Live Arcade Manager Trash Talks Nintendo & Sony [Archive]

Evil Avatar

02-04-2006, 06:51 AM

Next Generation online has posted an article (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2188&Itemid=2) with quotes from Xbox Live Arcade Group Manager Greg Canessa, where he has some less than enthusiastic comments about the possibility of a Playstation Online service or Nintendo's Retro Revolution downloads.

If Sony is trying to come at us, you know... 'good luck.' It's going to be really hard for them. It's just a huge engineering challenge, and beyond the engineering challenge, it takes a long time to build a community. Not to mention Arcade, because that has its own set of issues. You have to take time to build an ecosystem and talk to developers and get developers to put out games for that platform and work with them to plug into all of the underlying technologies that need to be in place and making sure it works properly. There's so many stacks of challenges, I can't see how Sony can catch up with us in the near-term.

fushi

02-04-2006, 07:08 AM

That was quite an embarassing read, but I wish the man every success.

GunnyMo

02-04-2006, 07:14 AM

Doesn't seem like smack talk to me but reality. Other than SOCOM and Madden there isn't much of a Sony online community for PS2 (forums don't count). I hope Sony can come up with something modern and not kill it six months later (Final Fantasy XI anyone?).

Draft

02-04-2006, 07:16 AM

Sloth

02-04-2006, 07:20 AM

Sounds like a man whose proud of his work and justly so. Xbox live is a fantastic service. And he's right about the difficulty and time it takes to build a community. Sony isn't going to just have overnight success with theirs.

bapenguin

02-04-2006, 07:29 AM

man, I met Greg and he seemed like a smart guy. But Nintendo is going to make a fortune on their backwards library. We honestly have no idea what Sony is going to bring to the table.

fushi

02-04-2006, 07:31 AM

But of course, Nintendo fans are already seeing red and this thread will be a disaster area before long.
Yes, such insolence will not stand.

I have contacted the higher-ups and our troops are rallying at Planet Gamecube as we speak. I suggest you edit out whatever negative comments you have made towards the holy Yamauchi-Iwata-Miyamoto trinity and repent now... or pay the consequences.

Heretic Machine

02-04-2006, 07:31 AM

A little stupid, but I can't say he's wrong about Sony's idea to McGuyver an online play system that will somehow outmatch Live. The best they could really hope for would be to copy Live, and then make it free, that's about the closest they could come to besting it IMO. That and having chat rooms outside of games, since the price and that lack of chat rooms are really the only two low points of Live that I can think of.

Morratut

02-04-2006, 07:39 AM

A splash of cold water to all the Sony fanboys out there who thinks Sony is gonna have a XBL beater on launch.

It's true what he is saying though. It's just reality.

Do Sony have the resources to build such a infrastructure?

I'm sure i've read MS have big XBL datacentres all over the world. I think they have a few in US, 1 in UK, 2 in Europe, 1 in Japan and another in South Korea. I assume they have one for NZ and Aus also.

Proof that these work great was playing Halo2 last night with a friend who has a 360. For the first time he was playing on XBL. We was playing people from Massachusetts. I added them to my friends list and we went off as a team fighting the good fight. Talking and having a laugh with no hassle. Great stuff.

It still amazes me to this day that it's so easy.

Do Sony have those resources? I don't think they do. If they have to do it with partners or 3rd parties they will have bigger problems than MS did in the early years.

I hope they prove me wrong though in the long run :cool:

I also find MS attitude quite refreshing. This is the most harsh type of talk i've heard from MS. Even then it's not really harsh. Unlike Sony who just trash talks MS at every turn with no real proof which sickens me.

MS attitude is bring it to the table. Lets see what you've got.

JazGalaxy

02-04-2006, 07:43 AM

I'm a little lost as to what could possibly be better than Live. Not becuase LIVE is so good, but just because... well... what else do people want out of online gaming?

I predict that sony is going to try to do the typiacl sony thing and make their online service about everything from music, to games, to videos, to shoes, and call that "better". To me as a gamer, I just don't see how that's better.

boratika

02-04-2006, 07:44 AM

"A lot of those Nintendo games, you know, aren't gonna hold up." My money says he'll eat those words. At least sales wise. Just look at the GBA library, and there's still more snes ports on the way.

The best they could really hope for would be to copy Live, and then make it free I could dig that.

But yeah Sony and Nintendo do have their work cut out for them onlinewise.

Heretic Machine

02-04-2006, 07:47 AM

My money says he'll eat those words. At least sales wise. Just look at the GBA library, and there's still more snes ports on the way.

I could dig that.

But yeah Sony and Nintendo do have their work cut out for them onlinewise.

Shit, if they could do that they'd sell me on it. But I just don't see it happening. And Nintendo and their little "Connect" service is not what I'm talking about here, not at all... that is an example of what not to do with an online service.

Dakar

02-04-2006, 08:12 AM

I'm a little lost as to what could possibly be better than Live. Not becuase LIVE is so good, but just because... well... what else do people want out of online gaming?

Live but free, or at least with the ability to have MULTIPLE PROFILES under one pay account. That will make it better to me.

And why do people act as if company employees are so interested in the truth? MS employees are full of crap. Sony employees are full of crap. Nintendo employees live in la-la land and are full of crap.

Switcher

02-04-2006, 08:12 AM

Man, what a twit. He would have some good points, if only you couldn't close your eyes, and throw a dart at a lineup of SNES 1st party games, and by chance, hit something that has better gameplay then anything released on the 360 thus far.

I can't knock Live as a service. But when your console has some of the most assinine backwards compatibility in the history of gaming, I don't see how you can knock someone else's attempt, especially when most of it's details haven't even been released yet.

JazGalaxy

02-04-2006, 08:16 AM

Live but free, or at least with the ability to have MULTIPLE PROFILES under one pay account. That will make it better to me.

Well I can see how one might want that, but it was a calculated decision to make only one profile be on an account. You can't hide your identity that way, and it makes for a better gameplay experiance on the whole. Sony may change that, but I don't think that would make the gameplay experiance bettter...

JazGalaxy

02-04-2006, 08:18 AM

I can't knock Live as a service. But when your console has some of the most assinine backwards compatibility in the history of gaming, I don't see how you can knock someone else's attempt, especially when most of it's details haven't even been released yet.

It has assanine backwards compatibillity because MS, like myself, really couldn't understand why people were pretending BC was such a huge issue. Most people with PS2s don't even use them for backward compatibillity. I can see maybe some RPG fans doing it. That's about it.

Granted, it would be much easier to pick up an Xbox1 game than it was to go back and pick up a butt ugly long loading PS1 game, but still. I don't understand where your xbox goes that you can't play your xbox1 games and niether did microsoft.

boratika

02-04-2006, 08:22 AM

Shit, if they could do that they'd sell me on it. But I just don't see it happening. And Nintendo and their little "Connect" service is not what I'm talking about here, not at all... that is an example of what not to do with an online service.
Yeah I don't expect anyone to trow money in that black hole. Xbox live lost how many billions? I'd still dig it if it happened.

hd1

02-04-2006, 08:29 AM

I'll have to halfway agree with him on the Nintendo portion. Sure, there are many that have already been played, but things like SMB don't get old. Also, you can't download A Link To The Past or Orcarina Of Time on XBLA. Aside from smaller timewaster games, there are a lot of old Nintendo games that take a pretty long time to complete; they aren't offering small arcade games like Geometry Wars, they're offering full, albeit older, games. I can understand why he would think Nintendo's download service is mimicing Xbox Live, but they're really totally different.

