I don't know what they're smoking, but I want to stay away from whatever it is.
The price comparisons of the 360 and PS3 just got a lot more complicated, and not in Microsoft's favor. The new SKU is arguably less functional than the closely priced $500 PS3.
I'm sure the idea looked good on paper, but ultimately I can only see this as hurting Microsoft's position.
Releasing a console with built-in HD-DVD would be interesting. Though there are potential reasons to avoid this.
1) Price being too close to the PS3, in some ways validating it. 2) No guarantee of success and thus subsidizing of the HD-DVD drive.
But that said, decided not to include an HD-DVD drive pratically makes the whole thing a wash. Without the HD-DVD drive, all we have is a more expensive premium console that has a larger hard drive, HDMI hookups, and is black.
Without any truly tangible benefit, it shrinks the extremely important price difference between the consoles. My points 1 and 2 above apply in almost the exact same way.
1) Price too close the the PS3, in some ways validating it. 2) Lack of backing of HD-DVD can be seen as implying a lack of confidence in the medium.
The whole thing seems ill-conceived. If they didn't want to release a console with an built-in HD-DVD drive, they could have simply upgraded live and announced a new, larger hard drive alone and perhaps a black case mod for the first 1000 buyers. A whole new SKU for this is a ridiculous waste of resources, while at the same time killing several key talking points for the 360.
It's not entirely pointless. A lot of people who bought PS2s expecting a very nice DVD player didn't get one, and worse many of those died entirely after a few short years. While this didn't happen to everyone, it's understandable that some people might be skeptical of look to a PS3 for movie playback.
He wasn't spouting crap off as fact without knowing what he was talking about. Just about everything he said is carefully worded to make it absolutely clear it's his opinion, his skepticism and his issues.
There really wasn't any need to bring charges of fanboyism into this at all.:/
I shortage of software might point to that, but a shortage of systems? More Wiis implies more consoles to run Gamecube titles. Selling fewer Wiis is unlikely to move additional Gamecube software.
The book you mention is titled "Game Over - Press Start to Continue", and it is highly informative concerning the games industry if you a blissfully ignorant child at the time it all went down (as I was). I recommend it to anyone here who hasn't already informed themselves of what happened then.
Nintendo certainly had a Monopoly, and they used that power in the industry. How much of it was greed and how much of it was necessary corrective action to prevent the mistakes made in the Atari era is up to interpretation.
What they did (for whatever reasons) was unpopular with developers (however necessary it may or may not have been), hence the mass exodus around the N64 era to the Playstation.
I'm personally one who gives companies, as well as people, significant amounts of "benefit of the doubt" whether Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo. If there are problems with Nintendo and the shipment of development kits I'd much sooner chalk it up to logistical or supply issues (they can't seem to keep normal Wiis on shelves, developement tools are likely in a similar state) rather than any malevolence. Iwata is not Yamauchi, and I think he's eager to avoid the mistakes that made third parties abandon Nintendo for Sony in the first place.
This doesn't mean that he or Nintendo doesn't want my wallet, simply that he and the company he leads recognizes that in order to get at it properly they need third parties, and in order to get third parties they need to play nice.
The only logical reason to keep a third party away from a Wii dev kit at this point in time is to keep them from making a game with a pathetic excuse for a control scheme. Given that there are already games which have fallen into this category, I think we can largely rule that out.
Nintendo's taking their own route, "single player fun"...
I vehemently disagree.
I've had a Wii since launch, and if there's one thing that is true of the console it is this: I never play it anymore when there aren't other people around. For whatever reason, I can't even bring myself to play Zelda unless someone else is there.
The system literally screams for you to call your friends, grab a few drinks and party. It and its games seem designed for groups, even if most people are spectating.
It seems meant for offline play, which at the moment is mostly centered around multiple people (although Super Paper Mario may get me to sit down with it when I'm alone).
Anyway back to the DS Nintendogs basically brought the DS back from the dead...
The DS wasn't dead, except in the sense that it was dead even with the PSP in terms of hardware sales (at the time the Nintendo fanboys fought the Sony ones over Nintendo's greater software attachment rate). However, Nintendogs was the turning point at which the DS broke away from the PSP.
I'll back this up and say that hardcore gamers do buy the Wii. Not all of them, but a fair number of them.
I've got a Wii and a DS, and I've already got as many DS games as your wife, and a fair number of Wii games as well including VC titles. That said, I also have significant libraries of PS1, PS2, Xbox and Xbox 360 games.
I must be some mutant, some strange and unnatural mix of flourescents and pure, distilled sunlight. A monsterous abomination lurking in the horrorible spaces between day and artificial illumination. When you least expect it, I'll exist beside you with a terrible grin on my face as you recoil in horror at my holding controllers from competing systems. The sheer impossibility of the situation will madden your weak mind!
