XBOX 360 is too expensive....

[Kenzya]

Originally Posted by MrESqueek

Nintendo's approach is to mix things up a little and, you know, TRY SOMETHING NEW. Just improving graphics is not enough. Even the head of the company said so. You could do that, but over time, it'll just be the same thing over and over again. And you'd lose interest among your fanbase.

True to life. That's what I said when I played the Xbox360. I was at Walmart kind of excited that I was playing Xbox360. Kameo loads up and I start playing. The graphics are better, I guess. That was all though, I was holding the same controller and looking at the same thing. There was nothing more, I could play this same exact game on Xbox if I really wanted to. I could garuntee you could find a game like this one on the Xbox.

N64 - 2D -> 3D. We start here. Dreamcast and PS2 improve the graphics. Realistically, more things can be done visually in games. Looking out over a mountain at miles of landscape you have to conquer and the like. We've exhausted all the new ideas here. We'll have things like better antialiasing, instead of new gaming possibilities.

I applaud the Revolution.

p.s. Nintendo has already done a showcase of the controller. While there are a few bugs to work out, the general consensus is that the controller is coo~ http://hardware.gamespot.com/Story-ST-15143-2567-x-x-x

Oh, and don't categorize me. I hate the Gamecube and I'm against the Nintendo DS.

[Laharl]

Originally Posted by MrESqueek

Laharl, you honestly think that a new game which requires an add-on to the controller won't have it included?

You sadden me.

N64:

Starfox 64 Bundle - Comes with Rumble Pak.
Donkey Kong 64 Bundle - Comes with Expansion Pak just in case you didn't buy one.

You forgot to mention those games were more expensive. The bundle that includes the necessary device to play the game is always more expensive and tends to not sell as well. I personally like to buy my $49.99 video game that kicks ass I don't need anything new to play than buy my $79.99 plus tax thing that needs something extra, unless I already know I'm a fan of that said thing, like say DDR. WHich brings me to your next point:

I sincerely doubt the company who produced a game will hinder our ability to play the game. Even Crystal Chronicles and Four Swords could be played one player without the GBA link. And I believe Four Swords even came with a link cable when you bought it. The bongos came with Donkey Konga, obviously. And they were like 5-10 bucks for another one. When you buy DDR for PS2, do you get a pad?

Four Swords came with A (as in one) link cable, and it also cost $10 extra over other games released around the same time. Both that and Chrystal Chronicales, single player, were pretty shallow games. They weren't very fun without the device that the game is built around. As for DDR, that is one of the few exceptions to the rule because it's all based off an arcade game. Arcade machines pretty much NEED gimmicks to make them work nowadays because people will just buy the regular games for their consoles. If it catches on enough in the arcades to warrant a home release, as DDR did, they can safely make an extra peripheral for just that one game because they know it will sell.

Rediculous innovations? Try testing the waters. EyeToy was probably the most fun I have ever had playing a video game. Sure, it didn't do so well, but it was amazingly awesome when it came out. It was just poorly implemented. Sony is famous for allowing strange and innovative new games on its consoles. Try DDR, the entire basis of this website. Do you use a controller to play it? How about Pop'n? DrumMaster? EyeToy? Gosh, I can think of so many.

I didn't care for the EyeToy, which I did have a chance to use quite a bit. The DK bongos were pretty cool (Jungle Beat is a super fun game), but it wasn't really worth the cash to get. And, like I said before, DDR was in arcades long before it came out on consoles. They knew it and a dance pad around it would sell because of the popularity of the arcade versions.

Your last point, I will say, entirely valid and I don't really have any counterpoint to it. Heh.

[Squeek]

I guess we should pretty much conclude this until we actually get a hands-on with any of the three consoles since so much of it is in the dark as of right now.

