Chrono Compendium
Zenan Plains - Site Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: SSJoseph on August 09, 2005, 06:10:24 pm
-
[Deleted]
-
I agree on #5, #4, #2 is inaccurate, and agree with #1 more than you can possible imagine.
For #3, I loved Mario Sunshine. Did you play it? The game was great! It wasn't as major as Mario 64, but it was still a very good game. And it didn't hurt.
As for #2, the GameCube was released the same month as the XBox, a year after the PS2. I don't think that year hurt the XBox, rather, it was the games that hurt it. Also, being the first doesn't mean the best. Didn't the Sega Genesis and TurboGraphics 16 come out before the SNES, the greatest console ever?
-
#5 should be tied with #1 in my opinion. I originally bought a GameCube for one reason: Metroid Prime. Later, I realized that Metroid Prime was the ONLY reason I had bought my GameCube.
-
OK, Well I been doing some research on Nintendo.
And I found out alot of things that bothered me.
I gathered up some huge mistakes that nintendo made in the past.
And for you guys, I will list my TOP 5 Favorite mistakes of Nintendo...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Staying Young.
This is #5 on the list, and if you look through the ages...nintendo never grew up.
As we all can see, Sony and Sega grew with the ages (IE. Sega: Soul Calibur...Sony: Many games)
But nintendo just kept releasing games for E-T and maybe 10 M games (none of which developed by them)
Which is why we complain now about the gamecube.
We all used to love the older games, but we grew.
Nintendo Didn't
4. Ow...Red headache in 3D
Game Boy creator Gunpei Yokoi had an idea one day, and he called it the Virtual Boy.
Now even though you play in actual 3D...it was butt ugly and hard to use.
Not to mention the red colors...uhg.
Sure its very innovative at the time but still after 30 minutes or so it gives you the worlds biggest headache ever.
Did I mention the super slower-then-doom 20MHz processor?
and the 1MB of ram also?
3. Mario and his hose...
OK, Super Mario sunshine?
Who dosn't agree with me that it was a huge mistake.
Did nintendo just say "Lets give him a hose, and have the princess go on vacation with him....and somehow Bowser is there, it will be a hit"
WRONG!
2. 2 Years after PS2
This may have been the reason why no one truley plays a Gamecube other then hardcore gamers, and children.
They launched there system almost 2 years after the PS2 released theres.
Huge mistake nintendo
1. Next time someone tells you CD's are the future, tell them to shut up.
You know...sony used to be affiliated with nintendo.
In fact, they were develeoping a supercharged add-on to the 16-bit Super NES.
Nintendo said in a public announcment the following statement "Next time someone tells you that Compact Disk are the future, tell them to stop talking."
Sony realized that nothing was stopping them from releasing PlayStation independently....and well you know what h[appened with that now dont we.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5) You're following a stereotype here. The PS2 and the Xbox have close to the same percentage of E and T-rated games as the GCN does. I might also remind you that multiple Resident Evil games as well as Eternal Darkness, quite possibly the greatest survival horror game of our age, are GameCube exclusives. Eternal Darkness was developed by Silicon Knights in conjuction with Nintendo; the big N was not merely the publisher.
4) I'll concede this one.
3) The sales figures for Super Mario Sunshine beg to differ with you.
2) The GCN's still made a decent showing for itself in spite of every difficulty you claim, at times taking number one in the console wars.
1) Everyone who's anyone in gaming is well aware of this. Going by the technology of the time, Nintendo was right. Compared to cartridges, which had no load times and faster response, CDs were sluggish. In addition, they were fragile, whereas Nintendo's products are practically indestructible. Only with the advent of DVD technology did optical media attain true quality.
For every criticism you can level against Nintendo, I can level a much weightier one against Sony or Microsoft. However, I hate Sony more, so I'll go with them.
-------------------------------------------
5) Sony's choice of gaming has ruined diversity and creativity in the gaming market. One needs only to look at the vast supply of GTA knock-offs and EA Sports titles to understand why. That doesn't even mention the tasteless atrocity known as the SpikeTV Video Game Awards, which has Sony's flaccid penis in its collective throat.
4) The Sony PSP is getting the shit kicked out of it by Nintendo's portable market dominance.
3) Final Fantasy VIII, X-2, and arguably IX. That's something of a diss against Square-Enix as well, but it remains a fact that for the most part, they're still entrenched with Sony. This trend will only be reversed when the next-gen FF game appears on all three consoles.
2) The PS2 is one of the least durable pieces of equipment out there. I might also remind you that in general, PlayStation games are shit.
1) Why, oh why does the PS2 not have 4 controller ports?
-
Hadriel, dispite those marks agianst Sony, they are appearently doing SOMETHING right to gain dominance. Being the first to move to CDs made Square jump ship, and IMO, it was Square that destroyed the N64, not Sony.
I wouldn't say that Sony's choice of games ruined diversity and creativity. With the PSX having a cheaper medium than cartridges, allowed more devolpers to make games for them, so more knock-offs and copies. Sony themselves have made some innovative games, such as The Mark of Kri, which IMO is a very good game.
But lets hope there is something about the Revolution to claim Nintendo's title back. I think they made a bad decision by making the hardware not up to spec with the other 2...
-
I think Nintendo's main thing is that they're too stuck up to listen to anyone but the few main people at the top of their ladder. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Nintendo fanboy. But they could take some hints. Mainly, put some freaking high-def support in the Revolution!
-
i don't hate nintendo at all, but one thing that they should do in my opinion is... KILL MARIO :twisted: and make Link or Samus the mascot
-
Samus for the kill! An asskicking female mascot would rock way harder than a mustached, plumber guy O_o
5. Staying Young.
Anyways...I don't think that they should have followed Sony & Microsoft in trying to make "older" games because, well, that market is obviously already tapped with both of those respective companies. Nintendo OWNS the youth and party game market. And even with Sony's (much better) PSP system out, they still have a firm grasp on the handheld market as well (not to mention ALWAYS HAVE).
4. Ow...Red headache in 3D
Virtual Boy was a mistake, and they realized it pretty quick...I mean, how long was it even on the market? I only remember it out for a few months or so...They were just experimenting w/new technology. I never blame companies for trying new things, no matter how rediculous.
3. Mario and his hose...
I don't really know about Mario Sunshine. I heard it was fun and that's basically all I ever want out of Mario. I mean, can you truly make him any more rediculous? Nope. You could dress him up like a clown for all I care...Mario will always be Mario no matter what they give him as a new weapon or w/e whakky situations they put him in.
2. 2 Years after PS2
Late releases can often be good things. I think it worked out for Gamecube since they became the less expensive of the "Big Three". Late releases also means finer tuned systems (which is why PS3 will still win when it comes out after XBOX 360 :P). And since Nintendo does so many of it's own games, it doesn't really have to worry much about developers jumping on other systems prematurely.
1. Next time someone tells you CD's are the future, tell them to shut up.
Nintendo kept up w/CDs as long as they could. They truely advanced upon cart technology (hello handhelds!) and made remarkable advances. But w/the advent usage of blue lasers now, they're now forced to make that jump.
I think something missing from the list would be the feud w/Squaresoft that Nintendo had. This made Nintendo severely lacking in the RPG market for years. When Squaresoft went to Sony I knew that Nintendo's reign had come to an end...the crown passed to a new generation.
But honestly, I think we'll all do to remember that Nintendo is not Sony nor is Nintendo Microsoft and it's especially not that blundering Sega. Nintendo is Nintendo.
-
I think Nintendo's main thing is that they're too stuck up to listen to anyone but the few main people at the top of their ladder. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Nintendo fanboy. But they could take some hints. Mainly, put some freaking high-def support in the Revolution!
