|
|
|
dissapointed with x360 games
|
|
|
iOwnNubs
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
8. April 2006 @ 18:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
Sounds like someone needs Call of Duty 2 and an HD tv.
|
|
Advertisement
|
  |
|
|
|
rabbity
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
10. April 2006 @ 05:55 |
Link to this message
|
i get my HDTV very soon, so excited.
|
|
Toinye
Newbie
|
10. April 2006 @ 08:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
It's a shame that every console generation, people complain about launch titles. You can't compare a launch lineup to current gen titles because all current gen systems are in their primes, for the most part.
This was stated in earlier posts, but everyone should be aware that every videogame console in HISTORY has had poor-to-subpar launch titles (ps2 being the king of whack launches). Everyone needs to have patience and give 360 some time to drop their tight upcoming exclusive titles (which were listed earlier).
As far as sales go, according to Microsoft, the 360 was the most successful launch in console history (of course we gamers don't feel that way due to lack of quality titles). But like I said, microsoft is only looking at sales, and sales for this launch exceeded that of any other console in the history of video games.
I hope that in future generations, companies give out final DEV kits earlier so that no developer is rushed to make their games, and I hope that companies realize the cycle of launching poor titles in the beginning is getting to the point where it just isn't acceptable anymore.
I feel that people will be fully content with 360 by 2007 though. I also think that PS3 will also have a very poor launch (they are showing all the signs ALREADY). But its all good though because we are gonna have a healthy console war for years to come, bringing about some amazing games.
|
|
jaypugh
Junior Member
|
10. April 2006 @ 09:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
Good post. I agree with most of what you said. There are two consoles that impressed me in their first year though and those are the Playstation and Dreamcast. The DC may have failed but they did so only due to Sony slinging money at every developer known to man to keep them from developing for the DC. Let's face it, the DC was an awesome system that never had a chance after launch but did launch and have some good games. The Playstation was awesome with Ridge Racer, Tekken and more. Maybe both of these consoles stand out to me because I simply didn't expect that much from them and I was surprised. The PS2 stands out as the worst I've ever had to endure as far as the first year of a console. I too think the PS3 will follow in the same manner as the PS2 and 360.
One last note, even as an Xbox/360 fan I have to say that I find it near impossible to believe that the 360 launch was most successful in history. How can you even call it a launch when you had key game stores with a total of 3 to 5 units? No way... They botched the launch but call it a success because they sold everything they had. The reality is that you are bound to sell everything if you only have a few. The 360 tops the PS2 in my mind when it comes to actually screwing up a launch when it comes to simply providing the console itself. Yes, I think they have better launch games than the PS2 but if no one has the system then the games don't matter.
|
|
rabbity
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
10. April 2006 @ 10:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
two very good posts.
|
|
bacon52
Suspended permanently
|
10. April 2006 @ 14:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
i dont have any problems with the 360 games
just a few arent good
|
|
Toinye
Newbie
|
11. April 2006 @ 18:10 |
Link to this message
|
|
jaypugh you make some good points. We all know 360's are just NOW starting to meet the demand (like since the end of march) and to be honest, I've never seen the comparison on paper as far as the success of this launch compared to other launches. I believe I read this in a press release, or was watching a video of an interview with the head of Xbox 360 laying out all the post-launch facts. That's all I was going off of though, so until I find where I read that stuff at, I cant really back it up.
But Yeah you're right, it doesn't make sense how if there was such a shortage of systems, how they outsold other console launches but maybe they were going off of sales as far as $$$ instead of actual units sold cuz 360 is so damned expensive compared to most other systems launching with $200 or $300 price tags.
|
|
rabbity
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
11. April 2006 @ 19:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
well they were not short for the first day, so maybe they meant the fastest selling console in the first week or two, b/c after that you could not see one for dust.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. April 2006 @ 19:42
|
|
jaypugh
Junior Member
|
12. April 2006 @ 04:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
@ rabbity
Just what do you mean they were not short on the first day? Surely you aren't saying that they had enough consoles for everyone in line. In all of the states in which I have friends from my clan we saw the same problem. My store for example would typically get maybe 50 to 100 units of a launch system. For the Xbox 360 they got like 3 premium systems and maybe 5 regular systems. They didn't even have a launch party. What's the point for 8 people?!!
