360?

[ricola]

anyone jumping on the midnight xbox 360 launch bandwagon?
I was pretty tempted, but ultimatley decided to wait for a chip first.... :twisted:

[Mini Dickman]

Nope. Consoles don't do it for me. Unless, that is, the PS3 can pull off Killzone 2 AND MGS4. Then, by god, I must have one. But I think it's the same dupe as with every "next generation": pre-rendered amazery that turns out to be BS. I'll believe it when I see it.

[GeneralSantos]

You couldn't have paid me to be there. Standing in line freezing my ass off for a couple of hours only to find out that the store ran out after the pre-orders were filled. Sounds like something Phil should get Bud & RC on...

I may get one next year after I find out if the Nintendo Revolution is going to blow whole herds of chipmunks or not. If it does, I'll pick up a 360 then. I spend most of my gaming time on the computer lately though.

[GeneralSantos]

For all you Halo fans, check out www.redvsblue.com for some seriously funny shit. They use the Halo engine to make movies about 2 teams (Red & Blue, ya savvy?) that are battling for control of a box canyon. They have like 67 episodes so far but you can only get the last 10 or so on their site. They have most of the early ones on Gamespy though.

[ChingChongDingDongRice]

I was mildly interested in the 360 when I learned that Oblivion would be available for it, and that it would run just as well as it would on the PC. However, when I learned about Oblivion being delayed until April, and then I saw the utterly pathetic initial lineup of games for it (come on, GOLF?), getting one was put just under "be brutally sodomized" on the list of things to do.

[westernestates]

I HATE Microsoft like the freakin' plague. The only reason I got an XBOX was because there were a couple of cool games that I couldn't get on my PS2 or gamecube like Morrowind, Fable, Shenmue II, Rallisport,etc. The thing I hated most was having to pay for XBOX live. It was a rip-off because you not only have to pay the outrageous fee of $7 bucks a month when on the PS2 it was free but on some games you had to pay another fee to play it. That's just F***ed up.

It's just I think next gen wise XBOX360 is a over glorified Xbox 1.5. I think spec wise the PS3 is going to blow that thing out of the water and I never heard of two pricing points for a system. Listen either you want to include a bunch of crap or you don't. Also it isn't a 100% backwards compatible like PS3 or revolution I think it's Microsoft just trying to stick not just one but the whole two fists without tube into out rectum.

[Daniel Ruoss]

I'm getting an Xbox360. I loved the first one and had no problems with it. The new features look neat. Like most consoles it will take a little time for the system's capabilities to be completely utilized by game designers. I'm looking forward to the 'Godfather' and 'Scarface' games. I know it's pricey but I'm getting it as a birthday gift for myself! I think the PS2 sucks. I hate the controller and Sony has nothing to compete with Xbox Live. Plus we all know Microsoft is taking over the world so I'm just scoring my brownie points early! ALL HAIL BILL GATES! :twisted:

[KungFuJesus]

I'll get one eventually. The price will come down like it always does. There's a few things I'd knock an old lady in the head with a brick for, but the 360 ain't one of em.

[Tulisin]

I'm not going to bother, all the great Xbox 360 games will go to PC eventually anyways.

[the deta]

So Noone got the 360 eh?

[Daniel Ruoss]

I'm not going to bother, all the great Xbox 360 games will go to PC eventually anyways.

Wrong! All the great PC games will be able to be ported over to the 360. Of course over the next 2-3 years computers will again leap forward, but I can tell you right now Call of Duty 2 on the 360 looks just as good as the PC version. I've had the 360 since it came out and I've had no problems with it. No freezing, no disc problems. I can't wait until the game designers get fully familiar with the 360 and produce the games that take full advantage of its capabilities.

:twisted: ALL HAIL BILL GATES! SONY WILL BOW AT THE ALTAR OF MICROSOFT! :twisted:

[westernestates]

I'm not going to bother, all the great Xbox 360 games will go to PC eventually anyways.