Why should Nintendo spend money to include a feature that less than 10% of people are going to be able to use throughout the life of the system? Are Nintendo and Microsoft foolhardy for using 9gig dual-layer DVDs while Sony is going for 30gig Blu-rays? No, of course not. Sony will be paying a heavy premium for those drives (and disks...well, actually, You the Consumer will), and it'll seriously ramp up the cost of buisneuss.
Now if the system AFTER the Revolution doesn't have high def, that'd probably be a fool move, but that'll all depend on what percentage households have high def (and how high? There are several high def resolutions) t.v.s.
-
I think Nintendo's main thing is that they're too stuck up to listen to anyone but the few main people at the top of their ladder. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Nintendo fanboy. But they could take some hints. Mainly, put some freaking high-def support in the Revolution!
Why should Nintendo spend money to include a feature that less than 10% of people are going to be able to use throughout the life of the system? Are Nintendo and Microsoft foolhardy for using 9gig dual-layer DVDs while Sony is going for 30gig Blu-rays? No, of course not. Sony will be paying a heavy premium for those drives (and disks...well, actually, You the Consumer will), and it'll seriously ramp up the cost of buisneuss.
Now if the system AFTER the Revolution doesn't have high def, that'd probably be a fool move, but that'll all depend on what percentage households have high def (and how high? There are several high def resolutions) t.v.s.
Here's the thing. I would agree with you, generally. But Nintendo has been wrong how many times speaking about the features their next-gen consoles aren't going to have?
I think the option should at least be INCLUDED. You can always NOT have the game run in high-def. Plus, its gonna kill a lot of business for Nintendo in the 3rd party market. For example, let's take the Madden series. Now, EA is most likely gonna put this in high-definition. The games are going to be the exact same price across the consoles, regardless. Now, why would anyone in their right mind buy it for Revolution, when they can get it for the same price WITH high-def for ps3 or 360? Pretty much no one will. So is EA going to waste their time re-writing the code for a system that the game will bomb on? Nope.
Basically, Revolution is going to be good for exclusives, but that's it. (whether they be from Nintendo, or 3rd party exclusives).
-
I think Nintendo's main thing is that they're too stuck up to listen to anyone but the few main people at the top of their ladder. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Nintendo fanboy. But they could take some hints. Mainly, put some freaking high-def support in the Revolution!
Why should Nintendo spend money to include a feature that less than 10% of people are going to be able to use throughout the life of the system? Are Nintendo and Microsoft foolhardy for using 9gig dual-layer DVDs while Sony is going for 30gig Blu-rays? No, of course not. Sony will be paying a heavy premium for those drives (and disks...well, actually, You the Consumer will), and it'll seriously ramp up the cost of buisneuss.
Now if the system AFTER the Revolution doesn't have high def, that'd probably be a fool move, but that'll all depend on what percentage households have high def (and how high? There are several high def resolutions) t.v.s.
Here's the thing. I would agree with you, generally. But Nintendo has been wrong how many times speaking about the features their next-gen consoles aren't going to have?
I think the option should at least be INCLUDED. You can always NOT have the game run in high-def. Plus, its gonna kill a lot of business for Nintendo in the 3rd party market. For example, let's take the Madden series. Now, EA is most likely gonna put this in high-definition. The games are going to be the exact same price across the consoles, regardless. Now, why would anyone in their right mind buy it for Revolution, when they can get it for the same price WITH high-def for ps3 or 360? Pretty much no one will. So is EA going to waste their time re-writing the code for a system that the game will bomb on? Nope.
Basically, Revolution is going to be good for exclusives, but that's it. (whether they be from Nintendo, or 3rd party exclusives).
Even if the option is simply included, and not made standard, it still ramps up the cost of the console.
-
I think Nintendo's main thing is that they're too stuck up to listen to anyone but the few main people at the top of their ladder. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Nintendo fanboy. But they could take some hints. Mainly, put some freaking high-def support in the Revolution!
Why should Nintendo spend money to include a feature that less than 10% of people are going to be able to use throughout the life of the system? Are Nintendo and Microsoft foolhardy for using 9gig dual-layer DVDs while Sony is going for 30gig Blu-rays? No, of course not. Sony will be paying a heavy premium for those drives (and disks...well, actually, You the Consumer will), and it'll seriously ramp up the cost of buisneuss.
Now if the system AFTER the Revolution doesn't have high def, that'd probably be a fool move, but that'll all depend on what percentage households have high def (and how high? There are several high def resolutions) t.v.s.
Here's the thing. I would agree with you, generally. But Nintendo has been wrong how many times speaking about the features their next-gen consoles aren't going to have?
I think the option should at least be INCLUDED. You can always NOT have the game run in high-def. Plus, its gonna kill a lot of business for Nintendo in the 3rd party market. For example, let's take the Madden series. Now, EA is most likely gonna put this in high-definition. The games are going to be the exact same price across the consoles, regardless. Now, why would anyone in their right mind buy it for Revolution, when they can get it for the same price WITH high-def for ps3 or 360? Pretty much no one will. So is EA going to waste their time re-writing the code for a system that the game will bomb on? Nope.
Basically, Revolution is going to be good for exclusives, but that's it. (whether they be from Nintendo, or 3rd party exclusives).
The fundamental flaw in your argument is your assumption that most people will have high definition tvs. This is simply not true. Yes, many games on the PS3, and all games on the Xbox360 will support higher resolutions than the 480p that the Revolution will support. Speaking of which, Microsoft is requiring all games from the Xbox360 to support 720 (I forget if it's 720i or 720p) resolution. Sounds pretty nice, right? Wrong. The Revolution and the 360 both have the same size disks, so that means less room for content on the 360. Sure, it's nice if you have a tv that can support it, but for most people, they're going to be losing out because the disk will be filled with images they can't use. Some benefit that is.
-
I think something missing from the list would be the feud w/Squaresoft that Nintendo had. This made Nintendo severely lacking in the RPG market for years. When Squaresoft went to Sony I knew that Nintendo's reign had come to an end...the crown passed to a new generation.
AGREED! Got to post it before me though.... :cry:
-
The fundamental flaw in your argument is your assumption that most people will have high definition tvs. This is simply not true. Yes, many games on the PS3, and all games on the Xbox360 will support higher resolutions than the 480p that the Revolution will support. Speaking of which, Microsoft is requiring all games from the Xbox360 to support 720 (I forget if it's 720i or 720p) resolution. Sounds pretty nice, right? Wrong. The Revolution and the 360 both have the same size disks, so that means less room for content on the 360. Sure, it's nice if you have a tv that can support it, but for most people, they're going to be losing out because the disk will be filled with images they can't use. Some benefit that is.
I agree with some of your statements. The flaws in high-def are that the framerate can often drop below an acceptable level. I'm actually shocked XBOX360 is REQUIRING that, thats stupid. I still think it should be an OPTION. Some companies want that, some don't. If they want it, then they have it. If not, no problemo.
I'd really like to see how much a high-def output would cost per unit for Revoultion. Keep in mind, Revolution probably won't be coming out till late 2006, so it will drop a little bit from its current price. I personally would be willing to pay an extra $50 (assuming the Revolution's going to be $200, making it $250) for High-def, as I would be able to use it. The way I see it, I have about 35 GC games, a good deal of which were bought for $50 anyway.
Although, I do understand that that extra $50 might drive a large casual audience away, which is exactly what Nintendo is trying to get a hold of.
-
The fundamental flaw in your argument is your assumption that most people will have high definition tvs. This is simply not true. Yes, many games on the PS3, and all games on the Xbox360 will support higher resolutions than the 480p that the Revolution will support. Speaking of which, Microsoft is requiring all games from the Xbox360 to support 720 (I forget if it's 720i or 720p) resolution. Sounds pretty nice, right? Wrong. The Revolution and the 360 both have the same size disks, so that means less room for content on the 360. Sure, it's nice if you have a tv that can support it, but for most people, they're going to be losing out because the disk will be filled with images they can't use. Some benefit that is.