Switcher

02-04-2006, 08:32 AM

I don't even own an original Xbox. But I can't count the number of people I've seen in message boards asking, "I just sold my xbox to pay for a 360 - Is The Two Thrones compatible with it?"

"Will Black be playable on the 360?"

etc..etc..

I just feel bad for these poor souls who were duped or just too dumb to realize that the 360's BW was going to be this mediocre. Sometimes not doing something at all, is much better then doing a half-assed job on it.

And I still buy old PSOne games to play on my PS2. I'm a big 2D fighting game fan, and if the right title is there, I'll pick it up.

MosBen

02-04-2006, 08:50 AM

I have very little interest in playing old games that I played to death ten or fifteen years ago. Yeah, I might pick up a couple here or there, if they're cheap enough, but I'm much more interested in new games, whether through retail or download. If Nintendo stakes their entire download service on their old games my interest will be much lower than it is for Live, where I really am interested in seeing what indie developers come up with.

MosBen

02-04-2006, 08:57 AM

Oh, and as to Sony's online service, I can't really think of anything on the games side of it that I think they could really improve upon, though like people have mentioned making it free would be nice, if unlikely. I suppose I wouldn't be opposed to having the ability to download movies, though they'd have to be significantly cheaper than buying the DVD (if I get to keep it) or ordering it through ondemand (if I get to keep it temorarily). There also better be a big ass hard drive and/or recordable media. Actually, now that I'm thinking about it, having a fixed storage space, to me, makes purchasing movies unlikely and ondemand much more likely. Especially since including something like a 100 gig drive would jack the price of the machine up a ton.

Much more likely is a smaller hard drive paired with an ondemand service. Of course, if people have broadband they probably already have some kind of ondemand service already. Will the PS3 really be able to do a better job than what people already have?

IndependentGMR

02-04-2006, 09:25 AM

torrefaction

02-04-2006, 09:35 AM

I just feel bad for these poor souls who were duped or just too dumb to realize that the 360's BW was going to be this mediocre. Sometimes not doing something at all, is much better then doing a half-assed job on it.

Comments like this display instantly the lack of understanding some people have about what is really required to make something backwards compatible. The Xbox 360's emulation is a pretty phenomenal achievement. It's not exponentially faster, but it works pretty damn good regardless. Developers now have the ability to be sure the 360 can run it. It's as much up to the developer as to Microsoft.

Everytime someone complains about Microsoft in the software industry, it typically is a result of all the work they HAVE to put into backwards compatibility. Legacy code and legacy hardware slow things down. Thank god they didn't take that attitude to the console.

Heretic Machine

02-04-2006, 09:54 AM

I can't knock Live as a service. But when your console has some of the most assinine backwards compatibility in the history of gaming, I don't see how you can knock someone else's attempt, especially when most of it's details haven't even been released yet.

Ya, except neither the SNES nor the N64 were backwards compatible with their ancestors. Are you saying that it would of been better to leave out the feature all together?

dotbomb

02-04-2006, 10:04 AM

I thought it was a good article and he made good points. I didn't find it that arrogant really.

Nintendo will do well with their offering. But it won't compete with Live. He's right about that.

Sony he says he's got no clue about but he has doubts they can pull together the relationships that MS already has. I agree with this because MS has a proven system in place with sound business metrics to back it up. MS can walk into any dev studio/publisher and say "Here's the revenue stream we predict your game will produce on Xbox Live Arcade based on past performances of our current offerings". That's a HUGE advantage that Sony just doesn't have and it should drive tons of publishers to Live Arcade.

Switcher

02-04-2006, 10:05 AM

Whoa, whoa, whoa, let me clairfy.

The actual nuts and bolts of emulation is a whole other bag, if it's hard, I believe it's hard. If what the 360 does in this area is a great accomplishment, then great. No beef with that.

My actual complaints stem from the fact that if it's such achievement to get these games running, who's idea was it to include Barbie Horse Adventures on that list, but not Splinter Cell, Prince of Persia, or the dozens of higher quality titles? How come there's not even a definitive date for a new batch of games to be added to the list yet?

And why was emulation chosen in the first place? Why not full backwards compatibility like the PS2? If it's because Microsoft didn't feel it was integral, then that leads back to the "don't do it if you can't do it decently" statement.

Taco

02-04-2006, 10:12 AM

My actual complaints stem from the fact that if it's such achievement to get these games running, who's idea was it to include Barbie Horse Adventures on that list, but not Splinter Cell, Prince of Persia, or the dozens of higher quality titles?

Man. I don't even care about this and I've seen the answer to this question 50 times.

If your goal is to get a great popular game to work, and you get that game to work, a side effect is that other games will work with that new implementation. No one said "Hey let's get Barbie working", is just happened to work by chance.

If it's because Microsoft didn't feel it was integral, then that leads back to the "don't do it if you can't do it decently" statement.

That's kind of odd to me. When is nothing better than something again?

Wonka

02-04-2006, 10:20 AM

"A lot of those Nintendo games, you know, aren't gonna hold up."

I'm sorry, but that is a pretty ignorant comment. The company (Nintendo), in and of itself, has been held up by one video game character for nearly 20 years.

"... But, there are some games like Joust or Gauntlet or Pac-Man that are as fun today as they were back then."

Yeah, Gauntlet is good, but I'd rather play Super-Punchout.

I agree with the comment as he made it. A LOT of games will likely NOT hold up.

Super punch out certainly should, and I bet that some other NES titles will also be. But the fact is that even for Nintendo, a large percentage of their old games would probably not be as fun today now that standards have been allowed to climb up. I absolutely LOVED duck hunt as a kid. Does that mean that faster and faster ducks are going to still entertain me that much NOW? I have not tried duck hunt since I was very young so that is actually an open question... But somehow I fear that it will not be as great as I remember.

The bottom line is that anyone who has ever used MAME will tell you that some of the older games are just NOT as fun as you remember them being. I agree that this observation will still be true here. Nintendo has indeed always made great games, and they have a tremendous library to draw from. But not even most great games are actually TIMELESS. It's a VERY rare game that is not only great, but is ALSO still fun to play a decade or more later without any additional improvements...

And if a game is not truly timeless, who outside of the uber-geek community is going to have enough pure nostalgia to buy it today???

I think the man has a good point here, he just didn't state it very clearly.

Rafer

02-04-2006, 10:29 AM

I don't think Sony can pull off a service as good as Xbox live, like sure in theory it doesn't sound impossible to implement, but a good software interface is tough to pull off in practice, especially for a hardware company, look at how much trouble Sony has had coming up with an iPod killer. (But they did hit the ball out of the park with the PS1 so I wouldn't say it's impossible).

And why was emulation chosen in the first place? Why not full backwards compatibility like the PS2? If it's because Microsoft didn't feel it was integral, then that leads back to the "don't do it if you can't do it decently" statement.
Well it was cheap to put actual PS1 chips in the PS2 because Sony manufactures them themselves, and they served a double function (sound?) for PS2 games so it was almost no cost to implement hardware emulation.

