Which CONSOLE!?

[mikeszekely]

I can't help but feel you guys are making Ken out to be this evil corporate mouthpiece just to piss MGREXX off. laugh.gif

Ken's the president of SCE, what did you expect him to say? "Oh sorry guys, we f'ed up with the PS3 architecture, the Xbox 360 is superior and we're only staying in the game thanks to the huge installed base"?

Kutaragi's not evil. But he's been taking shots at the Xbox 360 since before E3 in almost every interview he's done. Plus, from our experience with the PS2, we have reason to believe that Kutaragi will talk up the PS3 as if it's far more powerful than it will actually be.

If it makes you feel better, Kutaragi's not the only one I have problems with. I think every time Nintendo president Satoru Iwata opens his mouth, he sticks his foot in it.

I kinda like Xbox Team president J. Allard, though... he strikes me as the only guy in charge who actually plays with the stuff after they make it. Although he does kind of look like Lex Luthor.

2 - Xbox live: Seriously, internet gaming is the future, actually, it's also NOW. Standard XBOX LIVE will be free for all 360 owners... And given the network edge and the already established support microsoft has over Sony, this is no contest.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not disagreeing that Xbox Live is a good selling point for the 360. The current Xbox Live service has been great, and I think stuff like the new "zones" they're adding to the new Xbox Live will help to make sure that everyone has a good time on Live. But I do have to clear up a misconception.

Yes, the new Xbox Live Silver will be free. But the thing is, aside from subscription-based MMOG's like Final Fantasy XI, playing games online will NOT be free. Pretty much all the other features, like voice chat and the ability to peak in on your friends and see what they're playing, yes, and there will be free weekends like HBO. But if you want to play Perfect Dark Zero online, you'll need to upgrade to Xbox Live Gold. I personally don't think $50/year is that bad, though. And current Xbox Live subscribers will automatically have Gold.

[Jolly Rogers]

Even with DVD capabilities of both current generation systems most games used the CD format. Whenever it comes to format, cheaper and easy to produce ALWAYS WON.

That might have been true couple years ago during launch, but a vast majority of new PS2 releases ship on DVD now.

Square/Enix obviously must be thanking Sony for the bumped-up storage blu-ray offers. They're the king of bloatware/FMVs.

[Black Valkyrie]

Xbox PC games ?! yeah right, it had exclusive games from SEGA like Gun Valkyrie, Panzer Dragoon Orta and Outrun-II

Edited June 14, 2005 by Black Valkyrie

[JB0]

Not to follow cliche, but it's truly all about the games.

Truth!

The playstation brand has had marvelous timing and marketing genius to skyrocket it's PS platforms to the top, but I believe theyre at a similar position nintendo was when Sony knocked them off the pedestal. 

Ummm... Sega knocked Nintendo off the pedastal.

SNES and Genesis came out of the era tied. Nintendo's 95% market share had fallen to 50%.

At best Sega and Nintendo were sharing a pedastal.

1 - Price: Sony has always been the more expensive brand.  Unfortunately quality has not always matched up to their prices of recent sales and thus they have been dethroned in the consumer electronics dept.

One of the PS1's major selling points at US launch was it was cheaper.

PS2 and XBox ran equal as far as the consumer is concerned, with Nintendo undercutting both of them.

Now theyre saying they'll make the PS3 blu-ray capable. Sounds great, but in reality, no.  Blu-ray is new technology, and it WONT come cheap.

With luck, Sony will rob the movie and music divisions to subsidize the PS3, like they did with the PS2 at launch.

Yeah sure it has enormous storage capability but it's much more than games will ever need for five years and it'll also cost more to make each disk.

Agreed!

Even with DVD capabilities of both current generation systems most games used the CD format. 

Actually, single-layer DVD is the preferred format currently, and has been for a while.

All XBox games are on DVD, as are most PS2 games(blue = CD, silver = DVD).

...

And what's this about both current-gen systems? There are 4. GameCube uses half-sized DVDs(again, single-layer is the preference). Dreamcast used a proprietary 1GB disk.

Whenever it comes to format, cheaper and easy to produce ALWAYS WON.

True, to a degree. While DVD rapidly supplanted CD, the price of manufacture has kept the game industry from going dual-layer to any signifigant degree.

So, why the overkill? To win another war Sony is waging... Blu-ray vs HD DVD.

And thanks to the blind loyality of the PS fanboys, a lot of people think that the war is already won, because the PS3 having BluRay will main-stream it the same way that the PS2 did for DVD. Fact that DVD was already mainstream outside of Japan, and had been for a few years, is irrelevant.