I agree with some of your statements. The flaws in high-def are that the framerate can often drop below an acceptable level. I'm actually shocked XBOX360 is REQUIRING that, thats stupid. I still think it should be an OPTION. Some companies want that, some don't. If they want it, then they have it. If not, no problemo.
I'd really like to see how much a high-def output would cost per unit for Revoultion. Keep in mind, Revolution probably won't be coming out till late 2006, so it will drop a little bit from its current price. I personally would be willing to pay an extra $50 (assuming the Revolution's going to be $200, making it $250) for High-def, as I would be able to use it. The way I see it, I have about 35 GC games, a good deal of which were bought for $50 anyway.
Although, I do understand that that extra $50 might drive a large casual audience away, which is exactly what Nintendo is trying to get a hold of.
$50 is beyond extra, it's absurd. Adding 25% to the cost of the system (assuming the $200 price point) for a feature that, at best, 10% of the system oweners can use is absolutely insane.
-
Counter to #5 => Resident Evil 4
Not only is it heavily mature, it is the BEST GC game on the market.
-
You've never played Eternal Darkness, have you? No one who has would be able to make that statement with a straight face. ED is hands-down the best survival horror game ever made. Period. Full stop.
-
Eternal Darkness was a good game, I'm not sure about the best ever survival horror game. Certainly in terms of innovation, though. Note that I haven't even played RE4 yet, so I can't make an opinion on it. Also note that the company that made Eternal darkess, Silicon Knights, has since left Nintendo for Microsoft. And I'm jealous. Too Human looks AMAZING.
-
I though Silcon Knights left to become Third Party. Rare was sold to Microsoft, but I was unaware that they aquired SK too.
RE4 is MUCH different than any survival horror game I've ever played. I always avoided them, because I HATED the controls, the human tank controls. But for RE4, it just feels much better... IMO, while Eternal Darkness WAS a great game, its no RE4.
-
I do believe i have a right to say this: The PS2 is no where near crap!
In Australia (my home land), 50% of ALL game sales last year were PS2 games. 30% were XBOX, 15% were GBA and 5% were GameCube games.
This is of course in Australia, if some1 could find any statistics for America and Europe, i would be glad to compare and see if Nintendo are still crap.
Also, say 'I' if u loved the N64!! Personally, aside from the SNES, the N64 was the BEST gaming console of all time. I still have mine. I tried to play a game once, it froze, so i got all pissed off and kicked it! Hey! Guess what? It started working again!!! :D :D
-
You might be right about SK becoming a third party... I'm pretty sure Too Human is an exclusive for Xbox360, so I might've jumped to a conclusion there.
As for in America, GC sales are defintly the weakest of the consoles (generally speaking, once in awhile they'll top the charts with some huge blockbuster game), but not nearly as weak as in Australia. However, Nintendo DS is destroying the PSP in japan, and beating up on it in USA as well. Go Nintendo!
-
Aye, I loved the N64. But, I love RPGs more. And the N64 only had Ogre Battle 64, and basically no other RPG for the most part, other than Paper Mario, I think. Thats why I can't say its the greatest.
-
You've never played Eternal Darkness, have you? No one who has would be able to make that statement with a straight face. ED is hands-down the best survival horror game ever made. Period. Full stop.
No I haven't but have you played Resident Evil 4? That game has completely changed the genre, groundbreaking in every aspect of gaming.
-
You've never played Eternal Darkness, have you? No one who has would be able to make that statement with a straight face. ED is hands-down the best survival horror game ever made. Period. Full stop.
No I haven't but have you played Resident Evil 4? That game has completely changed the genre, groundbreaking in every aspect of gaming.
I did play RE4. It wasn't anything special.
In the US, the PS2 has a dominant percentage of the sales; Xbox and GC are usually about on equal levels. In Japan Nintendo destroys everything else. No idea what it's like in Europe.
-
Are you sure about Nintendo DOMINATING in Japan? DS is whooping PSP over there, but PS2 I'm pretty sure is cleanign up, followed by Nintendo, and the USA-manufactured Xbox is doing horribly.
-
You've never played Eternal Darkness, have you? No one who has would be able to make that statement with a straight face. ED is hands-down the best survival horror game ever made. Period. Full stop.
No I haven't but have you played Resident Evil 4? That game has completely changed the genre, groundbreaking in every aspect of gaming.
I did play RE4. It wasn't anything special.
In the US, the PS2 has a dominant percentage of the sales; Xbox and GC are usually about on equal levels. In Japan Nintendo destroys everything else. No idea what it's like in Europe.
I was under the impression that Sony dominated the console market in Japan.
What exactly was your qulams with the game?
-
Just because any one system specifically targets one audience, that does not mean that it, or it's competitors are, as said, "crap". The Gamecube has it's target audience and the PSP has it's target audience. The reason that the PSP isn't doing as well is simply because of the price. Newer games will come out for it (GTA baby! GT4 on the go! Yeay!) and handheld fans may have to reconsider their priorities...The PSP is just more than a handheld, which makes it more valuable. So I think the price is right and/or fair...Plus, I've heard that the PS3 will use those PSP memory sticks...
Oh, and I stopped liking the 64 when they took off the Ultra from the title...It was a meh system to me...SNES & NES totally obliterate it. And PSX of course...8)
-
USA-manufactured Xbox is doing horribly.
Oh really? I was under the impression that the XBOX would actually do quite well in Japan. Like come on, Halo 2 for all!!
I have not quite come to terms though on which console i prefer, PS2 or XBOX. I have a PS2, yet no XBOX, the reason i dont have an XBOX is because Halo 2 is probably the only game I want that is on it, actually, Fable would do as well but. Here is a list of pros and cons for each.
PS2: Pros
-It has a lovely slimline version which is twice as portable as the normal PS2 and 3 times as portable than an XBOX.
-Lots of games that appeal to all age groups
-Proud home of the GTA series
-Proud home of the Ratchet and Clank series
-Great Graphics
-One of the best controllers ive ever seen
-The Eye Toys (not the best but XBOX dont have em)
PS2: Cons
-Memory Card is quite pricey, doesnt hold as much memory as i would have wanted.
-Memory Card is useful for when playing at friends houses etc. and u dont want to bring ur PS2
-Only 2 controller port (thats really really poor Sony)
-The Ethernet Network Adaptor is sold seperately
-Too many other bits and pieces that could have come with the PS2 anyway.
-Memory Card DOESN'T come with one! How fuckin' rediculous!
XBOX: Pros
-Has a Hard Disk for built-in memory
-4 controller ports
-An 'all-right' controller
-Proud home of the Halo Series
-Fable :D
-Nice box
-Additional memory in the controllers
-Great multiplayer games
-XBOX Live comes built-in (I think...)
-Link Cable
-Good graphics
XBOX: Cons
-Hard Disk is useless in the fact that u cant transport the memory
-Not really portable
-XBOX games dont appeal to all
-No Ratchet and Clank
-XBOX Live is a waste of money
-Pretty dodgy controller
You can all make up your own descisions on how u think these two compare to each, im just not quite sure on which one i am for.
~LC
-
Even with Halo 1 and 2, XBOX is still sucking the big one over in Japan. They're hoping to change that with 360 by signing on a bunch of big names over there for launch titles, like Blue Dragon. (I think that's the name).
-
I don't think that "an 'all-right' controller" should be a plus for the XBOX, especially since it's actually a piece of crap controller...but w/e...
A ufck Halo...I mean, if I had an XBOX, sure, I'd play it, but to have an XBOX for the purpose of playing Halo? What a waste...There are other, better, FPSs out there...
-
Halo was awesome, V_T, get off crack :)
And shouldn't: "-Memory Card is useful for when playing at friends houses etc. and u dont want to bring ur PS2" be a pro, not a con?