Dabombpizza

02-04-2006, 10:33 AM

Oh hey, all you guys are talking about Nintendo and Sony and how thier download service is going to work. That means the details came out right? It's not just ambiguous statements with no working examples or even a solid statement on how the infrastructure will work? 'Cause I couldn't find a posting of the details on the forums...but that's cool that you guys know how it works. ;)

trip1eX

02-04-2006, 10:37 AM

The guy works for MS. If he didn't diss the other consoles it would be news.

HE's overblowing xbox live. Voice and friend's list have been around awhile. There's TEAmspeak and Ventrilo. Ventrilo was done by like one guy. There's instant messengers which all have voice. The technology is pretty straightforward now and won't be that hard to implement.

Look at what a small group of guys can do with Xfire on the pc. I think Sony with it's deeper pocket can add voice on that easily.

Morratut

02-04-2006, 10:37 AM

And why was emulation chosen in the first place? Why not full backwards compatibility like the PS2? If it's because Microsoft didn't feel it was integral, then that leads back to the "don't do it if you can't do it decently" statement.

Completely different hardware between the Xbox and the 360.

Xbox = Intel 733Mhz CPU with Nvidia card.
360 = IBM 3 Core PPC CPU with ATI card.

Very different hardware. It's not a option to run the Xbox games in hardware.

Sony on the other hand had a scaled down PS1 chipset on the PS2 board. So it can run most PS1 games in hardware.

Plus its not 'someones idea' to emulate Barbie Horse adventures over great games like Riddick or Prince of Persia. The MS engineers have aimed for the best and most wanted titles. If another game just so happens to work because of that it then goes on the list too.

Snoy Cracken

02-04-2006, 10:37 AM

Ya, except neither the SNES nor the N64 were backwards compatible with their ancestors. Are you saying that it would of been better to leave out the feature all together?
I am confused by this comment. how does what Nintendo did 5-10 years ago have anything to do with what microsoft is doing today?

Dabombpizza

02-04-2006, 10:45 AM

You know...there really isn't any Nintendo bashing in this article...just underestimating.

When I look at Nintendo Revolution's retro story, with all due respect to Nintendo, I think it's a small subset of the opportunity here.
The opportunity being the pay to download medium. While Marketplace is set to sell everything from indie games to live themes, he thinks Nintendo is only going to use it to sell old software. Of course...Nintendo hasn't announced anything about it's online plan, so it's a bit too soon to say it's a "small subset of opportunity." Although, I can't imagine what more Nintendo would offer that I would want to buy, and they're definetly not making contracts with indie developers, which just makes me giddy about the 360. Now when the price drops, and the fix the bw compat probs, I might just buy one. Oh, and when more than one game I like comes out.

Banacek

02-04-2006, 10:48 AM

Voice and friend's list have been around awhile. There's TEAmspeak and Ventrilo. Ventrilo was done by like one guy. There's instant messengers which all have voice. The technology is pretty straightforward now and won't be that hard to implement.

Have you ever used Live? Have you compared the easy of use between Live and what you have to go through on the PC? Live just makes it so easy to find my friends and play. I hope Sony and Nintendo can come out with something as good, since I'd LOVE to play games like Mario Kart, Strikers, and Party online. And on my TV, not on my DS :)

RMan

02-04-2006, 10:56 AM

But of course, Nintendo fans are already seeing red and this thread will be a disaster area before long.
Well, you have to admit the position he takes against Nintendo is just plain stupid. I have never seen a place where Nintendo has said all it's online service is supposed to do is old games, but that's how he's characterising it's entire purpose. The retro games are just a hook, and a good one, and I'm quite sure he knows this. I like the fact that anyone ever doing anything online now is doing it as a reaction to them, I guess since they released their system first they can claim to be the sole innovators. I didn't even read the Sony stuff, he lost me at the baseless Nintendo bashing crap, he's clearly a PR tool.

JazGalaxy

02-04-2006, 11:01 AM

thecrazyd

02-04-2006, 11:14 AM

I thought it was a good article and he made good points. I didn't find it that arrogant really.

Nintendo will do well with their offering. But it won't compete with Live. He's right about that.
So you have some inside information about this? If so, feel free to share it. Otherwise, how about you wait until you know what they are doing before you talk about what they are doing?

dotbomb

02-04-2006, 11:38 AM

So you have some inside information about this? If so, feel free to share it. Otherwise, how about you wait until you know what they are doing before you talk about what they are doing?

I have no inside info but I do have what is published. Source is http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=61604

He reaffirms that the Revolution will make use of Wi-Fi Connection, although it "has a lot of different requirements and capabilities."

These include the "virtual console", Merrick explains, which will allow you to download NES, SNES and N64 games and store them on your Revolution's 512MB of flash memory - which Merrick confirms is expandable. And, of course, you'll be able to play GameCube games straight off the disc - "You don't need an adaptor, the Revolution will digest either full size Revolution games or the smaller GameCube discs," Merrick says.

Hmm. That sounds a bit familiar - don't tell us Nintendo's going for the whole "multimedia hub" thing too...

"No. When I talk about music and movies, I mean you might download a trailer for a game, or in-game music. But our business is interactive entertainment - we're not looking to be the home multimedia broadband portal, they can fight over that." We think we know who "they" are, even though he's not saying.

So when I say they won't compete I mean that Nintendo has no interest in competing with MS and Sony when it comes to other media types other than games.

And here I thought this was all pretty clear.

I'm not saying Nintendo won't have success. No, far from that. I'm saying they won't compete. HUGE difference. Look again at the quote... he says it himself.

Live is much more than just games. Keep in mind MS is launching a camera soon too. Cheap video chat for families and friends...

Neverborne

02-04-2006, 11:56 AM

Comments like this display instantly the lack of understanding some people have about what is really required to make something backwards compatible. The Xbox 360's emulation is a pretty phenomenal achievement. It's not exponentially faster, but it works pretty damn good regardless. Developers now have the ability to be sure the 360 can run it. It's as much up to the developer as to Microsoft.

Everytime someone complains about Microsoft in the software industry, it typically is a result of all the work they HAVE to put into backwards compatibility. Legacy code and legacy hardware slow things down. Thank god they didn't take that attitude to the console.

So you're arguement is: because no one understands how difficult it is, it gets them off the hook.

MS has no excuse for how shitty their BC is. I mean, Barbie's Horse Adventure?

I don't understand how a microwave works, but, when I buy a new one, it better microwave, goddamnit!

Taco

02-04-2006, 11:58 AM

Anyone who mentions "Barbie" needs their nuts cut off. Getting old people. Never was a valid point.

Neverborne

02-04-2006, 12:00 PM

Anyone who mentions "Barbie" needs their nuts cut off. Getting old people. Never was a valid point.

May I present Exhibit A:

Someone who owns and enjoys playing Barbie's Horse Adventure on his X-Box 360.

Taco

02-04-2006, 12:03 PM

fushi

02-04-2006, 12:10 PM

Xbox 360's BC is like a lucid dream.