I dunno about you, but I aint paying another $80-$90 bucks for a war that's not even decided yet. Not for a game console atleast. 

Seconded!

2 - Xbox live: Seriously, internet gaming is the future, actually, it's also NOW.

I still play solo almost exclusively. I've played a few netplay games, and I've not been particularly impressed.

Standard XBOX LIVE will be free for all 360 owners...

No objection here. Though more for the downloads and globabl high-score lists than the online multiplayer.

Overall though, I'm still going to wait till the dust settles... it's always about the games, but I'm hoping for tighter competition from MS.  It'll only make both consoles better.

I want a 3-way tie, as unrealistic as it is.

IMNSHO, it's the optimum solution for the consumer.

[JB0]

Even with DVD capabilities of both current generation systems most games used the CD format.  Whenever it comes to format, cheaper and easy to produce ALWAYS WON.

That might have been true couple years ago during launch, but a vast majority of new PS2 releases ship on DVD now.

Square/Enix obviously must be thanking Sony for the bumped-up storage blu-ray offers. They're the king of bloatware/FMVs.

I thought even Squeenix was moving to real-time cutscenes. Admittedly, I've not played much of their modern offerings(an hour wasted on a borrowed copy of FF10 being it, unless we count RAD as Enix's baby instead of Sandlot's).

[Duke Togo]

Oh, and let's not forget every online poll I've seen asking which next generation console people planned to buy, the PS3 was 2:1 over the Xbox 360. We may actually have every Xbox fan in NA posting in this thread.

[mikeszekely]

Oh, and let's not forget every online poll I've seen asking which next generation console people planned to buy, the PS3 was 2:1 over the Xbox 360. We may actually have every Xbox fan in NA posting in this thread.

Or maybe Xbox gamers are more open-minded. I know I picked the "more than one" option for this poll.

Or, maybe PlayStation fanboys just spend more time voting on senseless polls.

[mikeszekely]

Square/Enix obviously must be thanking Sony for the bumped-up storage blu-ray offers. They're the king of bloatware/FMVs.

Considering that Final Fantasy X, Final Fantasy XII, Front Mission 3, and Kingdom Hearts all fit neatly onto single-layer DVDs, I'm sure they're fine with what they have.

Actually, from what I understand, they're upset with Sony for not including a standard hard drive on the PS3.

[JB0]

Oh, and let's not forget every online poll I've seen asking which next generation console people planned to buy, the PS3 was 2:1 over the Xbox 360. We may actually have every Xbox fan in NA posting in this thread.

Or maybe Xbox gamers are more open-minded. I know I picked the "more than one" option for this poll.

Or, maybe PlayStation fanboys just spend more time voting on senseless polls.

I voted "more than one" too.

I already KNOW each system's gonna have a few games I want.

[Jolly Rogers]

Square/Enix obviously must be thanking Sony for the bumped-up storage blu-ray offers. They're the king of bloatware/FMVs.

Considering that Final Fantasy X, Final Fantasy XII, Front Mission 3, and Kingdom Hearts all fit neatly onto single-layer DVDs, I'm sure they're fine with what they have.

Actually, from what I understand, they're upset with Sony for not including a standard hard drive on the PS3.

FF XI shipped with a HDD and we don't know if contents were timmed from FM4 and KH2, like many current games, to fit a single layer DVD.

[JB0]

Square/Enix obviously must be thanking Sony for the bumped-up storage blu-ray offers. They're the king of bloatware/FMVs.

Considering that Final Fantasy X, Final Fantasy XII, Front Mission 3, and Kingdom Hearts all fit neatly onto single-layer DVDs, I'm sure they're fine with what they have.

Actually, from what I understand, they're upset with Sony for not including a standard hard drive on the PS3.

FF XI shipped with a HDD ...

Because Sony refused to release it as a standalone peripheral like they did in Japan shortly after the system's launch. The japanese had a hard drive before the first revision of the system(AKA US launch version) was designed.

[striderhiryu]

i voted for more than one, actually i'm going to buy the three of them for the following reasons:

Revolution: good multiplayer games, also can read GC discs and i already have over 30 games.

PS3: for the RPG's, future macross games and if posible a strider sequel.

Xbox 360: for Halo and any good FPS it has.

if any console does not satisfy me it will bee sold.

[JB0]

PS3: for the RPG's, future macross games and if posible a strider sequel.

Personal bet: You'll have better luck looking for the NES Strider on the Revolution than getting a new one on PS3.

...

Hey, that's an idea. Companies could resurrect licenses by getting the old NES/SNES games out on the Revolution download, using it to re-introduce the name, then release a remake/sequel.