Wrong! All the great PC games will be able to be ported over to the 360. Of course over the next 2-3 years computers will again leap forward, but I can tell you right now Call of Duty 2 on the 360 looks just as good as the PC version. I've had the 360 since it came out and I've had no problems with it. No freezing, no disc problems. I can't wait until the game designers get fully familiar with the 360 and produce the games that take full advantage of its capabilities.

:twisted: ALL HAIL BILL GATES! SONY WILL BOW AT THE ALTAR OF MICROSOFT! :twisted:

No, Xbox 69 looks like a rectangular paper weight.

Let's take a look at the pros and cons of Xbox69 and the Playstation 3

Pro-
All Playstations 3's are backwards compatible with PS and PS2 games.

Con-
Xbox 69 only plays SOME of the greatest hits on the 69 and even then you have to go on Xbox live to down patches. WTF, even the DS can play all GBA and if Nintendo could do why did Microsoft do a half-ass job playing Some of the Greatest Hits.

Pro -

All PS3's will use the new Blu-ray disc technology which is superior to the current DVD technology.

Con -
Xboob 69 doesn't have it

Pro -
PLAYSTATION 3 SPECIFICATIONS

CPU: Cell Processor PowerPC-base Core @3.2GHz
--1 VMX vector unit per core
--512KB L2 cache
--7 x SPE @3.2GHz
--7 x 128b 128 SIMD GPRs
--7 x 256KB SRAM for SPE
--*1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy
--Total floating point performance: 218 gigaflops

GPU RSX @ 550MHz
--1.8 TFLOPS floating point Performance
--Full HD (up to 1080p) x 2 channels
--Multi-way programmable parallel Floating point shader pipelines
--Sound Dolby 5.1ch, DTS, LPCM, etc. (Cell-based processing)

MEMORY
256MB XDR Main RAM @3.2GHz
256MB GDDR3 VRAM @700MHz
System Bandwidth Main RAM-- 25.6GB/s
VRAM--22.4GB/s
RSX-- 20GB/s (write) + 15GB/s (read)
SB2.5GB/s (write) + 2.5GB/s (read)

SYSTEM FLOATING POINT PERFORMANCE:
2 teraflops

STORAGE
--HDD Detachable 2.5" HDD slot x 1
--I/O--USB Front x 4, Rear x 2 (USB2.0)
--Memory Stickstandard/Duo, PRO x 1
--SD standard/mini x 1
--CompactFlash(Type I, II) x 1

COMMUNICATION
--Ethernet (10BASE-T, 100BASE-TX, 1000BASE-T) x 3 (input x 1 + output x 2)
--Wi-Fi IEEE 802.11 b/g
--Bluetooth--Bluetooth 2.0 (EDR)
--ControllerBluetooth (up to 7)
--USB 2.0 (wired)
--Wi-Fi (PSP)
--Network (over IP)

AV OUTPUT
Screen size 480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p
HDMI out x 2
AV multi out x 1
Digital out (optical) x 1

DISC MEDIA
CD
PlayStation CD-ROM
PlayStation2 CD-ROM
CD-DA
CD-DA (ROM),
CD-R,
CD-RW
SACD Hybrid (CD layer),
SACD HD
DualDisc (audio side)
DualDisc (DVD side)
PlayStation 2 DVD-ROM
PlayStation 3 DVD-ROM
DVD-ROM
DVD-R
DVD-RW
DVD+R,
DVD+RW
Blu-ray Disc
PlayStation 3 BD-ROM
BD-ROM
BD

Con:

Xboob 69 can only do some of that crap.

Pro -
You can play games online for free still.

Xbox -
Microsoft has to try and drain every single dollar from you by sticking there little thing (After all it is called MICROSOFT) for a service that offers very little.

Pro-
There will be plenty of PS3 in stock way before Xmas so there will be no shortages.

Con-
Microsoft doesn't nearly make as many and the result Xpube 69 that cost $1,000 on ebay. No system no matter how great it is not worth that much.

[Mini Dickman]

Video games of recent have sucked amazingly.

The most hyped part of them is the graphics. On the PC, the graphics never look as good as the pre-release screenshots/movies. On the consoles, it's outright forgery.