-
XBOX is not doing well in Japan at all. The main reason is because of XBOX live, no one in Japan is insterested in it yet anfd that is one of the few advantages the XBOX has over its competitors.
GTA series is on XBOX too...
I agree with V_T, Halo is generously overrated.
-
You've never played Eternal Darkness, have you? No one who has would be able to make that statement with a straight face. ED is hands-down the best survival horror game ever made. Period. Full stop.
No I haven't but have you played Resident Evil 4? That game has completely changed the genre, groundbreaking in every aspect of gaming.
I did play RE4. It wasn't anything special.
In the US, the PS2 has a dominant percentage of the sales; Xbox and GC are usually about on equal levels. In Japan Nintendo destroys everything else. No idea what it's like in Europe.
I was under the impression that Sony dominated the console market in Japan.
What exactly was your qulams with the game?
Like I said, RE4 was the same thing over and over again.
I'm unsure how well Sony does in Japan, but it's a safe bet that Nintendo does a great deal better over there than over here. Sony is based in Japan, but they're rehash-mongers, and Japanese culture doesn't generally take kindly to that mentality. Well, except in hentai, but let's not go there.
-
RE4 is the same thing over and over agian...? Are you sure you played it?
The control scheme, the camera behind the back, the enemies, etc etc make this game much different (and better) than every other survival horror game I've ever played.
-
Microsoft just announced the prices for their console. It's interesting, and I'll explain why.
Xbox 360 Core System - $299 (299 Euros, 209 GBP)
•Xbox 360 console
•Wired controller
•Detachable faceplate
•Xbox Live Silver membership
•Standard AV cables
Xbox 360 - $399 (399 Euros, 279 GBP)
•Xbox 360 console
•20GB detachable hard drive
•Wireless controller
•Wireless Xbox Live headset
•High-definition AV cables
•Ethernet cable
•Xbox 360 Media Remote Control (limited time)
•Detachable faceplate
•Xbox Live Silver membership
Now, no one in their right mind is going to buy the Core Package. It's absolutely retarted. You get absolute crap, and on top of that, it "forces" you to buy a memory card, since you're not getting a hard drive to save your stuff. But, for an extra $100, you get an actual system.
Now, in my mind, this is a rip-off. Not that fact that's its $400, but the fact that they're giving a cheaper one for $300. Because now they're going to advertise it for $300, scamming a bunch of people into it, and then forcing them to either spend an extra $100 once they find out they get nothing, or get a system taht essentially does nothing for them. Wise from a business perspective, but one that pisses me off, for sure.
Oh, and on top of that, Nintendo delayed Zelda till April 2006 at the EARLIEST.
-
Halo is not awesome enough to justify buying an XBOX, Sentenal...I'd rather play UT myself...
Oh, and SilentMartyr, I think he was just saying that GTA's true home is on the PS2...I think this is because it isn't as good on XBOX...Again, I blame the controller...GTA doesn't work right on XBOX...Why is it that Sony's the only one w/more than one trigger button? Are the other companies mad or something?
-
Did I say it was enough? I only ment that Halo is a great game, sequel included.
-
I didn't mean to imply that you did, I was just making a counterpoint to Halo's aleged awesomeness...
-
Few games are worth $200 total to play.
-
I think the ratio for Chrono dislikers (uh...) is far lower than that for Halo...And again, no one here has really said that Halo sux0rs or w/e...
-
RE4 is the same thing over and over agian...? Are you sure you played it?
The control scheme, the camera behind the back, the enemies, etc etc make this game much different (and better) than every other survival horror game I've ever played.
If I hadn't played it, would I be saying I played it? If I hadn't played it, would I be proclaiming that it's Eternal Darkness' bitch? I know some people would, but would I do that? I have a reputation for saying what I mean, meaning what I say, and having reasoning that's very difficult to punch holes in. I'd like to keep that around.
Actually, all those things you named make it the same as every other survival horror game and its grandma.
-
I think the general consensus on RE4 is this: Anyone who hated the series before has hard time believing that the series is so revamped and that much better. About 50% of those people think it is that much better, and the other half still hate it.
-
My opinions on what you wrote:
#5: Staying Young: I think this has hurt them. I don't think it would have had the impact it did alone, but I do think it hurt them. Even if there ARE a myriad of "older" games as mentioned in this thread, their marketing in general has NOT reflected that IMO. Their advertisements seem to still reflect the "younger" focus. Really the generational problem where those 40-50+ "in general" consider video games "for kids", and thus I think that attitude is more prevalent than it should be. This may also be a partial reflection on the almost-gertitocracy that Japan is. There may be many young minds there, but they aren't the ones making the decisions, and neither do they have profound influence. "Old perceptions" still rule, and IMO that is the biggest problem at Nintendo currently.
#4: Ow...Red headache in 3D: I think this was a mistake, but doesn't belong in the top 5. Why? Because after less than a year, nobody had even HEARD of Virtual Boy. Really. Nobody cared later. It really had a "zero" effect, as nintendo stayed on top in the "portable" market, and it wasn't meant as a replacement for a normal TV system. So while it was a massive screw-up, I don't think it affected them negatively in the market as a whole. There's other decisions (like your #5, and others not metioned) that I'd put higher than this, just because the effect was so small IMO.
#3: Mario and his hose...: I don't think this affected the company as a whole very much. Sure it was no Super Mario 64 in innovativeness, and IMO was less fun (more annoyances rather than challenges to me), but it was just an OK game, rather than revolutionary. Again, not as big a deal. I think the bigger thing that hurt the GC is that this game was NOT a release game. For virtaully every console (or perhaps 100% excluding VB), a Mario game was ALWAYS a release title. This was the bigger mistake, rather than the game itself.
#2: 2 Years after PS2: As others have said, it was less, and while I'm more in the camp of "it had a bigger effect", again, it wasn't business-shattering IMO, just from the XBOX perspective. It certainly didn't help though.
#1: Next time someone tells you CD's are the future, tell them to shut up (No CDs for N64): No shit. I think this was listed either in the top 3, or #1 in multiple "worst decisions in videogame history". If people look back at SNES, one of the main reasons Nintendo had dominance was its WIDE array of 3rd-party developers. Discarding CDs threw away Squaresoft (big mistake), but it also made an artificial "limitation" on devleopers, so that they remained "wary" of doing anything with Nintendo. The loss of developers caused by this decision was the mistake, more than the media type itself. Then they compounded the error in GameCube by not using DVDs. Their fear of piracy outweighed business sense (again) by again LIMITING what developers could do (GC discs are MUCH smaller). But snubbing Sony and not using CDs is EASILY the biggest mistake Nintendo ever made.
Now having said that, what would the video game landscape be like if Nintendo had NOT snubbed Sony, and either HAD come out with a CD-expansion for SNES (and N64 having CDs), or simply competed with Sony with BOTH having CDs? Would the rest of the mistakes put them down, or would Nintendo have stayed high?
I wonder...
-
I also think that if SONY had not gone out and created their own console, that each systems lifespan would be much longer. I'd say at least 50% longer. So really from the current lifespan of about 4-5 years to maybe 7-8 years.
-
Hadriel, I'm just going to say "Your on crack", and leave it at that :)
And I'm not sure if thats true joseph. Whose to say Nintendo wouldn't have gotten the same following with its Nintendo-Sony console?
-
I still don't think that staying w/a cart-based system was a bad idea. Nintendo made huge advancements in cart technology and that's not to be scoffed at...
Also, Sega was going to go out of business no-matter-what...although, really, they aren't technically out of business, they're just out of the console business...but anyways, what they did with the Dreamcast was serious stupidity...Gamers won't let you get away w/basically giving them free games like that...