Edited June 15, 2005 by JB0

[Blaine23]

Oh, and let's not forget every online poll I've seen asking which next generation console people planned to buy, the PS3 was 2:1 over the Xbox 360. We may actually have every Xbox fan in NA posting in this thread.

Or maybe Xbox gamers are more open-minded. I know I picked the "more than one" option for this poll.

Or, maybe PlayStation fanboys just spend more time voting on senseless polls.

Playstation fanboys?

I get it... you're going to buy multiple game consoles, but the average consumer (like me) only plans on buying one... one system that will have more games, more friends to borrow games from, and more proven successful licenses... yet I'm a fanboy because I'll like buy a PS3?

Your logic perplexes me.

Seems like the average joe just wants to play a few games here and there and not obsess over minutae like disc format, playing on the internet, and who makes the processor or graphics card.

If anybody in the poll are "fanboys", it's you guys. Me, I just wanna kick back and play a game or two.

[mikeszekely]

Personal bet: You'll have better luck looking for the NES Strider on the Revolution than getting a new one on PS3.

Oh, I don't know about a Strider seqeul... but I do feel like mentioning that Capcom is releasing a "Capcom Classics Collection" late this year. It's supposed to have 22 games on it. Only five have been announced so far (1942, Final Fight, Ghosts n' Goblins, Bionic Commando, and Commando), but I'd be willing to bet that the original arcade version of Strider will be included.

[mikeszekely]

Your logic perplexes me.

If you just want to kick back and play a few games, take a moment to evalute which console will actually have the best games.

If you assume PS3, simply because of that word "PlayStation" on the side, as people like MGREXX have done, then yes, you're dangerously close to being a fanboy. You're one step away from hitting the boards at IGN with topics like "Xbox iz teh suxxorz! PlayStation RULEZ!" You're working on the same assumptions that the real fanboys are treating like gospel... that Sony owns the industry (and therefore will ALWAYS own the industry), or that Sony has more better franchises (and will ALWAYS have more... nevermind that Sony's biggest seller is GTA, which gets an improved release six months later on the Xbox, and nevermind the fact that series like Devil May Cry or Tekken could very well end up on another platform at any time).

If, on the other hand, you've sat back, looked at the merits and potential games on each system, and honestly concluded that neither the Xbox 360 nor the Nintendo Revolution have anything to offer you, and that launch titles like Tekken 6 or Devil May Cry 4 appeal to you, then that's a different story.

[Black Valkyrie]

Capcom is releasing a "Capcom Classics Collection" late this year.  It's supposed to have 22 games on it.  Only five have been announced so far (1942, Final Fight, Ghosts n' Goblins, Bionic Commando, and Commando), but I'd be willing to bet that the original arcade version of Strider will be included.

http://www.the-magicbox.com/0505/game050518k.shtml

1942

1943

1943 Kai

Bionic Commando

Commando

Exed Eyes

Final Fight

Forgotten Worlds

Ghosts 'n Goblins

Ghouls 'n Ghosts

Gun.Smoke

Hige Maru

Legendary Wings

Mercs

Section Z

SonSon

Street Fighter II

Street Fighter II: Champion Edition

Street Fighter II: Turbo

Super Ghouls 'n Ghosts

Trojan

Vulgus

The good thing it`s going be released for the Xbox but to bad no Strider.

Edited June 15, 2005 by Black Valkyrie

[Jolly Rogers]

i voted for more than one, actually i'm going to buy the three of them for the following reasons:

Revolution: good multiplayer games, also can read GC discs and i already have over 30 games.

Did I miss something? I thought thet Revolution is not backwards compatible with the GC.

[mikeszekely]

The good thing it`s going be released for the Xbox but to bad no Strider.

Bummer there's no Strider, and double bummer on all the versions of SFII. I already picked up the Anniversary Collection.

Did I miss something? I thought thet Revolution is not backwards compatible with the GC.

The Revolution is backwards compatible with GC games.

[mikeszekely]

Hideo Kojima has some thoughts on the next-gen consoles.

As a developer, I see the three consoles as different kinds of meals," said Kojima. "The PlayStation 3 is a sumptuous feast for special occasions; the Xbox 360 is a fine Sunday dinner; and the Revolution is a rich, home-cooked supper.

[JB0]

Hideo Kojima has some thoughts on the next-gen consoles.

As a developer, I see the three consoles as different kinds of meals," said Kojima. "The PlayStation 3 is a sumptuous feast for special occasions; the Xbox 360 is a fine Sunday dinner; and the Revolution is a rich, home-cooked supper.