If you don't believe me, look at the movies for Half-Life 2. The quality is horrendous, and it still looks a few times better than it did on any hardware when it came out. It took, what, 6 months, for cards to catch up with the game? And even then, it still didn't look good enough.

Console makers play the same games with every 'next generation'. The graphics for the PS2 before it was availible were almost on the level of the Xbox 2 thing. Obviously, they never looked that good.

Look at the PS3 MGS4 demo video. That's /impossible/. Unless they have managed to increase the power of their chip by an order of magnitude, and either absoutely perfect manufacturing or eat a few thousand dollars pers unit, the PS3 will never look that good. It's pre-rendered. You can't explain away all of that detail as normal maps and processing. And even if the PS3 could generate that level of graphics, the CPU'd only have enough time to produce an AI of Pacman-level.

The videogame industry is setting itself up for a painful market crash if they don't remove their heads from their asses.

There are a million and one arcadish modern warfare FPS games out there. If the gaming companies were truly interested in advancing ideas in gaming, they'd do something new. How about a realistic modern combat simulation? No, Ghost Recon doesn't count. The closest thing to come around like that is Hostile Intent for HL1, an independantly made modification, associated with no corporation.

I was one of the true believers, buying at launch for the Dreamcast. And I wasn't dissapointed at all- until Sega decided to give us the old broomhandle. DC had more good games than PS2 for at least a year or two after it was killed off. After that, I never cared about console gaming anymore. What happened to the replayability of games?

Call me when gaming stops sucking. I can't justify the cost of upgrading my PC every 6 months with the latest and greatest to play shitstains like BF2. And I'm sure as all hell not doling out $500 for a console that won't perform as advertised.

[Daniel Ruoss]

I found this browsing some other forums. It gets a little geeky with the techno stuff that I'll admit I don't fully understand. I posted it in response to westernestates post. I think it proves the point that when it comes to the next-gen consoles it's almost like buying a car. Just because one car manufacturer promises more horsepower and torque doesn't mean it's automatically better than a car that, on paper, has less. It's the total package that matters. Is the car versatile? Is it reliable? Is it durable? Is it safe? Is it affordable? etc., etc., etc. I think we could agree that anybody who would buy a car strictly for the listed horsepower/torque is either a fool or someone who understands that something fast and powerful entails compromises in most other areas.


__________________________________________________ ___________

(Lifted from IGN)


I was looking on the Xbox 360 forum and I spotted a topic by a IGN user called Zeylon, and the topic name is Ten 10 reasons why you shouldn't get the PS3, even if the PS3 was out today. And this is what Zeylon had to say:

I don't think the PS3 sucks, but since IGN was stupid enough to publish some trash with crappy reasons not to get an Xbox 360... all bets are off. http://ps3.ign.com/articles/668/668446p1.html.

1. No Live! In fact, sony came out and recently announced that they're not even going to bother to build an answer to Xbox Live.

Sony, you can keep your ability to plug in 7 controllers. I'll take being able to play with 63 other players on live in a fps over 7 controllers any day of the week.

2. The 36.5 megabits per second blu ray drive that Sony is squeezing into the PS3.

The BD-Rom drive that's going to be used in the PS3 has a speed of 36.5 MBits per second. 36.5megaBITS per second, not megaBYTES. 8bits=1byte=4.5megaBYTES per second. http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/

This is because the technology for the drives will still be in it's infancy when the ps3 is being launched.

That means in order to fill the 256MB cache (to load a decent sized race on GT4 let's say) will take about 56 seconds of waiting.

To fill the same 256MB cache on the xbox 360's 12x DVD drive read at 15.75MB/s (megabytes) = 15 seconds

I know you know your math.

If you want an idea of how long a minute is, try staring at a clock for a minute and see how bored you get.

I'm not going to stand for huge loading times next gen as well. Long load times are meant to be a thing of the past. But Sony is making sure that's not the case by insisting on using Blu Ray drives when the technology (and their read speeds) are still so early.