RMan

02-04-2006, 12:14 PM

I'm not saying Nintendo won't have success. No, far from that. I'm saying they won't compete. HUGE difference. Look again at the quote... he says it himself.
For future reference, when you say they won't compete, generally people think you mean in areas they're competing in, and it's an indication of their comparative quality. Like when I say Live won’t compete with Nintendo’s service, and leave it at that, it’ll cause confusion even though technically true if I was considering delivering old Nintendo console games as being crucial (but failing to mention that).

In my opinion, competing in media delivery (like movies, for instance) is something that Nintendo knows quite well it can’t compete in (Sony and MS have FAR more power in those fields). So, Nintendo is using that as an indication that MS and Sony’s focus aren’t completely on games, how much that effects their games is highly questionable, but I think Nintendo knows that this shortcoming will eventually hurt them (although I suspect not this generation). Nintendo’s currently using the best software they have available (like Sony using it’s movies to push the PSP) which is their old console games, and I’m quite confident if MS had that kind of resource available they’d use it too (or they’d be stupid), it’s just silly to me that MS is using that resource as some kind of attack against Nintendo (IMO, shows how worried they are about them, if that’s the best they’ve got).

dotbomb

02-04-2006, 12:27 PM

For future reference, when you say they won't compete, generally people think you mean in areas they're competing in, and it's an indication of their comparative quality. Like when I say Live won’t compete with Nintendo’s service, and leave it at that, it’ll cause confusion even though technically true if I was considering delivering old Nintendo console games as being crucial (but failing to mention that).

Fair enough and understood.

I see the world through a business owner's glasses.

For the record: I think Nintendo is brilliant. Not only do they have compelling games with great gameplay but they are smart for not competing directly with MS and Sony. It is a huge cash sink slugfest between MS and Sony that Nintendo (or any other company concerned with profitability) should avoid.

edit: And to add (possibly more fuel to the flames)... that article was full of typical company mumbo jumbo. He's basically touting all the barriers to entry his competition is facing. And he's right about them.

Achilles

02-04-2006, 12:29 PM

Well, you have to admit the position he takes against Nintendo is just plain stupid. I have never seen a place where Nintendo has said all it's online service is supposed to do is old games, but that's how he's characterising it's entire purpose. The retro games are just a hook, and a good one, and I'm quite sure he knows this. I like the fact that anyone ever doing anything online now is doing it as a reaction to them, I guess since they released their system first they can claim to be the sole innovators. I didn't even read the Sony stuff, he lost me at the baseless Nintendo bashing crap, he's clearly a PR tool.It wasn't baseless Nintendo bashing, he's going on the information they released and saying that XBLA is better because it offers both the retro and the new experience. Nintendo has never said that they're going to allow 3rd parties to release new games over their service, so why should he assume they would?

I've got no problem with anything he's saying here. It goes on what we already know. If the companies don't like what he's saying, or it doesn't fit with the reality maybe they should announce some features.

Mephistopheles

02-04-2006, 12:33 PM

Neverborne

02-04-2006, 01:16 PM

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

If you were somehow able to dodge the answer to the Barbie question the few hundred times its been answered over the last 3 months, at the very least you could of read it the two or three times its been posted in this thread.

Really, because obviously it isn't a good enough answer.

This all stems from MS making promises, and not living up to them.

When the original X-Box was released, it took about two years for them to live up to everything they promised for Live.

Now with the X-Box 360, they promised backwards compatibility, and what we get is half-assed emulation that doesn't work with everything. Oh, you can play some games, but not all of your favorites.

I'm sorry, but I'm calling Shannanigans on this bullshit. Everyone get your brooms.

ECM

02-04-2006, 02:16 PM

The best part is how he gets down on classic (Nintendo) games then says how great the Midway classics are. So which is it? Classic games suck or they don't suck? Or do they only suck when you can't have them on your platform?

IndependentGMR

02-04-2006, 02:19 PM

I enjoy Geometry Wars as much as the next guy, but I didn't drop $400 bucks to play a suped up version of Asteroids. I'd rather be playing Oblivion right now. The Xbox Live Arcade is cool, but it isn't anything that really knocks your socks off. Wik? Haha!

trip1eX

02-04-2006, 02:24 PM

Too many people give too much credit to Live. They polarize it to make it sound like Live is totally on one end and the PS2 is on the other end. The reality is the PS2 had more online players. GAmes on the PS2 had voice and friends lists. It's just that it wasn't universal. Of course you didn't have to pay for it either. Anyone that has played Socom2 on the PS2 knows that that game has the one of the best online interfaces this side of Halo 2. That's the reality.

The notion that somehow it's going to be terribly difficult for Sony to take the voice and friends lists from a game like Socom (btw they bought Zipper - the developer of that game) and support it across all games is nonsense and 360 employee promoting their company's product.

To end, LIve is nice, but it's nothing that can't be easily duplicated on the other consoles if that's what Sony or Nintendo want to do.

Mav

02-04-2006, 02:51 PM

Does it really matter at this point? The "next gen" console war is like watching retarded children fight. Not the fans, the actual developers themselves.

Microsoft had a piss poor launch of the 360. I'm sorry but when your hardware fucks up, you rushed it. When people are desperately trying to buy these things in America to the point they are sold out, I mean stores were getting shipments of like 10 consoles..for the entire store yet in Japan theres hundreds maybe thousands of them sitting on shelves. Love those scratching disks, which have been reported to happen with the console standing up OR laying down (and not being moved around like some claim).

PS3, well for one it's release is just pushing back farther and farther as they scramble to try to push something out the door. The controller looks like complete ASS, but on the bright side when you get frustrated at having spent half your 401k to buy the PS3 console you can throw the fucking controller and have it come back to you. The online thing they're going to do will probably end up sucking, I mean PS2's online as proven, bombed like hell.

And the Revolution, while I am a Nintendo fanboy, I still think this one is stupid in retrospect (no pun intended). So it can backwards compatible any first party Nintendo game from NES to Gamecube, nice. How much you want to bet you'll have to pay to download those. That's nice, I can go dig in my closet here pull out my box of NES cartridges that I already own and have paid for, yet the versions you'll be able to download and play must be paid for? Fuck that. It's gonna have to be real, real micro payments for that too work, like 99 cents a game. I mean after paying $75 for Street Fighter 2 on the SNES I am not going to go drop another $5 to buy it again on the Rev (which I will want, a large library of my favorite older games I can no longer play on old broken hardware). New controller has mixed reactions but I have a feeling it's going to be Power Glove bad..

Either way all big 3 are looking like ass at the moment, they all 3 have these big killer flaws and/or possible flaws that do not warrant dropped so much money on them at release. I've said it before and I'll say it again: anything truly worth playing, will have a PC port or originate on the PC itself.

MosBen

02-04-2006, 02:55 PM

Criticizing the level of support in their BC solution is all fine and good. Doesn't bother me particularly because I know how emulation works and I expect it to take them some time to fix some of the games I would like to play on the 360, but if it really bothers people then fine, complain that there aren't enough games available. I don't remember reading anything where they said for sure that every Xbox 1 game would be covered by BC, and really in the semi-recent history of BC you have mostly software, and not hardware, solutions (I can only think of the PS2 and the GBA/DS that fall into that category), but if, again, you were under the impression that BC meant *only* hardware BC then fine, it's upsetting.