I don't have a PS3, but I do have a Slim PS2, a Wii and an Xbox360 sans the HD-DVD drive. I love all three systems, and I'm looking forward to when there's a good reason for me to pick up a PS3.
Getting labelled a fanboy on/. is as easy as saying anything potentionally negative or positive about any given console. I've been labelled a fanboy for each of the big three once or twice apiece.
Posting the image was likely just an act of, "To hell with this crap" rather than, "Look at me I have money and luxury".
I have no doubts that the Cell is more powerful, and that eventually PS3 games will outclass 360 games in terms of graphics. However, that alone isn't going to cut it.
Both systems are likely going to progress towards their respective limits at similar rates. Until such time as the 360's limit is reached, the graphical differences between titles on the consoles will be minimal. All games made for the PS3 in this time period will have no significant eye candy advantage.
It is only after the 360 has reached its peak that the PS3 can have games that are "night and day" above the 360. Even then, it will only apply to the latest games.
The most important factors here are the limit on the 360's power, and the relative speed at which the Cell is exploited compared to the 360's chip. Sony only wins out in the scenario I detailed if the 360's limit is hit very soon, or if the Cell is exploited faster than the 360.
This is a problem for Sony, because they need to prove now that the PS3 is better than the 360. It could happen in their second wave of titles, but each successive wave that we wait to see the "night and day" difference between the systems is time the PS3 spends wallowing without distinction from its competitor.
Sony can't really affect the 360's limit, so their best shot is to do whatever they can to help developers get the most juice possible out of the Cell.
I would hope that improvements would be introduced in the future. After the complaints about the fraction of games with problems with the hardware BC in the US and Japan launch systems, I'd expect that the large number of games scoring a 1 or 2 on that page's system would create a lot of grumblings if nothing was done to improve it.
In the meantime, I've bought a new PS2. It's cheaper.
If it's a waste, why are (hypothetically) you taking the game for free? That appears to be what you're implying is the proper response to the price.
I'm confused by a strange attitude I see in people today I'd label "entitlement". Somehow, we are entitled to anything we want, whether or not we can afford it. Instead of dealing with it and living without luxuries, we take what we want.
I don't know where this attitude comes from, I'm just noting what I've been seeing here in America.
I remember playing Halo 2 on live, it was an experience that was fair at best, and horrible at worst.
The lag made things like grenade hopping impossible. I used look sensitivity 10, and I tell you there is nothing quite as frustrating as turning suddenly to shoot someone behind you with a rocket launcher and dying because you shot the wall at a 90 degree angle to where you were facing due to lag.
Of course, those are minor issues compared to what happens when you get a huge rockets game going in a small area.
Live has set the standard for how a console's online service should function. It did a decent job, and a lot of people enjoyed it. However, it isn't some invincible titan no one can conquer. At the moment Nintendo may be thinking of the children too much to compete, while Sony obfuscates everything with Home. However, Live does stand to be defeated if Sony or Nintendo get their online act together.
As nifty as letters and e-mail are, it's been my experience stateside that there's nothing that beats a good phone call. It may not always be more effectively, but at least you know some human had to listen to you.
Outside of that, I can't think of anything else to do that you haven't already done.:(
Great, now all those nifty graphics APIs are going to have to have methods for differentiating between renderings for Caesar and renderings for God. Thanks a bunch.
All I want to know is, how did Jesus manage to keep from releasing his spirit for 3 days without being in an instance? He couldn't have used a soulstone otherwise.
But then he did say, "Into your hands I commit my spirit", which would indicate he instantly released. If that's the case, I guess the corpse run was just a really long one. Having them move the body into a sealed tomb probably didn't help, although he might have been in range to rez outside.
I'm sorry God, don't smite me. I haven't hit level 60 yet!
It's basically another case where instead of following God, he thinks God follows him. It's certainly true that Christians are supposed to live every moment working God's will and purpose, but many appear to assume that means that everything they do is God's will and purpose. It's an easy, if fallacious, assumption.
Have you taken the time to tell Nintendo of Europe about this?
Additionally, are there any video game companies that don't treat Europe this way? I seem to remember hearing complaints about Europe's "second class" position in reference to Sony and Microsoft's game divisions in the past.
I'm not saying its right, but given the complaints it seems industry-wide.
Slashdot Mirror
When I was 10 I did just that. I bought a Sega Genesis because it meant I could get two games right off the bat instead of just one.
Would I do that now? No, but I still was a gamer then and only had allowance money to work with, $100 was a big deal.
Not to mention that a higher price and another SKU only serve to alienate the non-gamers and casuals further.
I don't know what they're smoking, but I want to stay away from whatever it is.