On top of this, Playstation 3 Blu Ray drive will cost Gamers $100+ per console. http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25901

And within 1 year, once blu-ray movies actually start coming out, the same $100 would probably buy you a far faster 4x or 8x blu-ray player that functions a lot better (compare watching dvds on a standalone player vs. on the original ps2). And do you really think that, if blu-ray does come out on top, that the 360 won't release with a version that can play bluray versions as well? Legally, as long as MS pays the same small fees that other blu ray player manufacterers pay to use sony's tech, Sony can't stop MS from putting blu ray drives in their 360s. And by then, the drives will likely be a lot cheaper, and a lot faster than the once found on the launch PS3s.

3. Opting for 8 USB ports and multiple memory card readers over a HDD.

There's no reason to put in like 8 usb ports and all these freaking memory card reader and all these other ports that no one wants. We can buy a memory card adapter if we want.

We don't need 3 ethernet ports, one will be more than plenty. JUST INCLUDE 4 USB 2.O PORTS, 1 ETHERNET PORT, SUPPORT FOR SONY MEMORY STICK DUOS (since that's what psp uses and that's what makes Sony the most money) AND THE STUFF TO CONNECT TO ANALOG AND HDTVS.

USE THE MANUFACTURING COSTS YOU SAVE TO THROW IN A CHEAP 5GB HDD so developers can make games like Blinx or FFXI or use the HDD to reduce load times and stuff.

IF A SMALL HDD IS INCLUDED IN EVERY SYSTEM, EVERY DEVELOPER WILL USE IT TO REDUCE LOAD TIMES. Don't you guys want developers to use the hdd to reduce loadtimes, to make games like FFXI that require a HDD? wouldn't that be better than a bunch of useless ports that no one will use that you can just buy an adapter for if you really need?

SELL THE ADAPTER TO CONNECT OLD PS2 AND PS1 GAMES SEPERATELY FOR LIKE $10 AND YOU'LL MAKE ENOUGH TO COMPENSATE FOR THE HDD. Once we transfer all our old saves over to the HDD, we can just sell it on ebay or something and it's one less ugly port we have to look at.

HDD = Custom soundtracks, downloadable content, FFXI style mmorpgs, faster load times.

Multiple seperate Memory Card Readers Built in = Worthless

4. Sony disabling the ability to have LAN parties (without getting wired controllers) by insisting on using bluetooth controllers over Infrared ones.

"Bain admitted that the wireless signal could be interfered with by another nearby PlayStation 3 console and in those instances where many consoles would be close by, such as at a LAN party, it would be necessary to default to using wired controllers"

5. The Cell.

Not only is the cell processor going to jack up the price of the PS3 quite a bit. It's greatly bottlenecked by the 512 MBs of L2 Cache (the 360 has twice that much L2 Cache).

For all the hype about the cell. Guess what, the processor means jack when it comes to gaming. 3 3.2 ghz cores vs. 1 3.2 ghz core and 7 PPEs mean nothing. What matters for gaming is the GPU. And most reports (anandtech etc.) state that the 360's graphics card is almost a generation more advanced. This makes sense, ATI built the card from the ground up with technology that won't make it's way into PC cards for atleast an year or so. The NVIDEA card in the PS3 is identical to the card as what'll be available for the PC in a month or two. The only thing that the cpu will actually matter for is the AI. And AI is more depenedent on L2 cache (this is what ultimately determines the number of simultanous algorithms you can run at any one time) than on processing speed. And guess what, the 360's has twice the L2 cache of the PS3's Cell!

6. No requirement to make developers use 720p.

People make the ps3s 1080i sound like it's going to be standard. All that sony said was the the PS3 supports aka. can theoretically output 1080i.

Guess what, the original xbox "supports" 720p (identical to how the ps3 will "support" 1080i).

Want to guess how many xbox games actually came out offering 720p? I'll give you one guess.

Want to take a guess how many ps3 games wil actually offer 1080i (Or the even more useless dual monitor output) esp. considering how much extra work it'll be to render everything at that resolution for two monitors - as if the PS3's measily 512 L2 Cache isn't already enough of a bottleneck?

The cool thing about the 360 is that all the games are required to support 720p, and considering that's a MUCH MUCH MUCH higher resolution than dvds, it's more than enough.