-
I think for the sake of argument I'll disagree with all of those apart from number 3. Super Mario Sunshine was just a plain crap game. Bad gameplay, horrible horrible cameras, stupid story, bad level design, some of the music made me feel like I was in Paris, horrible voice acting, you could die during bonus levels, not to mention bugs here and there. The only things i can say that are good about it is that it had SUPERB visuals for a mario game, everything looked just great. Also, some of the audio was quite good, I enjoyed a few of the songs and most of the sound effects (minus any dialogue longer than two words, i'll just say again that it was horrible). I especially enjoyed the sounds the funny creatures made, most of all the sunflowers on the theme park level.
-
Whoa! Sorry SilentMartyr! I didnt realise about the memory card thing. Yes, it was supposed to be a pro.
(My theory is, Microsoft followed Sony's path)
Personally, I dont belive this. Microsoft made the XBOX only cause the wanted MONEY! Its all about cash! Personally, I think that aside form Halo 1 & 2 and Fable, XBOX can go get screwed and be a pile of scrap shit.
And to add to the Halo topic, who here would like to see Halo Series on the PS2? Like if u are in my kinda case: Have a PS2 but no XBOX and love Halo.
No doubt some Halo Geeks would get all angry and try and bring it down. But i bet u lots of ppl would buy it if it came out for PS2.[/quote]
-
There's one problem with Halo coming to any system other than XBox.
Microsoft owns Bungie, the company that makes it. Are you going to see Mario on anything other than Nintendo? Exact same thing.
-
FPSs don't translate too well to teh Sony systems...I wouldn't mind seeing Halo on PC though, I guess...It would happen, but then, why would you want an XBOX?
How the idea for the XBOX sprang forth...
Microsoft: Hey! Lookit all them companies making cash on the console market! They're even taking some of our games! I know! Let's take one of our PCs and call it a gaming console!
-
Errr, there is already a Halo PC version. :P
-
Whoa! Sorry SilentMartyr! I didnt realise about the memory card thing. Yes, it was supposed to be a pro.
(My theory is, Microsoft followed Sony's path)
Personally, I dont belive this. Microsoft made the XBOX only cause the wanted MONEY! Its all about cash! Personally, I think that aside form Halo 1 & 2 and Fable, XBOX can go get screwed and be a pile of scrap shit.
And to add to the Halo topic, who here would like to see Halo Series on the PS2? Like if u are in my kinda case: Have a PS2 but no XBOX and love Halo.
No doubt some Halo Geeks would get all angry and try and bring it down. But i bet u lots of ppl would buy it if it came out for PS2.
[/quote]
Hmm? Memory card thing? Ima confused.
I personally wouldn't buy Halo ever. Like I said its generously overrated, if I was released on the PS2 or GC without Xbox live it wouldn't have gotten the big press that it did.
-
3) Final Fantasy VIII, X-2, and arguably IX. That's something of a diss against Square-Enix as well, but it remains a fact that for the most part, they're still entrenched with Sony. This trend will only be reversed when the next-gen FF game appears on all three consoles.
Is that supposed to mean that FFVIII, X-2 and IX are considered failures? I agree with X-2 because they were probably just trying to milk money out of X's success, but I just don't see how VIII and IX are considered sony's third greatest failure. VIII definitely had some flaws, like all levels requiring the same amount of exp., the [SPOILER] "GFs make us lose memory.. oops, we used to be childhood friends, our greatest enemy led the orphanage we lived in, and our principle was her husband, but we don't remember any of it!" [SPOILER], and Squall's being 17 as Laguna is 27 (I won't provide any more spoiler stuff cuz this is rather big, but to those who've played it they should see why I'm disgusted)... But I just don't see what's wrong with FFIX. A lot of people seem to hate it, and I haven't gotten an answer from anyone as to why it's so bad. I, personally, dislike Halo, mainly because I feel that it's so overated, but I don't just say "HALO SUCKS", and then reply "IT JUST DOES" when asked why it does; however, this seems to be the situation for FFIX.. maybe you have your reasons, but it still bothers me that other people hate it for the sake of hating it, say it suck, and then force others to hate it just so that they'll have the same opinion as someone else
Anyway, on topic...
Hasn't Microsoft not made a profit from XBOX yet? I heard that whatever money they got has gone right back into it, or something like that...
Why are people complaining about disk sizes? Is it really that big of a deal if a game is on multiple discs? FFVII was on 3 discs, FFVIII and FFIX on 4, Baten Kaitos and Tales of Symphonia on 2, and as far as I know, it didn't make the games cost any more.
-
Errr, there is already a Halo PC version.
Oh, I must not have noticed through all the better FPSs on PC...I stand by my comment...:P
but then, why would you want an XBOX?
Hmm? Memory card thing? Ima confused.
Lordchander was actually referring to Sentenal...
Basically Halo was for all the XBOX fans who didn't know that UT (or, dare I say it, CS) existed (or perhaps didn't have good enough computers?).
-
Lordchander was actually referring to Sentenal...
Damn me, i wasn't thinking straight. It was almost midnight where I live so I was tired. Sorry all.
Man V_T, I am SHOCKED ( :shock: ) that u didnt know Halo was on PC!
I first played Halo 1 on the PC. Excpet I just cant really play PC games. I seem to be to close to the screen. Either that or the controls are difficult. Ive heard a mission in GTA San Andreas (PC) is impossible with one person playing because of the controls.
-
FFIX wasn't a bad game at all, but it didn't shine, like VI, VII, and X. Basically, IX had old-school written all over it; not that this is a bad thing, it's just that I like to see new angles and new ways of doing things. Of course, being new is not enough; quality is also an issue, and this was the case with VIII and X-2; VIII had a revolting combat system, and X-2 was simple inanity marketed as a Final Fantasy game. The only possible reason to buy it is because they dress Yuna in skimpy clothing, and we have hentai for that.
Edit: Wow, I just noticed that I have the Glenn sprite. It RULES.
-
Personally, I really dont see what is wrong with FFX-2, aside from having the worst storyline, its pretty good gameplay nonetheless, and it did spoil the series also, but other than that.
-
I wouldn't say FFX shined. I played it. I beat it. It was good. Not great. FFIX was better.
And how was he refering to me about a memory card thing? I'm confused now...
-
Someone pointed out that someone else listed PS2's detachable memory cards as a con, now get over it, all of you!
Alright, Hadriel, I'm just glad to see that you don't hate FFIX.. But I really don't see why people consider FFIX like it's revisiting FFVI; the only 'old school' thing I noticed about it was the 4-person-party instead of 3-person-party... was there more that I was missing? I did feel that it was a sequel to FF1 (with the crystal thing and the fiends as bosses at the end), but not that it was trying to feel like FF1
-
the only 'old school' thing I noticed about it was the 4-person-party instead of 3-person-party... was there more that I was missing?
They were mainly re-visiting the old "Medieval, european, etc" theme, rather than the futuristic one they had gone with in 7 and 8, and then the rest of the series following. Plus, they had TONS AND TONS of references to the old games.
Like remember when Kuja kicked Garland (name of King in ff1 I believe) off the top in Terra? Reference to Kefka kicking Gesthal off the top of the floating island. There were things like that all over the place, and those references are one of the reasons I loved the game.
-
The old-school thing about it was that each character has specific abilities that only they can use. Garnet has her summons, Steiner had his sword techs, Vivi had black magic, Zidane could swipe anything and everything from anyone and everyone, etc. In VII and VIII, almost any character can use almost any ability; the only real variation from that was Quistis' enemy skill system in VIII. The limit breaks and attack power were really the only things that distinguished the characters from one another in battle, but VII made up for this with the sheer amount of stuff you could do with Materia; it was seriously fucking ridiculous. Not only that, the character stats made certain Materia more effective on one character than another.
