesn't have the resources to pull it off. As a marketing plan, it is a good idea. As a realistic plan, it doesn't sound too good.
$5 million sounds like a decent amount of money for Linspire, but for long-term support, it is just a drop in the bucket.
I would almost guess that Bill Gates put them up to this. Watching this fail would bring joy to his holidays...
I have tried to use both Yahoo! and Google search APIs.
Yahoo! was a piece of cake...straightforward, and I was getting accurate results after about 5 minutes of work.
I tried to figure out Google, but I couldn't. Call me stupid...that's okay. But I just could not get through the entire process successfully. In fact, that is why I went on to use Yahoo!
So to me Yahoo! is a godsend. Just their ease of use elevated them from "why the hell wouldn't I use Google" to, "Wow, it looks like Yahoo! is back in business!"
(My experience on both has been with their image searching, mapping, and regular search)
Slashdot Mirror
Script-
I agree wholeheartedly, and I think it is good. Different consoles are going in different directions, I don't see that as a problem.
The earlier poster didn't like the fact that Microsoft was pushing HDTV. Well then, don't buy their console if you don't like it.
Wow...what version of eBay are you going to?
When I did the same search, it brought me to a page that basically listed both systems. I clicked on the older Xbox picture, and it brought me to this page.
My question is: If you are only interested in three year old games, then why bother getting a new Xbox? Buy the older one which WILL run those games. Keep it, enjoy it...then in 4 years buy a 360 (again, for about $50) and play those games.
The only ones who should be stupid enough to buy a console in its first year of existance (I put myself into this stupid category) should be:
- People who don't own ANY console, and are just getting into it.
- People who want what is NEW and can't stand to wait a year
When the console has been on the market for two years, you have a much bigger library of games. The older games are much cheaper, the console will be cheaper, the peripherals will be cheaper.
You'll know which games are good- which aren't...without having to deal with launch hype.
Really...if he is only interested in 3 year old games, then why bother spending $400 on a new console? Spending $50 on an old console, and $30 bucks on two games would make him happier.
I've never seen such a large collection of self-rightous poor people since the last U.N. convention. Slashdot really brings them out of the woodwork.
If you don't have an HDTV you don't get the benefits of an HDTV. For those of us with HDTVs, we are looking forward to more and more devices that support it. It seems like your post was saying; "This is not fair, I cannot afford an HDTV, and they should not be supporting things I cannot afford." Well, not all of us are poor.
I believe that Nintendo has said that their next console will max out at EDTV support. That is their decision. Microsoft has gone with HDTV, but it is also compatible with 480i. Personally, I prefer the console that will utilize the higher resolutions on my television.
I also traded in my Radio Shack FlavoRadio to get nice shiny MP3 player.
Tomorrow's grammar lesson will be the difference between 'every one' and 'everyone.'
Then we'll get into the difference between 'is' and 'are' after lunch.
I agree with Gizmo Toy (one of my brother posts) but the one I was most disappointed in was Links 2004.
Tiger Woods...to put it frankly...sucks. When compared to Links that is. I was really hoping for a new Links, which would just absolutely seal up the likelihood of me buying an Xbox 360 on launch day.
Now, I will make an attempt to buy one on launch day...and maybe I'll get one- but probably not. I won't go through the extra effort that I would have, if it looked like a new version of Links was coming out. (I would have pre-ordered some ridiculous bundle if I had to.)
Links was a GREAT game- in fact it pushed me into buying an HDTV (at least for the 480p). If they could come out with the same game at 1080i, I would be thrilled...
(Yes, someone is going to reply, and tell me that they don't care about ME...I know, I know...)
Through the high-tech magic of my television, I have devised a scheme that will allow me to be 100% compatible with all Xbox titles.
My TV has 3 (3!) available component sources. So I can just KEEP my Xbox, get a 360, and have my cable box all plugged in at the same time.
With the click of the 'source' button on my TV remote, I can switch between the systems at will.
Yes...this is the way backwards compatibility should be done.
"Sole exception of about ten...."
I can see why you hide behind that AC facade.
Both of those games are at least 3 years old. If those truly are the only games you are interested in, it seems to make sense to just buy a used Xbox.