@Toinye
Even at $100 more per system there is no way they could sell enough to match the Xbox or PS2 launch. There were far too many systems that sold out for the PS2 at launch. I don't doubt what you read. I just question how they came to their conclusion. After all, I've yet to hear a single company stand up and say, "Our console had an ok launch." or "We had a bad launch but it will get better." No matter how bad things get companies always say that crap smells like roses. It's part of business.
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
12. April 2006 @ 12:49 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Wow! Nex-gen games are really something!!! They even have sexual preference.[
ROTFL
>_<
|
|
rabbity
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
12. April 2006 @ 13:23 |
Link to this message
|
|
i think nintendo rev might have a pretty good launch, as it may suprise a lot of people for what it is and how much it is going for.
|
|
jaypugh
Junior Member
|
12. April 2006 @ 14:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
I have to disagree there. I honestly don't know what Nintendo is thinking. They release a weaker system for a lower price with less support. Umm.. haven't they tried this before and they called it the Gamecube?
The die hard truth about gamers is that graphics DO matter. So many say it's about the gameplay but graphics bring the gameplay to life. The closer we can get to reality the more immersed we will be in the game. The system that can do that will be attract gamers. It isn't always given that it will be the system that conquers the others (PS2 as prime example with its pretty weak graphics to be honest. I mean, the Xbox has been superior since day one and the Dreamcast would still give it a run if it had games).
I see Nintendo taking yet another great loss and finally becomming like Sega and developing for other systems. That's just my 2 cents. With online play I no longer need a lot of games. One game can give me TONS of extra gameplay. With this in mind, for the first time I will not own all 3 systems. I'll have the PS3 when it comes out and I'll be more than happy.
|
|
rabbity
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
12. April 2006 @ 15:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
well graphics mean alot to people, but like you said, its all about the games, but in this case thats not all nintendo are giving you, they said they will have all the old games, online play, and an awesome controlller. the way i see it is nintendo will come out, with this cheap console, it will have features the other two consles do not have and will hopefully have all the old games whch made nintendo so popular in the first place.
i also think that the guys who loved the old nintendo games and what ever else nintendo are putting forward (something from sega i heard) they will be really happy to pay a little to get that experience back again.
also you said the gamecube was basically crap, well not really it had better graphics then the ps2 and for me better games, just not enough of them.
|
|
Toinye
Newbie
|
12. April 2006 @ 20:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
TOINYE's two cents...(completely off topic from 360, and will prolly be locked cuz we are so off topic now)
We all know that Revolution will not, in any way shape or form, compete with the likes of PS3/360 as far as capturing the "Hardcore Gamer" market, so with that said, here we go...
With the obvious exception of Nintendo's first true failure with the Gamecube (Virtualboy doesn't even exist in my mind anymore so it isn't worth mention) I feel that the Revolution is going to absolutely WOW all of us haters out there who are used to, and comfortable with the conventional ways of playing games. As far as Nintendo is concerned, the Revolution is not even GEARED toward us true gamers, they are trying to capture the market of casual gamers that don't spend days at a time in front of games like we all do (or have done) at some point in our lives.
It seems their tactic for capturing the attention of true gamers is with the amount of nostalgia included. Imagine XBOX LIVE ARCADE but with the games you grew up with (NES, SNES, N64, and did we forget about Genesis and TG-16 that were just announced?).
But the Revolution itself is probably going to surprise the hell out of every doubter in the world, so I don't think it's safe to rule them out yet. Year after year after year Nintendo has managed to revolutionize the face of videogaming, and they are CONFIDENT that they will do it again with this new console. So at this point I'm neither here nor there with the Revolution, I'm being optimistic because I know that everyone steals Nintendo's great ideas but until E3 none of us will ever know what Revolution REALLY has in store for us.
I am a hardcore nostalgic gamer and I love anything old school, or paying tribute to the old school. I feel Nintendo will be able to survive soley upon it's first party shit because the majority of their first party games have managed to stand the test of time for almost 20 years. So like I said people, don't rule Rev out till we see what kinda heat nintendo is packing at E3 in MAY.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 12. April 2006 @ 20:17
|
|
rabbity
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
12. April 2006 @ 20:52 |
Link to this message
|
|
well said.
|
|
jaypugh
Junior Member
|
13. April 2006 @ 07:13 |
Link to this message
|
Ok, I see some valid points here but I also see more holes in this strategy than Swiss cheese. If you guys will remember back to the GC and could find old headlines from Nintendo you would see the same claims for their GC. I remember the big buzz about the N controller and how they were looking to capture a different gamer market. This time they are saying the same thing, only louder.