7. Accessible cost

Blu-ray wont be cheap! Cell won't be cheap! Odds are, when the PS3 finally does come out, MS will lower the price a bit and the PS3 will cost a small fortune by comparison. The discs cost a small fortune to manufacture, don't expect games under $70 atleast for an year or so, and if then you consider the development costs who knows!

8.The Games.

Well this one is kind of a toss up. The Xbox 360's Kameo, Enchant Arm, Perfect Dark (drool), RE5, Gears of War, Blue Dragon, Oblivion, FPS, Racers (Forza, PGR), DoA etc. vs. GTA 4 and whatever sequels Sony has planned. What is true is the the 360s gaming library will get a one year headstart, and the PS3's will probably take a long time to catch up, if ever.

9. The Design.

Well this is personal opinion too. But who came with the brilliant idea to model it after a building anyways? Fire them and make it look next gen. My old Atari Jaguar looks less crappy. YOU CALL THAT A NEXT GEN DESIGN!? There is really no symmetry to it at all. Put the drive in the middle, get rid of the weird ridges and make it actually look smooth in the front and back and well. Then you have a nextgen looking consoles.

IT REALLY WOULDN'T TAKE MANY ALTERATIONS TO MAKE THE CONSOLE LOOK AWESOME, GET RID OF THE RIDGES SO ITS LOOKS PERFECTLY SMOOTH ON THE FRONT AND THE BACK, MOVE THE CD TRAY TO THE MIDDLE TO MAKE THE CONSOLE SYMMETRICAL. IT WOULD LOOK AWESOME.

10. Developer ***.

No one has any experience working with the Cell. 7 PPEs, seriously, you think any developer is going to have any idea how to utilize them? Just making a game that uses dual processors takes a 50% larger budget. Meanwhile, developers are already raving about how much easier Microsoft's standards and XNA development kits are making it to develop 360 games. And it's a heck of a lot cheaper to manufacture the discs too. Even small developers with just $100,000 can make their own game and sell it via Xbox Live marketplace.

And as already mentioned the L2 cache of the PS3's cell in miniscule. Most PC processors and the 360's processor have twice the cache. To make a processor with half the cache and expect it to be shared among 7 PPEs is just asking for developers to curse Sony day and night.

On top of all this, by the time the PS3 launches, developers will have had loads of experience of utilizing the 360. Expect the 2nd generation 360 games using much smaller budgets to blow the first generation PS3 games out of the water graphically.

[ricola]

while I agree with the majority of your post, the truth about the MGS4 demo is that it WAS in fact running in realtime. There are videos of Kojima proving this by stoping the demo and changing angles and movement of characters....

on the other hand, the Killzone demo was totally prerendered and the developers freely admitted this to the press. That level of visuals is not reflective of even the PS3.


the general consensus seems to be that in terms of overall number crunching Sony will have a slight edge, but a much steeper learning curve for developers.

it will be interesting to see if MS can manage to compete in Japan this time round, but even if they dont succeed in that region they will just continue to dump more and more money into the operation until they do succeed

[Belasco]

I'm concerned by how much "visuals" have overtaken "gameplay" in importance in all of this next-gen console talk. I don't care how photo-realistic games are becoming, I'm not going to drop a $60 game into my $400 console just to see a realistic smoldering, festering turd. Besides, what happens after photo-realism is achieved - visually, there is no where else to go. It HAS to be about the gameplay.

If Nintendo can make this new controller interface work really well and have developers create innovative ways to utilize it, they will be the Dark Horse in this debate. Personally, I hate console controllers for FPS's and I'm hoping Nintendo's controller will change that.

[Shoot Out A Log]

I'm not going to be shelling out $$$ for any of the new consoles any time soon, but I recently played little Call Of Duty 2 at Best Buy and it was sweet. I'm all about multiplayer FPS's. I'll consider getting a 360 somewhere down the line when the hopefully the price comes down a little bit.

[Mini Dickman]

Oh, I Just saw that MGS4 is to be released Q2'07. If that's their target date, then I'll believe the visuals.