Those games were normal prices near me. $50 for Starfox, $50 for DK, $50 for Konga, $50 for Four Swords. I wouldn't even pay $50 for those games though. It's very rare that I pay full price for a game. The final game I will ever spend $50 on during the era of the Gamecube is Twilight Princess of course. I have learned from experience that most of the games I spent $50 on weren't worth it and were huge mistakes. Soul Calibur II, Tony Hawk's Pro Skater, etc. All wastes of my money. The games I'm proud to pay full price for were Super Smash Brothers Melee, Super Monkey Ball 1 and 2 (though they were only 30 bucks each), and Tales of Symphonia. Heck. I would have paid $50 per disc on Tales. It was totally worth it.

If Xbox plans to release more games like Steel Battalion, they're gonna lose it soon. I never heard of anyone other than the super-rich hardcore gamers say more than "It's cool, but there's no way I'll get it." Yes, it was innovative, but at a huge cost. This wasn't your piddly 5 or 10 bucks extra (in some places). This thing is anywhere from $150 to $300. That's the cost of the system in some places. Innovation does not come at this cost, and Nintendo knows this. After all, they were pretty much the foundation of video gaming as it exists today.

~Squeek

[suicidalmuskrat]

Why did someone bring up the DK Bongos, or even the Eye-Toy. Stop thinking of the new controller like this. These were gimmicks designed for a single game (although I felt pretty special to be able to play 2 enjoyable games on the Bongos, when I entirely expected only 1). Also, How much do you expect PS3 and Xbox 360 games to cost? 59.99. How much do I expect a Revo game with an add-on to cost? 59.99. So people who want to create games around an add-on can still do so at a competitive price. This is not a gimmick, anymore than the NES controller was a gimmick with the d-pad. Or the N64 controller was with an analog stick. It's simply allowing us to better control games.

Laharl Wrote: "The Revolution is doing a lot of things right, namely that all the extra stuff you might want to get for the system, like Wi-Fi access, does not come standard so people who just want to play games can do so. "

Wi-fi is standard, out of the box. You have a wireless network in your house? Plug in the Revo and you're kicking someone's ass in Japan in SSB3.

Now let's pretend that only the confirmed attatchments will be released: The nunchuck and the shell. It can still do everything and more a standard controller can. So what's the problem Laharl?

EB, you should be shot for comparing this to a power-pad. Just like the Bongos and such, that was a simple attatchment. Nintendo is not telling you to control the fucking system with a guitar or a drum. It's allowing you to control A game with those, for cheap, and with ease. This is a controller. Get it through your heads. A CONTROLLER. Just like Sony and MS, just more capable.

I mean, even if the console completely sucked ass. I'd still by one, to encourage innovation. It's the only way to keep games fresh in the long run.

[87x]

#1 Selling point of the Xbox360:
We got updated Xbox Live. Which is the greatest acheivement of modern games. If Nintendo or Sony wants to stand up to it, they are going to have to implement a better online service. Sony already announced that the failed at this so really, Nintendo is the only one that has a chance.

Btw, Sony is going to bomb huge this go around on the consoles.

[esupin]

Look, everyone...

We all know that we'd take any console for free, so there is no real point in bashing console xyz.
Who knows, maybe in some sick twist of fate you'll end up owning one next year(like how I, DC fanboy, won a PS2 in a raffle).

[Omeganitros]

Esupin: Make your sig smaller by cropping out all the white around the picture, and you'll have the best Signature in these forums. Your avatar could be better, though.

[esupin]

I just realized this now. All my other posts were on the white background, so I couldn't tell.

[Omeganitros]

Originally Posted by Omeganitros

Of course. But we're talking about a unified online system here. It's already known that PS3 will obviously have online games.

Peronsally, though I guess Xbox LIVE will seem more attractive, it really shouldn't cripple Sony. Look at PC games. Completely forgetting about Steam (and Gamespy, which I had for a while), all of my PC games that have online multiplayer are not combined under one sytem. RTCW: Enemy Territory has it's own thingy. UT2K4 has it's own thingy. C&C: Red Alert 2 has it's own thingy. They're fine.