1. The N64 wasn't exactly a huge success. It was actually the beginning of the downfall for the Gamecube because N kept in their ways of controlling the media (cartridges and then their proprietary mini discs for GC). The backlash really started at the N64 with the extremely high cost of the cartridges alone but N was making money so they were happy. This alienated the developers and furthered the success of the Playstation.
2. @ Rabbity - ".. its all about the games, but in this case that?s not all Nintendo are giving you, they said they will have all the old games, online play, and an awesome controller."
First, as I've already said, we have heard this line from Nintendo about being different with the GC. Look it up. Next, a controller that is odd and creative rarely attracts gamers who spend tons of money on games. If it increases the playability then yes, it will have people buzzing but I've rarely heard someone say, "I'm buying ____ because I like the controller." Lastly, the old games is a gimmick. Yes a few people will be happy to play the old games but the problem is that that isn't a reason to buy a system. You can get old game packs on the PS2 and get old games on the 360. People aren't dying to drop a few hundred bucks to play old games. It's that simple. As a bonus, kewl but as an incentive to buy the console it isn't a very strong point for most gamers.
3. You say that the GC had better graphics than the PS2. I would like to give a resounding, YES but I can't. The truth is that this is a highly debatable issue. I can't count the number of games that looked a bit better but had bad frame rate issues on the GC. It seemed like when they turned on the advanced graphics features, which made the games look SLIGHTLY better than PS2 versions, the games started grinding to a halt and had frame rate issues.
4. Keep in mind one other thing rabbity. Many of the negative reviews I read about GC games had comments that the games were simply more difficult to play on the GC due to the controller that was supposedly a selling point for the system. Expect the same with the Revolution.
@ Toinye. I commented on most of your points above but there are some left.
1. As I've stated, Nintendo's slogan of being different is not new. It has been used before and yes, the Virtual Gameboy was one of those times. Also, as I've already said, the N64 was the beginning of Nintendo's downfall and not the GC.
2. I owned the N64 and the GC. I played some great games but once other systems started pumping out games the N systems were not just secondary but 3rd in line except a rare title here and there. Most gamers aren't going to buy a system for a rare game or two and Nintendo has lost a lot of steam over the last two systems. Also, do we honestly think the Revolution will sell that well in times like Christmas when the big buzz is about the 360 and PS3? It isn't likely that mom or dad will be picking up a Revolution when their kids are frantic about the other two systems that all of their friends own.
3. You say they are trying to capture the market of casual gamers. This is a recipe for destruction. The casual gamer buying a game or two here and there don't sustain a system's life span. It's NUMBERS and DOLLARS that count. Let's face it, to act as if the gamer who will buy 10 or so games in a year isn't needed isn't bold, it's foolish.
To finish this up, I haven't counted N totally out but their chances are slim at best. I predict a huge failure with their remaining die hard fan base and not much else unless they show the world something they can't live without. I hope they show us that and I hope you are right about the Revolution blowing us away. I have no loyalty to one system over another. I just want to play the best games. As far as Nintendo surviving solely on first party software, it isn't likely. Nintendo is good but they used to have RARE on board as well as other key developers that developed Nintendo friendly games (Banjo Kazooie for instance). No real support equals almost no sports titles (who will want the Rev version if the PS3 and 360 versions blow it away?), poor fps games (who is left to do a great fps on the Rev?), and so on. The support being weak is being glossed over by Nintendo and of course they are going to say they have faith that their system will survive and be awesome. Have you ever seen a company say, "Oh, our system won't be that great but buy it anyway."? Just a thought.