Do not, however, use Barbie Horse Adventures to prove your point. It proves absolutely, positively, *nothing*. Why doesn't Splinter Cell work? Perfectly reasonable question and I've got an idea about why that is (Double Agent coming out soon, afterall). Barbie Horse Adventures has nothing to do with why Splinter Cell doesn't work; stop acting like it does.

JazGalaxy

02-04-2006, 03:02 PM

Really, because obviously it isn't a good enough answer.

This all stems from MS making promises, and not living up to them.

When the original X-Box was released, it took about two years for them to live up to everything they promised for Live.

Now with the X-Box 360, they promised backwards compatibility, and what we get is half-assed emulation that doesn't work with everything. Oh, you can play some games, but not all of your favorites.

I'm sorry, but I'm calling Shannanigans on this bullshit. Everyone get your brooms.

That's the dumbest post I've read in a while, sorry. How is this about "Microsoft making promises and not living up to them?"

You say it it took them two years to "live up to everything they promised with live". Putting that date on it means that in your opinion it DOES live up to it now, which changes your statement into "Microsoft didn't live up to their promises as quickly as I wanted them to" which is... what kind of argument? And what did Live promise that it DIDN'T live up to? It's just an online service, it's not a relationship.

As for the emulation and it's "half ass"iness, MS straight up SAID it wasn't important to them. They said the console wasn't going to be backward compatible. They said buy an xbox if you want xbox games. It wasn't up until a few months before the consoles launch that interviews started coming out that said this, and there was a backlash. Then the formal answer changed into, "we're investigating the need for backward compatibility". Then "we're investigating the feasablility of backward compatibillity" then "we are going to have limited backward compatibillity."

What part of that is promising something they did not live up to?

Kelegacy

02-04-2006, 03:06 PM

So you have some inside information about this? If so, feel free to share it. Otherwise, how about you wait until you know what they are doing before you talk about what they are doing?
Don't bother trying to reason with anyone here. It's futile.

Everyone berates Sony for not having an online plan, but when whispers suddenly pop up that they might be developing something, everyone laughs and calls bullshit monkey balls. Everyone cries doom and gloom for Nintendo and raves about how XBLA is the super hot be-all shit (hey, SOMETHING needs to keep 360 owners occupied until the next-gen starts finally releasing games for their system) but when Nintendo announces that a huge backlog of games will be ready for download, NO, it can't be better than XBLA. It just can't.

I don't know why I even visit these threads, honestly. I'm going to see the same people say the same tired shit. It's wearing thin.

C'mon thecrazyd, lets get out of here and go get a drink.

jacktion

02-04-2006, 03:11 PM

No one can talk bad about the Holy Prophet Nintendo! Death to all who dare mock Miyamoto! No one can have different views than me or else I will declare a jihad on your ass! And don't even think about making any cartoons making fun of what I tell you not to make fun of! You have to do what I say!

I'm sorry. I was just reading about that muslim comic thing and thought it was funny. It seems pretty ironic. A Danish dude makes a cartoon about muslims being violent. Then Muslims say that is a stereotype and insulting and they declare death to all Danes! They say the comic artist should have his hands chopped off! So you have to laugh at that.

This Nintendo thing is the same thing. Fanboys rallying to their cause. Except thank god Nintendo fanboys are more civilized. Think if N-boys called for everyone who played Xbox and PS2 to have their hands chopped off. hmmm... not a bad idea.

But just to get back on topic, the Nintendo library could kick ass. I hope Nintendo doesn't blow it. If they give access to every NES, SNES and N64 game then I think people will buy that stuff like crazy. I know I will. And this MS guy saying that their games don't hold up? What is he smoking?

RMan

02-04-2006, 03:17 PM

Nintendo has never said that they're going to allow 3rd parties to release new games over their service, so why should he assume they would?
Hehe, I could assume that the titles that have been released or announced on the 360 are the only titles they will ever release, but I'm not a total fool or looking for the most negative view of the company I can imagine. I suppose I could assume that they won't make another console system after the 360, but I'm going to assume a company is going to do the painfully obvious, no matter how much I prefer the competitor's product.

Sl1pstream

02-04-2006, 03:53 PM

Everyone berates Sony for not having an online plan, but when whispers suddenly pop up that they might be developing something, everyone laughs and calls bullshit monkey balls.

It's not that they won't have anything. It's just that this "service that goes beyond Live" seems pretty weird, as they were going to leave it all up to the developers a few months ago. Seems like they came up with this new and improved service quite fast, or at least that's how I see it.

Then again, this is coming from PSM. On the other side, why wouldn't they be working on a service like this. Especially when both MS and N will have an online service. Even if the market for something like this is quite small, it's growing and I don't think Sony will ignore that market this generation.

Kelegacy

02-04-2006, 04:08 PM

It's not that they won't have anything. It's just that this "service that goes beyond Live" seems pretty weird, as they were going to leave it all up to the developers a few months ago. Seems like they came up with this new and improved service quite fast, or at least that's how I see it.

Then again, this is coming from PSM. On the other side, why wouldn't they be working on a service like this. Especially when both MS and N will have an online service. Even if the market for something like this is quite small, it's growing and I don't think Sony will ignore that market this generation.
"Beyond" doesn't mean better. It means that it could offer something different, maybe something XBL doesn't. We know Sony likes to value-chain its commodities, so downloads of music, movies, etc should be a given (but you'd need a HDD!! WTF is up with this next-gen of "optional" HDDs when you know you'll need one anyway?). I'll bet cash money that the Sony service wont beat out XBL with this first incarnation--if ever--but it doesn't need to. To give something that rivals the XBL service would be nice, to make getting online and into games with friends much more streamlined than its current service would be just fine.

laggerific

02-04-2006, 04:51 PM

Nothing embaressing. He's spot on about Sony, and while his opinion of Nintendo is a little lower than your average internet person, he has a point that their big draw is games you already played (shit I bet a bunch of you still own them,) versus new games from the much revered "independent developer."

But of course, Nintendo fans are already seeing red and this thread will be a disaster area before long.

I think once again that Nintendo is going after a different audience...and I am sure there will be a ton of original material taking advantage of the controller...and I bet some of it will even be fun.

Opty

02-04-2006, 04:52 PM

Okay, let me explain the whole Barbie fiasco ONE MORE TIME so idiots who want to rip Microsoft a new one for no good reason can shut up. Also I'm going to simplify it as much as possible because apparently some people have 1st grade reading comprehension.

The Xbox uses an Intel Celeron CPU and an Nvidia GPU. The 360 uses a PowerPC CPU and an ATI GPU. Now, all four of these chips speak entirely different languages. The Intel chip speaks (more or less) the same language as the PowerPC but only backwards, so the 360 needs to translate between the two. This is the easy part: Apple has to do this since they're moving from PowerPC to Intel. The hard part is that since the Xbox was designed around one GPU unlike PCs, the code directly talks to the GPU. So, now the 360 has to interpret said GPU instructions and translate them from NVidia to ATI.

Now, go pick up a child's book. The words in that book represent Barbie Horse Adventures. Now pick up a thick novel by King, Clancy, or the like. Now, that represents a major release like Halo 2. Now, wouldn't one say that by finding the translations for every word in the novel would find all of the translations of the words in the children's book because the children's book uses a smaller vocabulary and has less words overall? That's why Barbie Horse Adventures works. Because all of the "words" it uses are used by bigger more important games. Whenever Microsoft got a new game to work they put every game in the Xbox's library through to see what else came out. Thus, they increased their list's size and thus its impressiveness.