The price comparisons of the 360 and PS3 just got a lot more complicated, and not in Microsoft's favor. The new SKU is arguably less functional than the closely priced $500 PS3.
I'm sure the idea looked good on paper, but ultimately I can only see this as hurting Microsoft's position.
Why did Microsoft do this?
Releasing a console with built-in HD-DVD would be interesting. Though there are potential reasons to avoid this.
1) Price being too close to the PS3, in some ways validating it.
2) No guarantee of success and thus subsidizing of the HD-DVD drive.
But that said, decided not to include an HD-DVD drive pratically makes the whole thing a wash. Without the HD-DVD drive, all we have is a more expensive premium console that has a larger hard drive, HDMI hookups, and is black.
Without any truly tangible benefit, it shrinks the extremely important price difference between the consoles. My points 1 and 2 above apply in almost the exact same way.
1) Price too close the the PS3, in some ways validating it.
2) Lack of backing of HD-DVD can be seen as implying a lack of confidence in the medium.
The whole thing seems ill-conceived. If they didn't want to release a console with an built-in HD-DVD drive, they could have simply upgraded live and announced a new, larger hard drive alone and perhaps a black case mod for the first 1000 buyers. A whole new SKU for this is a ridiculous waste of resources, while at the same time killing several key talking points for the 360.
It's not entirely pointless. A lot of people who bought PS2s expecting a very nice DVD player didn't get one, and worse many of those died entirely after a few short years. While this didn't happen to everyone, it's understandable that some people might be skeptical of look to a PS3 for movie playback.
:/
He wasn't spouting crap off as fact without knowing what he was talking about. Just about everything he said is carefully worded to make it absolutely clear it's his opinion, his skepticism and his issues.
There really wasn't any need to bring charges of fanboyism into this at all.
I shortage of software might point to that, but a shortage of systems? More Wiis implies more consoles to run Gamecube titles. Selling fewer Wiis is unlikely to move additional Gamecube software.
The book you mention is titled "Game Over - Press Start to Continue", and it is highly informative concerning the games industry if you a blissfully ignorant child at the time it all went down (as I was). I recommend it to anyone here who hasn't already informed themselves of what happened then.
Nintendo certainly had a Monopoly, and they used that power in the industry. How much of it was greed and how much of it was necessary corrective action to prevent the mistakes made in the Atari era is up to interpretation.
What they did (for whatever reasons) was unpopular with developers (however necessary it may or may not have been), hence the mass exodus around the N64 era to the Playstation.
I'm personally one who gives companies, as well as people, significant amounts of "benefit of the doubt" whether Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo. If there are problems with Nintendo and the shipment of development kits I'd much sooner chalk it up to logistical or supply issues (they can't seem to keep normal Wiis on shelves, developement tools are likely in a similar state) rather than any malevolence. Iwata is not Yamauchi, and I think he's eager to avoid the mistakes that made third parties abandon Nintendo for Sony in the first place.
This doesn't mean that he or Nintendo doesn't want my wallet, simply that he and the company he leads recognizes that in order to get at it properly they need third parties, and in order to get third parties they need to play nice.
The only logical reason to keep a third party away from a Wii dev kit at this point in time is to keep them from making a game with a pathetic excuse for a control scheme. Given that there are already games which have fallen into this category, I think we can largely rule that out.
Well I've rambled enough.
I vehemently disagree.
I've had a Wii since launch, and if there's one thing that is true of the console it is this: I never play it anymore when there aren't other people around. For whatever reason, I can't even bring myself to play Zelda unless someone else is there.
The system literally screams for you to call your friends, grab a few drinks and party. It and its games seem designed for groups, even if most people are spectating.
It seems meant for offline play, which at the moment is mostly centered around multiple people (although Super Paper Mario may get me to sit down with it when I'm alone).
The DS wasn't dead, except in the sense that it was dead even with the PSP in terms of hardware sales (at the time the Nintendo fanboys fought the Sony ones over Nintendo's greater software attachment rate). However, Nintendogs was the turning point at which the DS broke away from the PSP.
I'll back this up and say that hardcore gamers do buy the Wii. Not all of them, but a fair number of them.
I've got a Wii and a DS, and I've already got as many DS games as your wife, and a fair number of Wii games as well including VC titles. That said, I also have significant libraries of PS1, PS2, Xbox and Xbox 360 games.
I must be some mutant, some strange and unnatural mix of flourescents and pure, distilled sunlight. A monsterous abomination lurking in the horrorible spaces between day and artificial illumination. When you least expect it, I'll exist beside you with a terrible grin on my face as you recoil in horror at my holding controllers from competing systems. The sheer impossibility of the situation will madden your weak mind!