|
|
rabbity
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
13. April 2006 @ 08:17 |
Link to this message
|
|
you say that people would not just buy a console on the fact that you coudl play older games, as xbox 360 and ps3 both can do this, but thats the thing, the xbox really did not have that many good games, and the ps1 were good games (but in my eyes not classics) and the ps2 was just crap apart from the recent games, which are not really classed as old. but on the other hand nintendo has an abundance of awesome old games which i believe if implemented right could bring the old guys back and for the price its going to go for whcih should be very cheap it will not be something they will not have to work overtime for.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. April 2006 @ 08:20
|
|
jaypugh
Junior Member
|
13. April 2006 @ 09:34 |
Link to this message
|
|
I guess this is my problem with the whole idea. Go to an electronics store and you will likely see TONS of Games listed as "100 Classic Games", "Games you loved", "The Greats", etc. Heck, you can even buy a joystick that comes with tons of classic titles loaded on it for like $20. That's nice and all but those have never pushed the selling of new PC hardware just like I don't think classic games with old style graphics will draw in many people for the Revolution. Even the die hard Nintendo fans I know aren't hyped about it. Most of them that I know just want their Metroid, Mario and Zelda. Of course they would like more but they typically would think about buying the system just for those games. While thinking about that I have to ask if the Revolution is going to be backwards compatible with the GC. I haven't looked at it enough to know. I think this would attract more gamers than "101 Nintendo Classics."
If we look at the situation even further then we find the PSP which has TONS and TONS of old games you can download to a mem card and play on it. A guy I know at BlockBuster had several hundred and his card wasn't near full.
Anyway, back to my point. I just don't see people forking over cash to play old games. Maybe a few but it will be a minority. In the end I hope the Revolution does well. It can only help the gaming industry to have a competitor forcing others to think outside the box. Will it put a dent in the gaming community? I highly doubt it.
|
|
rabbity
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
13. April 2006 @ 10:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
umm i have to disagree, once again, well i do know where you are coming from but firstly we do not know exactly what nintendo are offering the price set and what other special features they have up their sleaves, i think after e3 we will know a lot more, also have you ever played super smash bros melee, b/c anyone who has will surley not turn down an opertunety to play super smash bros online with new features and better graphics. also i think if it sells for around 200 dollars, and with the ps3 most likely to be sold out and costing more than double that price people might opt for a quick option till they can get their hands on a ps3.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. April 2006 @ 10:24
|
|
jaypugh
Junior Member
|
13. April 2006 @ 11:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
Sure some people will like it for the party games. I have played SSBMelee. It was fun but turned into a button masher in no time for me and most of my friends. I know that a lot of people liked it. It's not my thing really but I would give it a rent. I would much prefer a new Metroid game.
We can agree to disagree on a few things. We just don't see eye to eye. One thing I do agree is that POSSIBLY some will turn to the Revolution as a cheap alternative to the PS3 if the PS3 is sold out.
|
|
rabbity
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
13. April 2006 @ 12:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
ahh i see what you mean, by the button mashing, i used to do that aswell with that game, but one of my friends from america just joined my class at the time i invited him round my house and he owed all of us at it, we could not get close to him, he kept countering and used moves you did not think the player had, i supose that made me stop button mashing.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. April 2006 @ 12:24
|
|
Toinye
Newbie
|
13. April 2006 @ 16:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
**Cracks knuckles, clears throat**
Ok I guess I will start my responses in reverse order. First off, anyone who thinks SSBMelee is a button masher obviously does not know how to play it. You can't win in smash bros by button mashing...this game aint no combo-fest like Capcom's VS series...you button mash against a counter(er) and your ass is done. Smash Bros is a game about TIMING smash attacks, bottom line. There's nothing mashable about the game. I would like to play JAYPUGH in SSB Online when it comes out and you tell me whether or not I'm mashing, lol (I'm a self proclaimed pro at smash bros).
Anyway, Jaypugh you obviously have the wrong idea about Revolution and Nintendo's entire plan. First off, they made it CLEAR that they have no intention of going up against PS3 and 360. In fact they've said it over and over and over again to beat it into peoples heads. They are not in the console war, they are simply offering people an alternative. Pugh, your observations, and assumptions are not backed by much. We all know that 3rd party games that were on Nintendo, as well as Microsoft's and Sony's systems always sucked the worse on Nintendo's console (I'm talking post-SNES, of course). Jaypugh none of your points that you made were unbiased, you just basically rambled about an upcoming console that you haven't really even read into. You didn't even know that Revolution is backwards compatible with the Gamecube (if you look closely at the console, there's a slide-out slot below the normal DVD slot which houses GC titles, and the 4 controller slots are on the top, or side of the console depending on it you lay it flat or stand it upright.)