Now, if you can't get this then you're a troll through and through. The next time anyone brings up Barbie Horse Adventures as Microsoft picking and choosing will be labeled as one as well. Shut up and learn what you're arguing about before spouting your mouth and looking like a moron.

Taco

02-04-2006, 04:55 PM

laggerific

02-04-2006, 05:02 PM

It's very simply Opty. Idiots think if MS couldn't make their games backwards compatible with the ATI GPU and PowerPC CPU, then they should have gone a route that may or may not cripple the power but would let them play their old games.

Backwards compatibitiy = The most overblown non-issue ever. Sorry guys, most people just don't care. People don't pay $300+ and think about how their old games will play. This is also why Nintendo is not going to make a ton of money off their classic games alone.

The emulation community is quite large, and I am sure people will be excited to play NES and SNES games on their modern systems without required all the setup and junk to connect a million consoles. I know I will, and I do have a bunch of cartridges in the cabinet next to me...I think it would be cool if Square released the japanese final fantasies in english...I think they did for a PS1 set at some point.

boratika

02-04-2006, 06:21 PM

And why was emulation chosen in the first place? Why not full backwards compatibility like the PS2? If it's because Microsoft didn't feel it was integral, then that leads back to the "don't do it if you can't do it decently" statement.

Microsoft don't own the intelecual property to the Xbox components since they're pretty much just off the shelf (eg Pentium III), so firstly they can't alter it in any way such as shrinking it down, that's up to the whoever owns the components, who gain no advantage from doing so, only costs. So they would have to include the orriginal Xbox hardware just as it was (huge), which would make the 360 gargantuan.

Secondly since they don't own the IP, the price is set by the manufacturer, so microsoft is still paying the same price for those Pentium IIIs that they were in 2001 (ouch!). So not only is the Xbox barely cheeper to make now than when they started, the price has come down soo they are taking more of loss selling Xboxs now than at launch. You will notice a lack of a continiuing partnership between Xbox and Intel (and a lasting one between Nintendo and IBM.) And if they did have the hardware in there, they would be taking 100% loss on the hardware since I'm sure they would make it no more expensive.

Also they couldn't make a hardware solution that wasn't the orriginal hardware as that would be breach of contract between MS and the component providers. By emulation they pay a (relatively) small to orriginal component providers and the 360 is only biggish instead of some zigarut (sp).

Well theres probably some inacuracies in the above, but I think it still covers the basics. They have good reasons really.

boratika

02-04-2006, 06:46 PM

Anyone who mentions "Barbie" needs their nuts cut off. Getting old people. Never was a valid point.
Maybe not a valid point, but it wasfunny for a bit. Well untill people started taking it seriously.

boratika

02-04-2006, 08:05 PM

I've said it before and I'll say it again: anything truly worth playing, will have a PC port or originate on the PC itself.

Zelda?....

Morratut

02-04-2006, 09:09 PM

Maybe not a valid point, but it wasfunny for a bit. Well untill people started taking it seriously.

LOL :D

We was all thinking you was serious. ;)

Nessus

02-05-2006, 01:41 AM

I think he's got it backwards. It's the old Nintendo games that hold up and it's the arcade games that really are assisted greatly by nostalgia.

When I first downloded MAME I was so surprised to discover that many of the games I played as a kid in the arcade simply weren't as good as I remember with almost no depth to them. Yes, that's a trait of the genre, but still.

The other potentially damaging issue with arcade games is the fact that any arcade game can be beaten if you have enough credits, even if you have marginal skills.

So do you let the player just give themselves however many credits they want, as Midway Arcade Treasures and MAME allow, or do you artificially limit the number of credits a player is allowed? Either way it's very difficult to ballance the difficulty of games designed for the arcades emulated on console.

But he is right that Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection won't compete with Live, it's not meant to. It's meant to be simple and free. And I think there is a market for that. Just as there's a market for a full-featured pay service with Live.

Achilles

02-05-2006, 01:52 AM

Hehe, I could assume that the titles that have been released or announced on the 360 are the only titles they will ever release, but I'm not a total fool or looking for the most negative view of the company I can imagine. I suppose I could assume that they won't make another console system after the 360, but I'm going to assume a company is going to do the painfully obvious, no matter how much I prefer the competitor's product.I do see what you’re saying here, but do you really think it’s painfully obvious that Nintendo will allow 3rd parties to make new games and distribute them through their download service?

Sl1pstream

02-05-2006, 07:41 AM

Point and Click Adventures could be fun on the Rev. They need Lucasarts :/

Taco

02-05-2006, 07:47 AM

Indigo Prophecy could work well with that remote wand thing.

Lutheran

02-05-2006, 07:59 AM

And this MS guy saying that their games don't hold up? What is he smoking?

Yes because we all know how much better Joust or any of the other arcade games are better then SM64 , or any of the Zeldas or any of 500 other excellent older titles. He should realize that there are a WHOLE generation of familys with kids who never played 99% of the old nintendo catalog who will love to own the system just for that purpose. Now if they price the games too high then my viewpoint will change a bit. It needs to be real cheap to download any SNES or NES or even N64 games. A few dollars a game at most for the good ones and even cheaper or free for some of the other ones that will be available.

Mav

02-05-2006, 08:57 AM

Zelda?....

Emulator. Not the best solution for a console-only title but at the same time I've never found any console game worth buying the console itself for it. I enjoyed the Zelda games, just like I enjoyed the Sonic games on the Genesis. But I didn't buy a Genesis to play those Sonic games.

Sometimes the console in question (any of the three) is just simply not worth it for those one or two top level titles. I'd love to play Dragon Quest VIII, but I'm not going to go drop money on a PS2 (even at it's current retail price OR used). If it was truly a game worth having, it'll be ported to the PC, be made for the PC, or someone will find a way to emulate it.

Nin10dude

02-05-2006, 09:08 AM

I see Nintendo's downloadable games as a way to play what I missed out on. I never got every single game I ever wanted, now I can play'em, without needing eBay, or searching every EB or GameStop in a 20 mile radius to spent $50 extra on gas.

Kelegacy

02-05-2006, 09:27 AM

If it was truly a game worth having, it'll be ported to the PC, be made for the PC, or someone will find a way to emulate it.
Man, that's a pretty shallow arguement. By not owning a console, you are missing out on a lot of great games, games that will never see PC light-of-day. I had to switch almost entirely to console gaming in 2005 because the PC had such a dirth of releases.

Plus, console to PC ports just plain suck.

Lutheran

02-05-2006, 09:37 AM

^^^ Agreed

Kamalot

02-05-2006, 09:38 AM

And Nintendo and their little "Connect" service is not what I'm talking about here, not at all... that is an example of what not to do with an online service.Right on! I mean a service that lets you easily play other people online for free, that's just dumb!

Oh, waitasecond...

Kamalot

02-05-2006, 09:43 AM

When is nothing better than something again?When it does not confuse, frustrate and fragment your customer base.