Still, all the tech inside the PS3 is impossible to scale down in price enough to hit the point it's at. Sega had to undercost the DC, MS has always undercut the XB (and continues to for the 360), and the PS3 will have to heavily rely on (expensive) accessories and games. $70 for a PS3 game might be conservative.

MGS is a great series. I'd have hoped the PS3 MGS4 would be a second or third generation game, like the original was. They're always better after the deveopers have had time to actually learn how to use the SDK.

[westernestates]

Still, all the tech inside the PS3 is impossible to scale down in price enough to hit the point it's at. Sega had to undercost the DC, MS has always undercut the XB (and continues to for the 360), and the PS3 will have to heavily rely on (expensive) accessories and games. $70 for a PS3 game might be conservative.

I saw back at E3 an article that said that Sony is more than willing to take a loss in the hardware for two reasons. 1) They will really try and push the new Blu-ray disc technology not just when it comes to video games but when it comes to movies as well. 2) Sony knows that the real money is made in the software.

There is a problem I see not only with Xbox 360 but with the PS3 and that is the starting price of the system. Historicaly all of the great systems that have ever came out were all $300 or less when they first came out. In matter of fact there has been no console with starting price above $300 that have ever succeded, the prime examples being 3DO, CD-I interactive and last but not least Neo Geo.

[Daniel Ruoss]

I saw back at E3 an article that said that Sony is more than willing to take a loss in the hardware for two reasons. 1) They will really try and push the new Blu-ray disc technology not just when it comes to video games but when it comes to movies as well. 2) Sony knows that the real money is made in the software.

There is a problem I see not only with Xbox 360 but with the PS3 and that is the starting price of the system. Historicaly all of the great systems that have ever came out were all $300 or less when they first came out. In matter of fact there has been no console with starting price above $300 that have ever succeded, the prime examples being 3DO, CD-I interactive and last but not least Neo Geo.

Good points. While I think Microsoft is better able to take their loss on the pricing, Sony has no choice but to accept some form of loss to keep their costs within reason compared to the 360. Regardless of one's opinion of 360 v. PS3, that is the competition and it can't be ignored just because you may think you have the better system.

The Xbox 360 basic bundle is $299 so it does come just under that $300 mark. :wink: Just barely! I don't think the comparison to 3DO, CD-I, and Neo Geo is fair. The market conditions for each was very different. If I remember correctly Neo Geo came out during the height of Sega's Genesis and the debut of Nintendo's SNES. Plus Sega and Nintendo had such a large library of games that Neo Geo just couldn't match. 3DO was weakly marketed by Panasonic since they just didn't have the resources of a Microsoft or Sony to accept the necessary losses to get market share. It would really take sheer genius not yet seen in the console industry to make a new system, capture a large market, AND make a profit in the first 2 years. This is where Nintendo plays their cards right. They stick to the pure gaming console theory and do it well. They make a system for their loyal gamers. They drop the gimmicks and give what the hardcores want. Something easy and fun to play with. Their new Revolution system will be cheaper (it will do less compared to 360 or ps3) and by catering purely to their fans it will let them keep market share and perhaps even capture more if people find the Xbox 360 and PS3 too complicated and pricey. Don't forget there are still a load of people who will buy their system just because it will have Mario, Zelda, Metroid, etc. Not me though! (A shameful fact is that I never did beat Super Mario Bros. :cry: )

In the end I think the biggest reason Microsoft will triumph is because they're looking way beyond this season's console wars. Microsoft wants to be in your living room because that is where your computer is heading. In 10 years your TV, phone, and internet will all come from one cable into your house. If anyone has a cable provider that has OnDemand programming you're seeing a glimpse of the future. The near future actually. No longer will you have to watch what the stations show you when they decide to show it. Your TV and internet will be linked and you'll instead go through an interface where the "channel" is more like internet media archives. For example, you'll click over to the "Paramount channel" and be able to access their entire movie library and watch it when you want. (Will it be cheaper than cable? I don't know.) Thats what Microsoft is planning for. You can see that in their Xbox Live marketplace and the built-in Media Center that allows to send your computer media straight to your TV.

Please let me know what you guys think. I think we're all making good points here.