Jaypugh you are speaking from the mind of a gamer. If I were seeing this situation from the mind of the true gamer that I am, I would most likely agree with your points, but I understand Nintendo's true goal this time around. Like I said, they have no interest in capturing OUR attention, because we will be submerged in PS3 and X360 in all their glory for years to come. Nintendo is simply offering an alternative to gamers if they want to experience a new way of gaming, but more importantly, they are reaching out to the NON-GAMER audience that enjoys quick fun simple yet highly addictive gameplay. Good examples of the addictive type gameplay Revolution is going for, are Mario's minigames in Super Mario 64 DS. Another good example is the GOOD games that are offered through the Xbox LIVE Arcade. Like I said, they aren't going up against PS3 or 360, they don't even have plans of trying to put a dent in their sales. Their goal is to run WITH them, not against them. While 360 and PS3 are constantly at each others throats trying to monopolize the entire industry, Nintendo is going to enjoy comfortable success entertaining families around the world with their new innovate gameplay.
Lets face it, videogaming has PLATEU'D. We are overdue for something to attempt to change the face of how we have been used to playing games for the past 20 years. Nintendo is in a league of its own this time around, and if they WANTED to try to compete with the next-gen giants, they would have simply released another conventional console that everyone is used to (which TRULY would have been their demise).
As far as the Pre-Gamcube games that are offered, it will be very successful regardless of how you feel. Sure those old games wont have LASTING value, but people are still going to buy them. I believe Nintendo is paying attention to the Xbox Live Arcade and how they have marketed their library of games and I'm sure they will offer a lotta games as demos instead of forcing people to buy them. And even if they DO buy them, I'm sure they'll also take note of Live Arcades pricing plan (nothing is above 10-15 bucks). Trust me Nintendo is smart when it comes to their OWN shit.
As far as having a powerhouse third party behind them, you're right, they lost RAREWARE to Microsoft so they definitely lost a giant. With the exception of Mario and Zelda, Rare's games were the best games on N64 (Banjo, Conker, Diddy Kong Racing, Perfect Dark, Golden eye, etc). But Gamecube survived with its FIRST party support. Who cares about third party shit anymore? Nintendo is still alive because of their seemingly endless amount of mascots for their systems. If Zelda ran the N64, then Metroid UNDOUBTEDLY ran the gamecube.
In conclusion, we all know that the Revolution will either MAKE, or break nintendo as a company, as a whole. This is truly their absolute LAST chance, and if they have to rely on first party support for 80% of their success, then so be it? What other console has a mascot, or like a dozen, for that matter? ZERO. People flock to new Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong, Kirby, or Metroid sequels. If Nintendo became strictly a software developer, then their mascots would die with them. Because honestly they would not be popular or successful being ported to other consoles (Sonic, anyone?)
But like I said before, E3 will answer all of our questions, concerns, and doubts in a month. So from here on out, lets all just sit tight. In the meantime, I'm bout to go whup somebody's ass in some FIGHT NIGHT 360 on xbox live! lol
|
|
rabbity
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
13. April 2006 @ 17:18 |
Link to this message
|
|
well said, also if revelution does come out with super smash bros melee online then personally i can not see them going out of the race, i mean look at halo 2 on xbox live, its fantastic, and it did wonders for xbox, i think if they use the power of the revelution whcih is obviously better than gamecube and then take games like mario cart and ssbm and make sequals, with online play then nintendo revs will sell like hot cakes, expecially if the price is right.
|
|
Toinye
Newbie
|
13. April 2006 @ 17:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
Nintendo already confirmed the price to be below $200
compared to 360's $400, and ps3s $500-$900 price tags...I would think that the holiday season for 2006 mite belong to Nintendo. Moms and Dads of these little whining kids are gonna naturally flock toward the cheapest console. Only us GAMERS are gonna shell out real cash for the other next gen consoles. And thats pretty much what it boils down to right there, stupid parents that dont know any better so they buy the cheaper system, and us gamers. Like I said, Nintendo knows what they're doing...
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
rabbity
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
13. April 2006 @ 19:10 |
Link to this message
|
|
yeah 200 is great for me, i am not sure how much it will be here in uk but i am sure it will be nothing more than a couple of weeks pay for me.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 13. April 2006 @ 19:11
|
|