-
The old-school thing about it was that each character has specific abilities that only they can use. Garnet has her summons, Steiner had his sword techs, Vivi had black magic, Zidane could swipe anything and everything from anyone and everyone, etc. In VII and VIII, almost any character can use almost any ability; the only real variation from that was Quistis' enemy skill system in VIII. The limit breaks and attack power were really the only things that distinguished the characters from one another in battle, but VII made up for this with the sheer amount of stuff you could do with Materia; it was seriously fucking ridiculous. Not only that, the character stats made certain Materia more effective on one character than another.
Yeah, back in the old ones, characters actually had a unique purpose to your party. In the new ones, you get so much customization that combat uniquiness is down the drain.
-
Either that or the controls are difficult. Ive heard a mission in GTA San Andreas (PC) is impossible with one person playing because of the controls.
They have PC controllers that are the exact same as any of the best controllers (PLAYSTATION!!!) out there...I could understand someone not being able to do GTA stuff on XBOX though...that controll system/controller itself sucked big time.
About other stuffs...
FFIX shined because, unlike what we got w/VIII and VII, we DID get something that had become 'oldschool'...a very large (good) amount of character development!!! The only minor exception could be given to Zidane, who doesn't get as much attention as the other characters until near-end game...
Garland (name of King in ff1 I believe)
Nope, more important than a king...he was 'a' boss...
Yeah, back in the old ones, characters actually had a unique purpose to your party. In the new ones, you get so much customization that combat uniquiness is down the drain.
Sometimes in the FF series, and mind you I only mean sometimes, full customization can be a good thing. I point to Tactics...and, really, Tactics alone...
Materia=lame n00b Espers
-
FFVII had good character development..
-
That's a good point about the character development in FF9. It seems like in FF8, the only character development was "Where did you come from? That's nice, join the party" and that was it. Oh, and then there was a part of dialogue that took maybe 4 hours to get through after a boss. I think it was near the end of the second disc, and they were all standing on a basketball court and they just ALL hapenned to be part of some orphanage. Bull. Anyway, seven was a little better, but not much. Same thing, except maybe one small quest somewhere in the game that expanded a little bit. (Cloud would be an exception).
-
>_>; Kuja>Sephiroth
Zidane>Cloud, etc. Pwnt
-
AuraTwilight, it's a whole heck of a lot easier to make that case against Clod w/any other character from FFIX...Zidane was way too Captain America meets Locke for my tastes...
"Let's do it because it's the right thing to do!"
Bleh...Quina was ([at least] two times) a better character...
Also, I wouldn't say FFVII had good character development...>_>
-
>_>; Kuja>Sephiroth
Zidane>Cloud, etc. Pwnt
Dude, Kuja honestly looks like a girl. Sephiroth has long hair, but he's one cut motherfucker. Kuja, on the other hand, has ACTUAL BREASTS.
Zidane was more entertaining than engaging. Most of the time, his character would fit perfectly on a prime time sitcom. Cloud, on the other hand, wouldn't.
-
No no no, Kuja didn't have breast... You must have been imagining things. Although he was more of a Kefka type villian.
I enjoyed both games, but I wouldn't say Zidane was a better character than Cloud...
-
I swear to God, Kuja's gazongas were bigger than Garnet's.
-
I think Kuja was just confused about his gender and/or sexuality. Purple thong? ummm....
-
Garland was the first boss in FF1, and he plays some role later on...
I feel like Sephiroth's effect was lost in the whole RPG thing.. You can't really be THAT awesomely scarey in a turn-based game. Sephiroth in Kingdom Hearts, however, was insanely awesome and actually insanely difficult, as compared to FFVII's Sephiroth, where the only challenge for me was using a Megalixir halfway through the battle
I don't know if I mentioned this here or not, but after playing FFIX I was just horribly disappointed when I replayed the beginnings of FFVII and FFVIII; Cloud's and Squall's "I don't care" attitude was just so different than Zidane's
-
Garland was the first boss in FF1, and he plays some role later on...
If u count the the extra dungeon in the GBA version he was there at the end of it i think.
-
Garland was the final boss of the original game too. >_>
-
I thought Chaos was.
-
Kuja looks gay, but his Trance form is just cool.
Sephiroth looks and acts cool, but you see him the same amount of time a n00b would spend trying to revive Aeris... Wait, that's 12 hours longer.
Zidane is an amusing character.
Cloud's insane.
Squall needs a hug. A shame no one wants to hug him.
-
Cloud's and Squall's "I don't care" attitude was just so different than Zidane's
They had two completly different "I don't care" attitudes though. Cloud had the kinf of "fighting for my own survival" attitude. Squall was a puss. He jsut sat around saying "I don't care because life sucks and wnat to slit my wrists, I might be emo".
-
They had two completly different "I don't care" attitudes though. Cloud had the kinf of "fighting for my own survival" attitude. Squall was a puss. He jsut sat around saying "I don't care because life sucks and wnat to slit my wrists, I might be emo".
Atleast he still had the balls for the biker look >_>
Kuja looks gay, but his Trance form is just cool.
What do you mean LOOKS gay? His favorite opera's about a canary, dammit!
Sephiroth looks and acts cool, but you see him the same amount of time a n00b would spend trying to revive Aeris... Wait, that's 12 hours longer.
PHEONIX DOWN! There.
I thought Chaos was.
Garland IS Chaos.
-
What do you mean LOOKS gay? His favorite opera's about a canary, dammit!
So is Garnet's. And Brahne, too, but God knows she's a guy.
PHEONIX DOWN! There.
After Disc 1, smartass.
-
After Disc 1, smartass.
So? Seriously, people, why the hell didn't Cloud and co. use a Pheonix Down? It's not like Aeris wasn't killed by worst stuff. Fire, ice, giant birds and shit, and yet she's put down by a sword in her gut? Puh Lease! An elixer would fix that up 1, 2, 3!
-
Actually, Clod had a more "i'm too stupid & confused to care" attitude. I was twenty steps ahead of him...trying desperately to hurry his stupid ass along...Oh well, at least Aeris died...But that's little condolence...
And Squall only had an "i don't care, you sux, i'm so awesome compared to you" attitude until he 180ed halfway into the game...Cecil wannabe! Zell should have died as Aeris died...oh well, him being called a 'chickenwuss' was almost satisfying enough to have his stupid ass in the game...
And hey, there's nothing wrong w/opera! Rock Opera for example kicks ass! 8)
-
Cloud had a more self suffient, cocky attitude. Squall was just... I just don't understand how someone can like a guy who says "Whatever" every other sentance.
-
Nintendo delaying Zelda till April 2006 is a huge mistake. Becuase I know its gonna be pushed to Revolution. They're swearing its not, but I'm sure its gonna be at this point. Won't make the launch... I'm guessing holidays 2009.
(+ Toma)
-
Or its an excellent idea. Having Twilight Princess for launch on the Rev would instantly have every Zelda fan purchasing the Rev on launch. You might say that they would buy it anyways, but most would wait until it is near release to get it, and maybe at a reduced price. The 360 nor PS3 has a launch title of this calibur, and it might be one of Ninty's best decisions if they do hold it until Rev launch.
-
the PS3's launch date is still quite a ways a way though...I don't think we can say whether or not it has any spectacular launch titles yet really...Or maybe i'm forgetting something from E3...>_>
-
No, there will be riots if they push back this Zelda game any more. Nintendo will loose parts of its base if it pushes Zelda back anymore.
-
What? Twilight Princess is being pushed to April '06!?
*Cries*
-
Yes, that was my reaction as well. And if they push it back even farther... Death will come to them.
-
Yes, that was my reaction as well. And if they push it back even farther... Death will come to them.
yeah well ill probally have to wait 2-3 months after you guys get it since im in australia :evil: , they better release it everywhere on that date.
-
They...pushed it back?! If they do it again, I'm suing them! I'm almost on the verge of suing Square-Enix (Advent Children was supposed to come out last year)! I only have one word for Nintendos mistake.