Kamalot

02-05-2006, 09:51 AM

One of the main problems I've had with nintendo games lately is how they are made for children. And I don't mean the quality of visuals or control, I just mean how they are ridiculously easy now. Almost to the point of being made for babies. My brother and I got everything there was to earn in Mario Kart Double Dash in two days. We had a blast with it, sure, but like 8 hours of gameplay? that's not worth 50 bucks. Hopefully online play will fix that.

I beat Prince of Persia - Sands of time in 7 hours 32 min. It is one of the best damn games I have ever played in my life. It has no multiplayer. It has no co-op. I have Double-Dash and still haven't unlocked everything. It is the game requested most at parties. All of my friends get play time on double dash.

Which game was worth more? The 8 hour game that you play through one or the 8 hour game that you can play forever and everyone has fun with?

To see if online play helps with Mario Kart, try out the Nintendo DS version that uses the Nintendo Wi-Fi connection. Try it. It takes the best aspects of every Mario Kart ever made and drops them into a single game with over 30 tracks, tons of unlockables, mission mode, wireless multiplayer and single-cartridge multiplayer. I don't know how you could ask for a better value.

Would you rather have games with 'filler' quests, CGI sequences you can't skip or a reduced number of save points to artifically space out the length of the game? Would you prefer Halo (1) where they copy/paste entire environments to 'extend' the length of the game and then halfway through tell you to turn around and go back through all the same areas?

I'd rather reach the end of a game wanting more, than reach the end of a game thinking it was dragged out and pointless.

RMan

02-05-2006, 11:06 AM

I do see what you’re saying here, but do you really think it’s painfully obvious that Nintendo will allow 3rd parties to make new games and distribute them through their download service?
Yes. It is just a software delivery mechanism, I'd be first in line to call them stupid if they didn't use it for other smaller games and add-ons that don't make sense in the retail market.

Sl1pstream

02-05-2006, 11:18 AM

Yes. It is just a software delivery mechanism, I'd be first in line to call them stupid if they didn't use it for other smaller games and add-ons that don't make sense in the retail market.

Like Pokémon Mini?

Right on! I mean a service that lets you easily play other people online for free, that's just dumb!

Oh, waitasecond...

Make sure you do have all of your friends' friend codes for each and every game and then you'll be able to play random friends on your list. If you're that lucky that they've changed their nickname, you might not even be able to see which friend you're playing.

Although it's a nice service, especially because it's free, you have to agree that it still has its problems.

Balthasar

02-05-2006, 12:50 PM

Kelegacy

02-05-2006, 01:45 PM

I'd like to see some kind of "Arcade" for the PC. You know, where old Dos games could be rereleased for a couple bucks and you'd actually be ABLE TO PLAY THEM on your version of Windows. DosBox is great, but it isn't streamlined. Allow me to play all of my old games once again and I'll be happy. It's much easier than buying a 486 and using it just for Dos games.

I think people underestimate the importance of Backwards Compatability.

Taco

02-05-2006, 02:13 PM

I'd kill to be able to play the last three Tex Murphy games in WinXP hassle free.

mister_slim

02-05-2006, 05:02 PM

Historical ignorance for the win? I can't imagine Canessa doesn't know about the various game download services Nintendo has experimented with in the past, but I don't know how else to explain his comments.

RMan

02-05-2006, 05:54 PM

Actually, it occurs to me that Nintendo likely has more to gain from their online service than MS or Sony. MS and to a lesser degree Sony know how important online services are, but I think Nintendo’s attempts to reach more casual gamers and have lower cost software actually makes online delivered software a much better fit for them (not to mention it’ll be a huge benefit for getting more experimentation with the controller). They also get the added benefit of generally smaller assets due to less focus on graphic fidelity, thus quicker downloads. Ehh, it’ll be interesting to see how it works out, the only thing I’m not sure about is their storage, without some kind of add-on memory that could be an annoying problem after buying a bunch of games (although slower memory does seem to be cheap enough these days).

Heretic Machine

02-05-2006, 06:32 PM

Right on! I mean a service that lets you easily play other people online for free, that's just dumb!

Oh, waitasecond...

No, you're right, an online service that is free and allows me to EASILY play with other people is a great idea. But that's not what connect is. It's free, and online, but it's the exact opposite of easy. You know what I should have to do to play online with any online game? I should click on the Online Play option, which will bring up a server browser. I should be able to click on the server, and connect to it. The end, that's all. I shouldn't have to deal with friend codes, I shouldn't have to worry about someone picking up my cart and playing it, thus nullifying all of my friends, I shouldn't have to spam message boards just to get into a game, and I shouldn't have to worry about being matched up with the wrong friends when I do want to play with someone I know. The Nintendo Connect service is nothing short of the worst online play system I've ever seen. It doesn't surprise me that Gamespy was involved, but I expected better, even out of them.

Kamalot

02-05-2006, 06:52 PM

You know what I should have to do to play online with any online game? I should click on the Online Play option, which will bring up a server browser. I should be able to click on the server, and connect to it. The end, that's all.
Nintendo Wi-Fi is even easier. You don't have to pick a server, you just choose to play online and it finds people for you to play against.

And for those of you complaining about friend codes and swapping them online, this isn't rocket science.

Friend codes are to share between friends. If you talk to your friend on the phone, swap codes with them over the phone. If you talk to your friend via email, use email. Use SMS, Skype, AIM, ICQ, MSN, Yahoo messenger? I don't see how difficult it is to swap a code with your friend. I mean, if they are your friends, you should probably be talking to them outside the game anyways, right?

Heretic Machine

02-05-2006, 07:52 PM

Nintendo Wi-Fi is even easier. You don't have to pick a server, you just choose to play online and it finds people for you to play against.

Unless you're playing Animal Crossing DS.

And for those of you complaining about friend codes and swapping them online, this isn't rocket science.

Friend codes are to share between friends. If you talk to your friend on the phone, swap codes with them over the phone. If you talk to your friend via email, use email. Use SMS, Skype, AIM, ICQ, MSN, Yahoo messenger? I don't see how difficult it is to swap a code with your friend. I mean, if they are your friends, you should probably be talking to them outside the game anyways, right?

What if I want to play Animal Crossing with someone who isn't my friend?

ElPresidente

02-05-2006, 08:15 PM

REDMOND, OCTOBER 2005

MOORE: And what of Sony? If Sony has obtained a complete technical readout of the Xbox Live service, it is possible, however unlikely, that they might find a weakness and exploit it.

BALLMER: The plans you refer to will soon be back in our hands.

CANESSA: Any attack made by Sony against Xbox Live would be a useless gesture, no matter what technical data they've obtained. This service is now the ultimate power in the universe. I suggest we use it!

BALLMER: Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. The ability to destroy a competitor is insignificant next to the power of the Ook.

CANESSA: Don't try to frighten us with your chimpanzee ways, Lord Ballmer. Your sad devotion to those ridiculous onstage antics has not helped you conjure up the stolen data tapes, or given you clairvoyance enough to find Sony's hidden fort...

Suddenly Canessa chokes and starts to turn blue under Ballmer's spell.

BALLMER: I find your lack of faith disturbing.

GATES: Enough of this! Ballmer, release him!

BALLMER: As you wish.

GATES: This bickering is pointless. Lord Ballmer will provide us with the location of the Sony fortress by the time the Xbox360 is operational. We will then crush Sony with one swift stroke.

BALLMER: Ook!

HOW ON EARTH HAS NO ONE RESONDED TO THIS POST?!?!?!