I like that analogy, actually.

...

Does this mean he'll be doing mainly Revolution games?

[striderhiryu]

dammned, i'd like to kick capcom in the balls...

well, at least i could play games like capcom x namco and maybe buy a PS1 to play strider 2 and macross DYRL, VF-X and VF-X2.

meanwhile i'll continue to download the strider hiryu manga, i found it at lscmainframe.topcities.com wich takes the plot of the NES version, but it's in japanese.

Edited June 16, 2005 by striderhiryu

[MGREXX]

Here are some of the biggest Japanese big shot developers speaking of the next gen consoles.

Guess who they are betting on??????

PS3!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ahihori Hino is my hero because he said it like it is:

"Hino criticized Microsoft's Xbox 360, saying he didn't see anything "fresh" about it when he saw it at E3"

Japanese developers article

Edited June 16, 2005 by MGREXX

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

He also said good stuff about the XBOX 360 right after that sentence you just quoted.

None of this stuff impresses me since its not even all out yet. War ain't one til all the contenders are out. So I would not be surprised if Sony got toppled this time around.

[Duke Togo]

Well, we do know one thing. MW members pick the PS3 over the Xbox 360 at a 3:1 ratio. Every gaming site I have seen running polls has it atleast at 2:1. tells you all you have to know right there. In Japan I would *guess* that number runs somewhere between 5:1 to 10:1.

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Yes but the systems are not out yet for the mass market. I'm not trying to argue, but all I'm saying is that once nintendo was on top, but sony toppled them. sony might not always stay on top, who could have forsaw the kiddiness of ultra or nintendo 64? I remember back in 95-95 a lot of us were led to believe it would be the ultimate gaming system ever created.

[Duke Togo]

Sony didn't topple Nintendo. Nintendo all but committed suicide with the N64. Had Nintendo gone ahead with the Nintendo Playstation in its then partnership with Sony, we wouldn't even be having this discussion right now, Nintendo would still be ruling the gaming world.

[Radd]

MGREXX, there did not appear to be any overwhelming bias in favour of any of the next generation systems. A lot of good was said of both the 360 and the Revolution. Perhaps they took down the article you read and replaced it with another?

[mikeszekely]

MGREXX, you're hero also said some good about the Xbox 360.

Hino did say that the impressive list of Japanese developers working on games for the Xbox 360, primarily former Square Enix producer Hironobu Sakaguchi, will deliver some stiff competition for the PS3.

And did you miss out on Tecmo's Tomonobu Itagaki's praise for the system?

On creating games for the Xbox 360, Itagaki said that it is an extraordinary machine that is fun to develop games for.

Yuji Naka, the father of Sonic, had this to say,

[Microsoft has] used its knowledge from Xbox Live to evolve their network, making its services and controls even more convenient for the user, which I think is a very attractive point.

Keisuke Kikuchi, Tecmo -

[The Xbox 360] a well-balanced machine. Its CPU, graphics, memory, network capability, and convenience of hardware control are at a high level. I would like to make a game that takes advantage of its online connection.

Masanori Takeuchi, of From Software, first is critical of the PS3...

To be honest, it's still full of unknown factors, and it's difficult to comment on. In my own opinion, it doesn't seem like hardware that will make games more fun.

...before praising the 360.

But it's obvious that the console is meant for heavy users. I believe it's also a console that publishers can use their accumulated knowledge the most [out of the next-generation machines]. It's the best hardware if you have a good fund and you don't want to take risks in development.

But, I think Hideo Kojima may have said it best.

Citing the PS3 trailers shown during Sony's pre-E3 conference, Kojima said only a limited number of developers will be able to make games that actually play in real time with a similar quality of graphics.

On the other hand, Kojima said the Xbox 360 is much more accessible from a development perspective, and he thinks many companies will support the console.

[mikeszekely]

Well, we do know one thing. MW members pick the PS3 over the Xbox 360 at a 3:1 ratio. Every gaming site I have seen running polls has it atleast at 2:1. tells you all you have to know right there. In Japan I would *guess* that number runs somewhere between 5:1 to 10:1.

Yes, Duke, you've offered this tidbit at least once before, as has MGREXX. And I've told you before that all that proves is that people like you will buy the PS3 simply because it says "PlayStation" on the side.

Bottom line is that when Microsoft threw their hat into the console ring, most people thought it was a joke, and that the Xbox was going to tank faster than the Dreamcast did. And yet, it went on to carve out a piece of the market for itself that's bigger than Nintendo's. The Xbox team is gunning for first, and while they aren't likely to take it anytime soon, they will close the gap.