Pikman
-
They...pushed it back?! If they do it again, I'm suing them! I'm almost on the verge of suing Square-Enix (Advent Children was supposed to come out last year)! I only have one word for Nintendos mistake.
Pikman
Why Pikmin? I thought they were both good bordering on great games. Trust me, there much better candidates for "Nintendo's mistake"
-
...I still think Pikmin sucks (sorry, my typing gets bad around 9...)
-
Compared to what, though? Losing Rare's support? Completley ignoring the demand for online console gaming?
-
They...pushed it back?! If they do it again, I'm suing them! I'm almost on the verge of suing Square-Enix (Advent Children was supposed to come out last year)! I only have one word for Nintendos mistake.
Pikman
Advent Children was supposed to come out on my birthday... Anyway, I know we can blame SE's games' problems on SE, but can we really blame SE for Advent Children? I doubt that they use the same people to direct movies as they do for video games.
Anyway, according to ffonline.com (which said that it was coming out on July 10th 2003 before) AC is coming out in the first quarter of 2005.. At first I was like "ok that's not too long", but then I realized that it said 2005, not 2006... :(
-
Wait, what else has Rare made after making all those DK sequals? I lost track of 'em after that...
-
Compared to what, though? Losing Rare's support? Completley ignoring the demand for online console gaming?
It's more that only Microsoft leapt on it. PS2 has shit online support as well. They've already anounced free worldwide wi-fi for the Revolution. What has Sony said about online support for PS3?
-
Now seriously, how the heck is Nintendo selling Rare a dumb move? Man, am I seriously the only one who noticed that the quality of Rare's games took a dramatic turn for the worse after the SNES? And not only that, the release dates keep getting pushed back further and further? I sincerely think Nintendo did the right thing by getting rid of this trash company. Seriously, they've released, what? Two (count 'em, TWO!) games for the X-Box since they were purchased. And while I am sure there are going to be some Rare games for the 360, I am not impressed with what I've seen at all thus far. Seriously, in my books, selling Rare was a brilliant move.
To the one who also says the PSP is better than the DS? In terms of graphics, without a doubt, but in terms of games? Uh uh, the games are sorely lacking, and nothing has made me jump out of my pants and say "I MUST HAVE THE PSP NOW!" as of yet. I won't be getting one for a long while.
Yes, Nintendo might have their heads up their asses at times, but they're a smart company, and more often than not, I find myself agreeing with what they say. Not only that, their stamp of quality and first and second party support has produced some of the best games this generation has had to offer. Seriously, I think Square-Enix is starting to warm up to Nintendo again, at least slightly anyway, which is a good thing. It means that the Revolution won't be so RPG deprived like the previous two consoles kinda were, with the N64 being much more deprived than the Cube was.
I do think that the Rev might end up supporting HD later in it's life, but then again, I don't have an HDTV just yet, so I could care less about HD support just yet. I am actually doubtful about purchasing either the 360, or PS3, but I know for a fact that I am getting a Revolution. That says something to me, I'm just not impressed with tech specs anymore, and am more about "OK, where are the games?" Wherever the good games are, I'll be there. And I have a hunch that Nintendo is going to be the one who brings the truly good games next gen, including all the 2-D games as well.
-
Here here! DS is better than PSP! Long live the DS
Long live the DS
-
I'll probably start with a Revolution, and perhaps a PS3. It depends on if Square keeps cranking out games for their system exclusivly or not.
-
I'll probably start with a Revolution, and perhaps a PS3. It depends on if Square keeps cranking out games for their system exclusivly or not.
S-E has indicated strongly that they will support all platforms next gen. I too will be getting a Revolution. As for the other two; one of my roommates will be getting an Xbox360, and none of us are too impressed with PS3 at this point.
-
I somehow don't see Sony coming out on top like they did the last generation, and the current one. Something tells me the exhorbitant pricing on the system itself. I don't know about you guys, but I'm not going to spend 500 bucks on a stinkin' console, regardless of HOW powerful it is.
-
It's release is still a ways off...and, like all consoles traced back to the beginning years of man, the pre-release 'supposed' prices are always overblown.
Also, the PSP is gonna have GT4 & GTA on it, I think those alone make it worth it...It's just taking a little while to pick up it's pace...and I really haven't seen anything outstanding from the DS side myself...just a lot of crappy looking "[insert franchise name here] Touch" games and stuff like Nintendogs :roll: but what do I know? Maybe they're just hiding their better games or something...You also have to take into account that the PSP isn't just a portable console...It has other uses that two touch screens (can you yell lame gimmick any louder Nintendo?) just don't make up for...
I admit though that I'd probably take the GBA over the PSP, though.
And it's not really that SE is 'warming up' to Nintendo...they're really just diversifying to everything they can get their hands on...even, sadly, XBOX...:P
-
Also, the PSP is gonna have GT4 & GTA on it, I think those alone make it worth it...It's just taking a little while to pick up it's pace...and I really haven't seen anything outstanding from the DS side myself...just a lot of crappy looking "[insert franchise name here] Touch" games and stuff like Nintendogs :roll: but what do I know? Maybe they're just hiding their better games or something...You also have to take into account that the PSP isn't just a portable console...It has other uses that two touch screens (can you yell lame gimmick any louder Nintendo?) just don't make up for...
Wow...just...wow...it seems you've truly been taken over by the hype machine, eh? GT4 is a great game, but I already have it for the PS2. Sure, the idea of having it be portable is a great idea indeed, but I sincerely don't think that it alone makes the PSP worthwhile. Truth be told, I don't see how having it as a movie, or music player makes it worthwhile. I want the games, not the gimmicky extra uses. Now you see, UMDs are a "lame gimmick" in my books, as is having to rely on it's other so-called strengths of being able to play MP3s from a memory card. I mean, I might get a PSP, but it's going to be a loooooong while before I even think of doing so.
The touch screen is HARDLY a lame gimmick. I own a DS myself, and I've come to appreciate the touch screen. If you ask me, it provides the most accurate mechanics for an FPS this side of a PC mouse and keyboard. Let's see here, not only that, the awesome games are starting to come, aside from Nintendogs, there's also Advance Wars DS, Meteos, Nanostray, Yu-Gi-Oh Nightmare Troubadour (which is a rockin' game), and coming soon Lunar Dragon Song, Castlevania, and a whole bunch more that catch my interest. Much more than I can say about the PSP's line-up. There's just nothing that excites me about it whatsoever.
GT4? Been there, done that, superb game. GTA? Puh-frigging-lease! What else? PoPoLoCrois? Hmmmm...an RPG, and I love RPGs. That's a maybe there. FF7 Crisis Core? What's with all the spin-offs all of a sudden? I dunno man, as I said, nothing has made me jump up and say "I MUST HAVE A PSP NOW!" I am sure it'll happen in due time, but right now, I don't see myself owning one. Especially not at 250 bucks for it.
-
Meh, I think the idea of having GT4 is completely worth-while...I mean, it's basically like saying, "Hey! Here's your PS2, only now you can, like, slack off w/it at work or on the go or w/e"...I also don't understand your GTA arguement...but w/e, I guess...and you're completely writing off Crisis Core just because it's a spin-off? That's rediculous. I also hear Capcom's gonna port BoF3 to PSP...now THAT'S fuckin awesome.
PSPs are also MP3 and video players man...I don't see how that's not a strength. Sure it's on the memory stick, but so what? I don't see how that makes it any less of a strength...It's also been said that the PS3 will be using the same memory sticks as the PSP, so getting one for your PSP use will be like doing yourself a favor for later on anyhow...Plus, I mean, I'd rather get a PSP than a lame Ipod (or w/e MP3 player) AND a portable DVD player AND a DS...
-
Wait, what else has Rare made after making all those DK sequals? I lost track of 'em after that...
Just a couple of blockbuster hits named Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. :?
-
Wait, what else has Rare made after making all those DK sequals? I lost track of 'em after that...