In fact, I'll sell you mine (on November 22nd) for about $50.
Because you can watch the Sopranos is HD if you have cable.
DVDs are not HD...
At Gamerankings.com:
Rainbow Six 3 Xbox- 88% (pretty good)
Rainbow Six 3 PS2 - 72.1% (even lower if you take out the PS2 fanzines)
Rainbow Six 3 was another game that was essentially Xbox only (for the consoles).
And another game I liked.
Sure...go buy the PS2 version...it just isn't the same. Here is what Gamespot had to say about the PS2 version:
So if you want to play Rainbow Six (a multi-platform game) you are just getting ripped off if you go with the PS2 version. No...all things are not equal.
If you want to play Grand Theft Auto- which console do you buy?
All the games have come out on the Xbox...but they are always on the PS2 first. If you want GTA- you buy a PS2.
Now go check your release dates for Splinter Cell and Top Spin on the Xbox and compare them to the PS2...then check the ratings of each game at GameRankings.com. You will see that the dates, and the rankings, aren't even close. Xbox is the superior platform for those games.
Then go look at the PC version of Crimson Skies...and compare it to the Xbox version. Totally different games.
This is one of the few conspiracy theories that I might actually agree with. Apple, and Sony have the need to push their own products- and damn anyone who wants them to change.
HP iPod? Dead
Apple ][ Clones?
Mac Clones?
Apple likes to be the only source..it's more profitable that way.
You are expecting to go on-line with no 'skill' at all and still be competitive.
Buying the game on day 1 does not mean that you have to be good.
Playing in the morning does not mean that you have to be good.
(those were two of my three suggestions)
Playing the game through on single player means you have to have enough skill to get through the single player game, in order to learn the controls and have at least a few hours with the game.
If you really think that I was saying that the only way to have a good game online was to be good...then you are mistaken. I'm 37 years old- and I know that my chances of being able to pick up Unreal Championship 2 at this point, and be a decent player, are zero...it's not going to happen. But if I get into Unreal Championship 3 early...and settle into my 'real' ranking...then I'll be able to play for a long time.
Of course, this still means that I will only come in first about every 20th game. But I won't be in the cellar very often.
If you are looking to WIN a lot of games...well, then you just have to be good. That's life.
If you don't want your ass handed to you, there are a couple of options:
#1- buy the game on the release date, and go on Live right away. You will be on an even playing field with the other players. I've done this quite a few times, and many of the best games I've played have been on day 1. Nobody knows the 'secrets' yet. Nobody knows where to hide, or what the shortcuts are (on a racing game) it's fair, and you can learn along with everyone else.
#2- Play the single-player mode all the way through. DO THIS! I really hate when people go on Live, and they don't even know how to work the controls of the game. Of course you get your ass kicked...you've never practiced!
#3- Start playing in the morning. Yes, it sounds stupid, but I've noticed I do much, much better in the morning...am I better then? No...but the people who are really serious about it usually play in the evening/night.
I agree with Serapth on this entire thread-
I too am very happy that the Xbox was NOT a home for many Japanese RPGs. It made a difference in the culture of the two consoles, and I also think it may have led developers to target a console based on the perceived clientele.
Games like Top Spin, Crimson Skies, Splinter Cell, Rainbow Six...those games interested me. And I think they did well on the Xbox, because of types of games they were, and the type of person who chose Xbox as their primary console.
Very rarely did I see a PS2 exclusive that interested me. But I saw a bunch of RPGs that were crowding the game space with titles I was not interested in. And yes, I think it makes a difference. Developers need to decide what platform to develop for (if not all platforms) and they kindof crowd together. And the ones I liked, crowded together on the Xbox.
Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath would have been worth buying an Xbox all by itself.
The fact that they (Oddworld) are going to get out of video games alltogether made me cry a little bit.
Dear A/C-
Thanks for visiting my website. Sorry you didn't like it.
Too bad you don't know the difference between 'dribble' and 'drivel'. Who the heck are you, Ali G? Are there really springs in those balls?
You should take a look at my story about the car show there aren't a lot of words to read. You might do better with that one.
Sure...have a look at my computer. You'll find out that I go to worldsex.com a couple times a week. You'd probably also learn this from analyzing the dried up goo on my keyboard.