Well I hope you feel better Mephistopheles, I laughed. :D

I thought there were some very good points made in this article, nothing particularly 'trash talky'.

On the subject of Backwards compatability there has only been one major console release prior to the 360 that was backwards compatible and that was the PS2.

I fail to see why Backwards compatability is suddenly such a big issue for everyone. Of the big three in this playing field it is only Nintendo who have some ground to gain from backwards compatability and that is simply because their back catalogue is so large and it contains some of the best games of their respective eras.

Having said that I don't think it will end up being Nintendo's secret weapon. While there are a lot of gamers out there who want to go back and get all nostalgic I don't see many casual gamers being quite so enthused. People decide to buy a new generation console to play new games, not to play old games. Backwards compatability is a bonus, supportive feature but it does not make the sale.

Oh and final thing... wireless play on the DS is VERY easy assuming it works properly with your hardware. I'm still trying to get mine working on a damned DLINK for crying outloud. A wireless router that my PSP had no problems connecting with first time.

I love Nintendo for their games but damn I want to put my foot through their hardware most of the time.

Balthasar

02-06-2006, 06:20 AM

I fail to see why Backwards compatability is suddenly such a big issue for everyone. Of the big three in this playing field it is only Nintendo who have some ground to gain from backwards compatability and that is simply because their back catalogue is so large and it contains some of the best games of their respective eras.

Having said that I don't think it will end up being Nintendo's secret weapon. While there are a lot of gamers out there who want to go back and get all nostalgic I don't see many casual gamers being quite so enthused. People decide to buy a new generation console to play new games, not to play old games. Backwards compatability is a bonus, supportive feature but it does not make the sale.
You would be surprised by how many casual gamers would love to play older games. There is a significant portion of the gaming population that definitely do feel as though current gaming has lost something from what they remember in their youth. They see it as having gotten too complex, too involved. There is a whole subset of gamers that stopped playing games years ago that this console would target.

Heretic Machine

02-06-2006, 07:08 AM

Balthasar

02-06-2006, 07:10 AM

Ok, but what does that have to do with Microsoft? They've had ONE console before the 360, you aren't being "retro" by going back and playing Halo.
I don't know what that does have to do with Microsoft. I thought I was talking about Nintendo and responding to your downplaying of their service?

BenN1ce

02-06-2006, 08:43 AM

Sony won't even do a Live arcade. They don't care about that. They will be trying to sell music and movies instead.

Kamalot

02-06-2006, 09:22 AM

Sony won't even do a Live arcade. They don't care about that. They will be trying to sell music and movies instead.

Super DRM movies and music?

How long will it take you to download a HD movie? How much hard drive space will it take up? How much HD space will the PS3 come with?

Will they try to sell games or will it be like the PSP where games are an afterthought to movies?

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I want a system that will play games, first and foremost. The LAST thing I need is another DRM heavy way for me to buy trashy music and music that aren't even worth the price of a rental.

Balthasar

02-06-2006, 10:10 AM

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I want a system that will play games, first and foremost. The LAST thing I need is another DRM heavy way for me to buy trashy music and music that aren't even worth the price of a rental.
I sure hope you don't buy music from iTunes.

Kamalot

02-06-2006, 11:26 AM

I sure hope you don't buy music from iTunes.
Hell no!

http://www.AllofMP3.com

Taco

02-06-2006, 11:38 AM

Russian Mafia++

Balthasar

02-06-2006, 11:38 AM

Hell no!

http://www.AllofMP3.com
I'm surprised that site is still up. Don't know how it could possibly be legal.

Kamalot

02-06-2006, 12:07 PM

Russian Mafia++
Proof please?

And is Russian mafia worse than corporate mafia?

Kamalot

02-06-2006, 12:08 PM

The other place for music...

http://di.fm

Taco

02-06-2006, 12:12 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allofmp3.com

The mafia part is speculation. There is no way in hell it's legal, you might as well utilize various file sharing services, they are free and no less shady.

ElPresidente

02-06-2006, 12:23 PM

You would be surprised by how many casual gamers would love to play older games. There is a significant portion of the gaming population that definitely do feel as though current gaming has lost something from what they remember in their youth. They see it as having gotten too complex, too involved. There is a whole subset of gamers that stopped playing games years ago that this console would target.

I'm not saying it wont be an influencer but it wont be the soul reason behind a purchase unless you are a serious nostalgic gamer/Nintendo fanpersonage.

No matter how cheap the Revolution is at launch it will still be viewed as a next generation console (regardless of Nintendo's comments regarding the systems power) and while there is definate appeal in playing the older catalogue the system will need more than just that to shift units.

Balthasar

02-06-2006, 12:57 PM

I'm not saying it wont be an influencer but it wont be the soul reason behind a purchase unless you are a serious nostalgic gamer/Nintendo fanpersonage.

I was responding to this quote: "Having said that I don't think it will end up being Nintendo's secret weapon. While there are a lot of gamers out there who want to go back and get all nostalgic I don't see many casual gamers being quite so enthused."

No one spoke of the downloadable games being the end-all-be-all.

Kamalot

02-06-2006, 12:59 PM

No matter how cheap the Revolution is at launch it will still be viewed as a next generation console [sic] and while there is definate appeal in playing the older catalogue the system will need more than just that to shift units.
You know, I read recently that those little joysticks you plug directly into the TV that each have a few roms on them outsold consoles by a large margin last year. People obviously want these older games. Parents grew up on these games. They are devoid of the ultraviolent nature of many of today's offerings and focus on simple, addictive, fun gameplay.

I wouldn't underestimate the appeal of retro games. Microsoft understands, and that's why they sell some retro arcade games in Live Arcade. Nintendo understands since that's the foundation of them as a modern company. Sony, not so much. What can they let you play? Crash Bandicoot? Jumping Flash?

mister_slim

02-06-2006, 08:03 PM

You know, I forgot to mention PS2 Linux and Net Yaroze. Sony's done some interesting things online in the past.

Banacek

02-06-2006, 08:34 PM

Friend codes are to share between friends. If you talk to your friend on the phone, swap codes with them over the phone. If you talk to your friend via email, use email. Use SMS, Skype, AIM, ICQ, MSN, Yahoo messenger? I don't see how difficult it is to swap a code with your friend. I mean, if they are your friends, you should probably be talking to them outside the game anyways, right?

Look at it this way, it's not hard to change the channel with the buttons on the TV, so why bother makes remotes anymore? The point is, that way does work technically, but it's sure not the easiest or best way to do it. I know a lot of people who play BF2 online, and I have to laugh at how much they go through to play online and talk to each other. The fact that it's not built into the game blows my mind.

mister_slim

02-08-2006, 05:13 PM

I'd like to see some kind of "Arcade" for the PC. You know, where old Dos games could be rereleased for a couple bucks and you'd actually be ABLE TO PLAY THEM on your version of Windows. DosBox is great, but it isn't streamlined. Allow me to play all of my old games once again and I'll be happy. It's much easier than buying a 486 and using it just for Dos games.
You would be looking for Gametap (http://www.gametap.com/), perhaps? It's not truly comprehensive yet, but the list is not small (http://www.gametap.com/home/game_titles/index.jsp). (I hadn't even noticed it has Grandia II).