[westernestates]

Good points. While I think Microsoft is better able to take their loss on the pricing, Sony has no choice but to accept some form of loss to keep their costs within reason compared to the 360. Regardless of one's opinion of 360 v. PS3, that is the competition and it can't be ignored just because you may think you have the better system.

That's probably why they offered two pricing points but let's be honest here, as a gamer what would you rather buy? I know myself I want all of that extra crap because buying it seperatly would cost a arm and a leg. I think Microsoft knew that if they only offered the $400 package that it was very likely that they would have failed.

I just don't understand why the average gamer would buy a core package it's like difference between getting a McDonalds Hamburger and eating a juicy hamburger with all of the fixing and fries plus a coke with ice.

[Mini Dickman]

I think you're right, and I don't like it.

All this networked availibility bullshit from the gigantic media corporations always comes with loss of freedoms. Fuck that, I'd rather watch analog broadcast TV and go to a movie store if it means I have control over what my computer does.

But, I watch nearly no TV anyway. MS and the conglomerates can keep their digital media devices. I still use a walkman to play music, since I Just can't justify $300 for a fragile lump of DRM, made by Apple no less.

[Mini Dickman]

As well,

You can add so many features before they interfere with other ones.

I truly can't see the desire to have an all-in-one machine that does many things badly for a high price, as opposed to a few things that do things well for a low price.

Take Cellphones. I want a cellular phone that is just a /phone/. If They made a phone that is compatible with the current networks that is the same form factor as those old Motorola Bag phones, I'd buy one of those. I cannot comprehend why someone wants a phone that's a phone, PDA, game system, and MP3 Player. Just as I can't comprehend why you'd want a game console designed to do multitudes of things. Oh yeah, and it'll play games too. It's almost as if it's an afterthought with all the shit they're lumping on these new ones.

[Daniel Ruoss]

That's probably why they offered two pricing points but let's be honest here, as a gamer what would you rather buy? I know myself I want all of that extra crap because buying it seperatly would cost a arm and a leg. I think Microsoft knew that if they only offered the $400 package that it was very likely that they would have failed.

I just don't understand why the average gamer would buy a core package it's like difference between getting a McDonalds Hamburger and eating a juicy hamburger with all of the fixing and fries plus a coke with ice.

I agree. The core package I think is just marketing (clever marketing) and being able to put more numbers of consoles out there. Someone says the premium is too expensive they have the built in excuse of "Well, then just buy the core system."

[Daniel Ruoss]

As well,

You can add so many features before they interfere with other ones.

I truly can't see the desire to have an all-in-one machine that does many things badly for a high price, as opposed to a few things that do things well for a low price.

Take Cellphones. I want a cellular phone that is just a /phone/. If They made a phone that is compatible with the current networks that is the same form factor as those old Motorola Bag phones, I'd buy one of those. I cannot comprehend why someone wants a phone that's a phone, PDA, game system, and MP3 Player. Just as I can't comprehend why you'd want a game console designed to do multitudes of things. Oh yeah, and it'll play games too. It's almost as if it's an afterthought with all the shit they're lumping on these new ones.

I agree 1000% with you there. A cell phone should primarily be a damned CELL PHONE. Not a camera, video player, MP3 player, or web surfing device. All of those things are worthless when you have shitty service and can't get a signal. I can just see someone stranded on the side of the road with no cell service but God Bless them they can take a picture of all the traffic driving past them and play Frogger, too!

[ricola]

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1779&Itemid=2


so fucked. but, as the article says, not much can be done about it...

[westernestates]

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1779&Itemid=2


so fucked. but, as the article says, not much can be done about it...

I know. Last year it was the DS. The average price for it back then on ebay was $300~$400 now it's the XBOX. I've been keeping track of it on ebay and the average going price for a Premium Pacakage XBOX 360 is around $800. I even saw one go for $1,200 not so long ago. I had a feeling that this was going to happen and I regret not pre-ordering one so I could make a killing on ebay.