You can read my e-mail, which is pretty boring. And maybe look at the Excel spreadsheet of my college credits, and see that I do very poorly in math. (And by viewing my e-mail, you'll see that I've been going to college since 1986 and still don't have my degree.)
Let's see what else...I lost about $6,000 in a really bad purchase of Krispy Kreme stock, but more than made up for it with big gains in Wells Fargo and Pepsi. You'll also find that I have recently moved a big chunk of money into a money market account, and a 2-year CD.
The money market account is actually to pay for in-vitro fertilization (already paid, but you'll see the record of that), and to off-set the first two years of my wife's income when she takes off work after in-vitro. The CD (higher return, longer commitment) will cover the following 3-4 years.
And finally, if you re-analyze the dried up goo from my keyboard, you will find that the reason we are going through in-vitro is that there is no sperm in my semen...due to a previous vasectomy.
That...and is about all you'll learn...unless you really dig into Worldsex, and you'll find out that I have a penchant for sites labeled 'hot young cutie' and the occasional 'blacks on blonde' sites which I am slightly embarassed about.
I just saved you the trouble of digging through my computer- that's the best stuff you'll find.
The problem with your nephew James and his testicles....is that nobody cares.
While yes, it is private- there is really no incentive for anyone to do anything with it. With potentially millions of customers, things like this just fall into the category of 'noise'.
First- what is this 'private data' that everyone is so worried about? Kiddie porn? It's not like anyone uses Quicken anymore- you can get banking info on-line. So I always wonder what the heck is so private.
Other than that, these on-line services provide a few advantages that typical desktop apps don't.
Portability for one. It would be nice to move around anywhere, and always have my files and applications available to me (with a net connection). Home to work, and to my mom's house for the holidays with all of my stuff available. Not that I would do any work from home, but if I had my pictures and everything else in a place that MADE SENSE then it would be great. I do NOT think it makes sense to put my files on a 'briefcase' type site, because I need to upload/download when I am working on them.
No install - always up to date. A lot of users would really benefit from this feature. And the $5 per month fee would be a good thing in many cases. Maybe you only need it for a while. Maybe you have a seasonal business and you hire extra workers for part of the year- there could be a lot of reasons. But this would take a big load of work off of the IT people. In fact, many small businesses IT space is in such a shambles, that this would be the only way they can get it together without spending big $$$.
With these advantages stated, I still think it would be a long time before this becomes standard operating procedure for many people. But with broadband connections becoming more prevalent (c'mon VOIP!) it will just make more and more sense for this stuff to be centralized.
I have NEVER seen a public school that had a decent IT setup. Every computer lab I've seen has been a disaster...they would be an excellent candidate for this type of service. And if the kids can easily bring their work home, then all the better.
Are you familiar with the entire Linspire concept? It is all about downloading...that is what makes them different.
And you don't download from Bittorrent...you download from Linspire.
THAT is why this is a big deal.
Move to Korea = $$$
New hardware to handle the load = $$$
Big pipes to service traffic = $$$ (even in Korea)
Cost to maintain data center = $$$
Like I said...$5 million doesn't go too far when you have to set up that type of infrastructure.
They're not talking about something small here - they're talking about supporting an entire country. You can't do that from your mom's basement.
Korea=HUGE broadband connections.
Linspire=HUGE updates.
This is a recipe for disaster. Linspire doesn't have the resources to pull it off. As a marketing plan, it is a good idea. As a realistic plan, it doesn't sound too good.
$5 million sounds like a decent amount of money for Linspire, but for long-term support, it is just a drop in the bucket.
I would almost guess that Bill Gates put them up to this. Watching this fail would bring joy to his holidays...
I have tried to use both Yahoo! and Google search APIs.
Yahoo! was a piece of cake...straightforward, and I was getting accurate results after about 5 minutes of work.
I tried to figure out Google, but I couldn't. Call me stupid...that's okay. But I just could not get through the entire process successfully. In fact, that is why I went on to use Yahoo!
So to me Yahoo! is a godsend. Just their ease of use elevated them from "why the hell wouldn't I use Google" to, "Wow, it looks like Yahoo! is back in business!"
(My experience on both has been with their image searching, mapping, and regular search)