I don't have a PS3, but I do have a Slim PS2, a Wii and an Xbox360 sans the HD-DVD drive. I love all three systems, and I'm looking forward to when there's a good reason for me to pick up a PS3.
/. is as easy as saying anything potentionally negative or positive about any given console. I've been labelled a fanboy for each of the big three once or twice apiece.
Getting labelled a fanboy on
Posting the image was likely just an act of, "To hell with this crap" rather than, "Look at me I have money and luxury".
I have no doubts that the Cell is more powerful, and that eventually PS3 games will outclass 360 games in terms of graphics. However, that alone isn't going to cut it.
Both systems are likely going to progress towards their respective limits at similar rates. Until such time as the 360's limit is reached, the graphical differences between titles on the consoles will be minimal. All games made for the PS3 in this time period will have no significant eye candy advantage.
It is only after the 360 has reached its peak that the PS3 can have games that are "night and day" above the 360. Even then, it will only apply to the latest games.
The most important factors here are the limit on the 360's power, and the relative speed at which the Cell is exploited compared to the 360's chip. Sony only wins out in the scenario I detailed if the 360's limit is hit very soon, or if the Cell is exploited faster than the 360.
This is a problem for Sony, because they need to prove now that the PS3 is better than the 360. It could happen in their second wave of titles, but each successive wave that we wait to see the "night and day" difference between the systems is time the PS3 spends wallowing without distinction from its competitor.
Sony can't really affect the 360's limit, so their best shot is to do whatever they can to help developers get the most juice possible out of the Cell.
Broader appeal? Amoungst guys perhaps, but I guarantee you that given a choice between GoW and FF most women will choose the latter.
I would hope that improvements would be introduced in the future. After the complaints about the fraction of games with problems with the hardware BC in the US and Japan launch systems, I'd expect that the large number of games scoring a 1 or 2 on that page's system would create a lot of grumblings if nothing was done to improve it.
In the meantime, I've bought a new PS2. It's cheaper.
Not to mention systems.
If it's a waste, why are (hypothetically) you taking the game for free? That appears to be what you're implying is the proper response to the price.
I'm confused by a strange attitude I see in people today I'd label "entitlement". Somehow, we are entitled to anything we want, whether or not we can afford it. Instead of dealing with it and living without luxuries, we take what we want.
I don't know where this attitude comes from, I'm just noting what I've been seeing here in America.
I remember playing Halo 2 on live, it was an experience that was fair at best, and horrible at worst.
The lag made things like grenade hopping impossible. I used look sensitivity 10, and I tell you there is nothing quite as frustrating as turning suddenly to shoot someone behind you with a rocket launcher and dying because you shot the wall at a 90 degree angle to where you were facing due to lag.
Of course, those are minor issues compared to what happens when you get a huge rockets game going in a small area.
Live has set the standard for how a console's online service should function. It did a decent job, and a lot of people enjoyed it. However, it isn't some invincible titan no one can conquer. At the moment Nintendo may be thinking of the children too much to compete, while Sony obfuscates everything with Home. However, Live does stand to be defeated if Sony or Nintendo get their online act together.
I think your humor is too subtle for everyone here.
Sigh, I was really hoping you'd accidentally forget to switch to Anonymous, and thus let us all know who you really are.
I suppose it will just be one of those mysteries for the ages...
Did you call them or e-mail them?
:(
As nifty as letters and e-mail are, it's been my experience stateside that there's nothing that beats a good phone call. It may not always be more effectively, but at least you know some human had to listen to you.
Outside of that, I can't think of anything else to do that you haven't already done.
Great, now all those nifty graphics APIs are going to have to have methods for differentiating between renderings for Caesar and renderings for God. Thanks a bunch.
All I want to know is, how did Jesus manage to keep from releasing his spirit for 3 days without being in an instance? He couldn't have used a soulstone otherwise.
But then he did say, "Into your hands I commit my spirit", which would indicate he instantly released. If that's the case, I guess the corpse run was just a really long one. Having them move the body into a sealed tomb probably didn't help, although he might have been in range to rez outside.
I'm sorry God, don't smite me. I haven't hit level 60 yet!
It's basically another case where instead of following God, he thinks God follows him. It's certainly true that Christians are supposed to live every moment working God's will and purpose, but many appear to assume that means that everything they do is God's will and purpose. It's an easy, if fallacious, assumption.
Have you taken the time to tell Nintendo of Europe about this?
Additionally, are there any video game companies that don't treat Europe this way? I seem to remember hearing complaints about Europe's "second class" position in reference to Sony and Microsoft's game divisions in the past.
I'm not saying its right, but given the complaints it seems industry-wide.
Bah, leave it to me to completely miss the "One Question per Comment Please".