[87x]

I tell you now, Xbox live is the number 1 single most reason why xbox is going to dominate this upcomming battle. The unified system is easier to deal with, slicker looking, and more advanced than anything out there today. It's like what was said earlier, Its got all these new features like a cellphone. Well, The more advanced cell phones are celling more than the old ones with no features. Thats because EVERYBODY loves new features. The whole world is based on this system. Everything that comes out is either a new idea, or something remade better than it was before. And you know what? Everyone that needs a sewing machine is going to go out and get one with cross stiching, Manual Feed, Work light, and some other shit. I guarantee they won't go out and get one with a pedal or wheel they are going to have to turn by hand to make the machine work.

Online play is the future of gameing and all the developers know it. If sony doesn't do anything about there online situation they are going to bomb.

[Moogy]

Online play is for idiots. I despise multiplayer.

[87x]

Too bad your opinion isn't the majority.

[evilbutterfly]

1) You can't say that PS3 will bomb or that X-BOX360 will dominate hands down. Online play is uber important, Sony is adding that. Microsoft did damned good on their first go around, and Sony has them as an example, so I wouldn't be surprised if Sony did it great on their first try. You're also forgetting that the majority of people are shallow idiots that will buy consoles based just on graphics. That alone will get PS3 tons of sales. I was talking to one kid at school about how PS3 will own graphically, he didn't believe me, I showed him the Killzone 2 video, and he said fuck X-Box he's getting a PS3. Lots of people are like this, whether you want to admit it or not.

2) Don't get me wrong, I think Nintendo is awesome for making crazy shit, I just think that they do it too much for their own good. I would hate to see them go downhill because they're too different for most people, but I fear it would happen. If they're out of the picture, Sony and Microsoft will keep using the same shit over and over. As it is, they wait for Nintendo to do interesting stuff and then they steal it. Without Nintendo, we'll lose a lot of the innovation.

3) I expect better than a console war topic from a moderator. This topic was made blatently to call PS3 a piece of junk, and a console war topic was guaranteed to occur. Had a person with ~100 posts posted this EXACT same topic, it would have gotten locked after a few replies because it would just be people fighting. Seriously, just lock this topic and keep console discussion to the stickies up top. They're there for a reason.

[suicidalmuskrat]

you should've showed him some real bonafide in-game footage of PS3...which is still impressive as hell, but not killzone calibur.

Props (finally) to EB for talking about the innovation factor...I don't even give a shit if nobody on this site likes it, but it's necessary. and if they can make some more non-game games, they'll have a smash on their hands.

[jewpinthethird]

Originally Posted by Moogy

Online play is for idiots. I despise multiplayer.

Agree'd for the most part.

Though games of competition are better off played online.

[Squeek]

Personally, with the way things have progressed in the first and only MMORPG I've ever played (take a guess), I'm pretty much set on this following theory:

People are retarded.

That being said, I'd use online play very rarely to play against some friends or friends of friends from afar. I'd never use it like some people do in Counter Strike and search for new rivals every day.

There is someone in a college a few hours away who I really need to challenge in Super Smash Brothers again. Our battles took half an hour to get 6 kills because we could never land a hit on the other guy. We were so equally matched. This is a prime example of what I would use the online play for. Re-match upon re-match without a 5-hour drive.

~Squeek

[FoJaR]

i wont even consider buying an xbox 360 until the price goes down...

there werent any spectacular release titles, there's nothing new or innovative about the 360, it's just more raw power.

[CrispyCritterz]

Well you know what....im not buying any more systems....i think they are a waste of money.....rather just like play stepmania ( ALL FOR FREE ) or just play what games i have already.....= D

[Fungishroom]

Is the 360 already out?

[Squeek]

Originally Posted by Fungishroom

Is the 360 already out?

Drive to your local retailer and find out.

Or google it.

Better yet.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/

15 days.

~Squeek