[GeneralSantos]

God, it's like you guys are reading my mind. I work at a job that doesn't allow you to have camera phones due to sensitive information and all that bullshit. Do you know how hard it is to find a non-camera phone anymore?? Plus, I read that Europe and Japan have cell phone access that blows ours away since they went to a unified standard there. Here, we get a dozen different carriers all using a different standard so nobody gets any service worth a damn. These companies need to pull their collective heads out of their asses and fix these problems, but all they see is the bottom line and screw the end users.

On the XBox 360, the core package is crap. I've read that if you buy it, you still have to get a damn $60 memory card just so you can save your games. Add that on and you might as well just get the hardcore system. Also, what's the deal with Microsoft charging 50 bucks for a wireless controller? Nintendo's WaveBird controllers are only 24 bucks and just as good if you ask me.

[ricola]

heres an interesting article comparing the 360 to the PC with games out on both platforms...

http://www.ggl.com/news.php?NewsId=1692


yep, ima wait

[Boss]

I really think MS rushed to get the 360 to market so they could beat Sony to the punch before the PS3 comes out. I have both an original Xbox and a PS2 and have had various Nintendo product. I will probably wait on the PS3 and maybe even a Nintendo Revolution as well. The Revolution is going to be a sweet console. You'll be able to play ANY previously released Nintendo game and the new controllers are supposed to be kick ass.

As for the cel phone thing, the US market is bawlz. No standardization and our phones are roughly 2 generations behind Europe and Asia. This is one area that capitalism hasn't worked.

[Industrial Trackfooter]

I spent the night in the Target parking lot here in Asheville waiting to get a 360. I fell asleep listening to Art Bell, killed my battery, but in the morning I was ready...to get a core system, because that's all they had. I haven't bought one yet, but I'm sure I will.

Since I wasn't the first on the block to get one, I've lost my enthusiasm. Right now I'm playing Shattered Union on my old XBox. Good modern-era-plus strategy game.

[beaver_clever]

F*ck the X-Box and everything that has to do with it. Sure the X-Box has a lot on the PS2, but the 360 has come out already. The tables have been turned, and now the PS3 has the upperhand. Sure the system is coming out a year later than the 360, that gives them that much more time to develop the hardware and software to fully integrate the whole gaming experience. I'm just posting this playing devil's ad. Personally I can hardly afford basic internet, and when the PS3 cum's out, I plan on waiting in line for a day or so, so that I can put it on E-Bay an make a cool $1000. Rent check for 2 months here I cum.

[nate]

cum? Have you been reading a lot of porn stories lately??!?

[Veggie 9]

I don't think so. lmao

I was just thinking this weekend, how the hype for Xbox came and went, and now it's just 'there'. Personally, I don't see the same kind of interest in XBOX 360 as there was with the Xbox.

PS3 will be a great seller. For that matter I believe revolution will too.

[BowlHaircut]

If the PS3 ever makes it out... they won't even have playable demos at E3 is the latest rumors...

I'm gonna be a 100% Nintendo fanboy if Sony doesn't hurry up, pull it out, wipe it off and get with the game here.

I just can't wait to play DDR on a next gen console.

[nate]

Spoken like a true bowl haircut, :bowl:.

[westernestates]

:offtopic: Speaking of the PS3 I was watching the news today and they were talking about the new media war between HD-DVD's VS. Blue-Ray Discs. Which ones do you guys think will win out? I'm thinking Blue-Ray's because of the PS3.

[nate]

Doesn't actually matter, almost all drive manufacturers have already said they'll support both, ala DVD+R and DVD-R.

[BowlHaircut]

Doesn't actually matter, almost all drive manufacturers have already said they'll support both, ala DVD+R and DVD-R.
It's gotta matter... we need a universal standard. Furthermore, to play both formats on the same player will require two lasers (translates to mucho dinero $$). One of these formats has to win, I hate the idea of two.

Personally, I am waiting for a year to see where the smoke settles. I want to make the right choice again.

By the way, does anyone know of a good place that rents Beta tapes? I'd like to get some new releases if possible.

[nate]

By the way, does anyone know of a good place that rents Beta tapes? I'd like to get some new releases if possible.
Nah man, they dumped their stock of Betas to make room for LaserDiscs and MiniDiscs.