[Blaine23]

Well, we do know one thing. MW members pick the PS3 over the Xbox 360 at a 3:1 ratio. Every gaming site I have seen running polls has it atleast at 2:1. tells you all you have to know right there. In Japan I would *guess* that number runs somewhere between 5:1 to 10:1.

Yes, Duke, you've offered this tidbit at least once before, as has MGREXX. And I've told you before that all that proves is that people like you will buy the PS3 simply because it says "PlayStation" on the side.

Bottom line is that when Microsoft threw their hat into the console ring, most people thought it was a joke, and that the Xbox was going to tank faster than the Dreamcast did. And yet, it went on to carve out a piece of the market for itself that's bigger than Nintendo's. The Xbox team is gunning for first, and while they aren't likely to take it anytime soon, they will close the gap.

I see what you're saying, Mike - but I think you're missing the point I tried to make earlier. Your average consumer will likely buy one console - I happen to fall into that majority. Video games just really aren't important enough to me to see spending more than the price of one console and a few games.

Playstation has brand loyalty and they earned it with the two very solid game machines, a variety of titles, and compatability with their friend's consoles (for borrowing games, etc...)

There is a difference between brand loyalty and fanboyism, but I don't think you're seeing that.

[KingNor]

Hardware is just a delivery unit. Brandloyalty (in the face of poor quality) is unAmarican!

Go where the good games are, reguardless of system.

i find it odd that people usually rent a game before buying it "to make sure its worth the money"

yet they'll buy an unproven system the instant it hits the market.

I like to give consoles a good couple months before i decide wich is the one for me.

hardware means nothing, i still get a kick out of NES Zelda. so the graphics of Nex-Gen systems is by far a backseat to the gameplay of their games.

just my 50cents.

[Ladic]

I will probably buy the PS3 at first, and most likely 6 months to 1 years after it has come out, to make sure there are plenty of good games.

I might buy the other 2 down the road, but when they hit the $80-150 prince range, much like I did with the current generation.

[JB0]

Sony didn't topple Nintendo. Nintendo all but committed suicide with the N64. Had Nintendo gone ahead with the Nintendo Playstation in its then partnership with Sony, we wouldn't even be having this discussion right now, Nintendo would still be ruling the gaming world.

Nintendo was NOT on top when the PS1 came out!

They were IN FREEFALL!

Nintendo comitted suicide when they didn't have a replacement for the NES ready to go immediatly after the Genesis. They spent 2 years developing a new system while Sega chiseled away at their customer base.

And when it came out, it had a cripplingly slow CPU, making fast and complex games, likes team sports titles and shooters, difficult to do. These sorts of titles became the Genesis' strong points, while the SNES went for slower titles where it's superior AV hardware could give it an advantage over the Genesis.

But the POINT is ...they went from 95% market share to 50% in the 16-bit era. And I think a large deal of that was name recognition. Nintendo at the time was virtually synonomous with "video game" in the same way that Atari was before. It didn't matter who actually made the system or software, you had "nintendo games." And the SNES had some VERY strong licenses, such as Zelda and Mario(though Sonic very rapidly achieved his own brand recognition).

And they STILL didn't learn their lesson, and were again late with the Nintendo 64. Once again, a large portion of the market had already made it's choice by the time Nintendo made it to shelves. Only this time, name recognition wouldn't save them, as they'd squandered it all away last generation, and were charging more for their games in an attempt to snag CD-style profits off ROM carts(which did a lot to squash any lingering vestiges in much the same way that the 32x debacle seriously hurt Sega on the Saturn).

And, of course, a botched Japanese launch meant there was a disturbing lack of support from the usual console game developers(which are all japanese).

Nintendo's fall from grace was not a single botched alliance. It was a long process, with a LOT of screwups.

[Duke Togo]

Sony didn't topple Nintendo. Nintendo all but committed suicide with the N64. Had Nintendo gone ahead with the Nintendo Playstation in its then partnership with Sony, we wouldn't even be having this discussion right now, Nintendo would still be ruling the gaming world.

Nintendo was NOT on top when the PS1 came out!

They were IN FREEFALL!

Nintendo comitted suicide when they didn't have a replacement for the NES ready to go immediatly after the Genesis. They spent 2 years developing a new system while Sega chiseled away at their customer base.

Except the SNES was THE 16-bit system. I mean, everybody had a SNES. You are trying to portray it as some sort of failure, when you couldn't be farther from the truth. Nintendo wasn't in freefall with the SNES, they were dominating. Holy Christ, man, what twisted reality are you living in? What are you, a disgruntled SEGA fanboy?