Just a couple of blockbuster hits named Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. :?
Thank you.
And anyways, I wasn't really trying to put Nintendo down, but I don't see how you could consider the game Pikmin to be the source of Nintendo's problems?
-
Rare is making Perfect Dark Zero, that looks awesome!
-
Rare is making Perfect Dark Zero, that looks awesome!
But the OMGHUEGBOXZDEUCE60's 400$ price tag isn't. :?
Nothing like waiting for the crucial price drop! I bet it'll be right around when Sony releases the PS3. But I will probably cave and get a Rev first, unless Blue Dragon turns out awesome(like Chrono or Earthbound awesome) and another above par game comes out. (If someone says Halo 3 I might die.)
(Seriously).
-
But the OMGHUEGBOXZDEUCE60's 400$ price tag isn't. :?
So? My parents are giving it to me if I get good grades :P
-
Halo three will be awesome I know it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :twisted: :lol: 8) :( :) :D
-
Isn't it more like, "Halo 3 will be just like the last two only mildly different (in a way you won't really notice very much)...!"?
I'd take the new UT (Or Killzone for that matter...) over any new Halo.
-
All I hope for is if Halo 3 ends.
-
But the OMGHUEGBOXZDEUCE60's 400$ price tag isn't. :?
So? My parents are giving it to me if I get good grades :P
Most of the forum members are grown, and make their own money and buy their own things, so it's intelligent that they're unhappy about the rather expensive price tag.
-
They sell their systems for alot of money so not alot of people can by them.
-
Actually, they sell it for so much because it costs so much. When companies launch new systems, they lose money. They have to make the prices fairly high upon the launch.
-
But the OMGHUEGBOXZDEUCE60's 400$ price tag isn't. :?
So? My parents are giving it to me if I get good grades :P
Try being a college student who is completely financially independent. Then get back to me.
-
What... the hell... are they thinking...
http://cube.ign.com/articles/651/651320p1.html
The controller.. its its a remote control!
-
But the OMGHUEGBOXZDEUCE60's 400$ price tag isn't. :?
So? My parents are giving it to me if I get good grades :P
Try being a college student who is completely financially independent. Then get back to me.
You try getting straight A's just to bring your GPA up to hit the minimum requierments to get honour roll!
-
They sell their systems for alot of money so not alot of people can by them.
Er, no offense...but what the heck? That makes no sense whatsoever...if you're trying to sell a product, you want MORE people to buy it, not less. Video game consoles aren't country clubs.
-
But the OMGHUEGBOXZDEUCE60's 400$ price tag isn't. :?
So? My parents are giving it to me if I get good grades :P
Try being a college student who is completely financially independent. Then get back to me.
You try getting straight A's just to bring your GPA up to hit the minimum requierments to get honour roll!
Umm, high school is cake. Getting an A requires minimal effort in comparison to college. I got B's in high school and I skipped classes and goofed off when I went to class.
-
Yeah...so far I've basically dozed during class and after at least a test in each class, I still have high A averages in everything. And I'm in all honors too...
-
But the OMGHUEGBOXZDEUCE60's 400$ price tag isn't. :?
So? My parents are giving it to me if I get good grades :P
Try being a college student who is completely financially independent. Then get back to me.
You try getting straight A's just to bring your GPA up to hit the minimum requierments to get honour roll!
Umm, high school is cake. Getting an A requires minimal effort in comparison to college. I got B's in high school and I skipped classes and goofed off when I went to class.
I don't know where you went to school, but dude, miss an assigntment, or be tardy, you get saturday school :x . And the teachers fail you. Oh and did you have a .04 GPA? I have to get honour roll! And if you even get ONE saturday school, you are NOt eligible for honour roll!
-
What... the hell... are they thinking...
http://cube.ign.com/articles/651/651320p1.html
The controller.. its its a remote control!
They do have an add on if you want to use a controller. See the revolution thread.
-
See time of my post, and see time of post for the revolution thread.
-
But the OMGHUEGBOXZDEUCE60's 400$ price tag isn't. :?
So? My parents are giving it to me if I get good grades :P
Try being a college student who is completely financially independent. Then get back to me.
You try getting straight A's just to bring your GPA up to hit the minimum requierments to get honour roll!
Umm, high school is cake. Getting an A requires minimal effort in comparison to college. I got B's in high school and I skipped classes and goofed off when I went to class.
I don't know where you went to school, but dude, miss an assigntment, or be tardy, you get saturday school :x . And the teachers fail you. Oh and did you have a .04 GPA? I have to get honour roll! And if you even get ONE saturday school, you are NOt eligible for honour roll!
Like I said, high school is cake. The assignments are nothing in comparison. If you are having trouble with those, you shouldn't got to college.
-
That's a rather cynical look, SilentMartyr. The four years growth period within the high school years is supposed to prepare you for College, right?
Also, you're looking at it as one who's completed it and is used to a more difficult school life. Don't tell me that you've NEVER felt that any of the work in high school was challenging at the time...
-
No, not at all. The only challenging homework assignment I ever had was a 10 page research paper, and it was only challenging becaus eof the length. And I am a rather cynical person in general, so that doesn't surprise me at all.
-
Listen, I don't want to go to school. But I realize that I need to go to school to get anywhere in life. But that is kinda tough when your mind travels every 10 seconds (result from ADHD) so you can take you 10 page assignment and whoa, what was that?
*goes off to follow what caught my attention.*
-
Personally, I'd agree with SilentMartyr, though it depends on the school, I suppose. I only took 5 subjects in grade 12, which was the minimum to get into University. Physics wasn't all that hard for me, especially as the teacher rarely checked homework. Chemistry, likewise, was not that difficult, on the whole. Math 30 was probably the hardest, but I took it through correspondance, so that would account for it. Math 31 - that is calculus - was easier than 30. And English, though there were a few papers and essays, was never that hard for me. But, do keep in mind, I took Math 30 in grade 11, and had only half-days both semesters of Grade 12, so that might account for the easy feel.
Also, it might well have to do with the fact that Engineering is so much bloody harder than High School that the earlier is so much easier seeming. By fifth years its not nearly so hecktic anymore, but in first year - and second, and third - I had six courses a semester, with some four or five weekly assignments, which amounted to many hours of homework, and many late days at the University - something I was unaccustomed to in High School. I adapted really quickly, but nonetheless, I think that Engineering far overshadowed High School, in my mind. After all, it does have the reputation for being amongst the most stressful faculties.
-
ADD and ADHD: Fake "diseases" made up to sell Ritalin.
-
ADD and ADHD: Fake "diseases" made up to sell Ritalin.
Oh yeah, your cool, just go and make fun of what I have, or how hard it is for me to learn you god damn FLAMER!
-
ADD and ADHD: Fake "diseases" made up to sell Ritalin.
Oh yeah, your cool, just go and make fun of what I have, or how hard it is for me to learn you god damn FLAMER!
I didn't flame...
-
Yeah, well you did. You just had to state that high school was a cake walk after I said my parents would give it to me when I got good grades. Guess what, NOBODY IS AS SMART AS YOU! If I accually succede, this will be the first time in my entire life that I have done something in school.
-
WHERE DID I SAY THAT?
All I said is that ADD and ADHD are fake diseases.
-
I shall show you...
(Please note that this post shall be edited multiple times)
-
You were arguing with SilentMartyr about school, not me...
-
OH MY GOD! I'M SO SORRY!
I ment to direct all insults toward SilentMarter!
Kinda hard to figure out stuff when you're not in person...
-
They don't need to make up diseases to sell ritalin. All they'd need is a sign that said, "Hey! We're sellin ritalin here!" :wink:
-
Insults? Woah there big fella, no need to get your boxers in a twist. And lack of attention span does not mean you have to stop trying in school. using it as an excuse is a easy way to give up. Everyone has hardships in life, wallowing about them isn't going to help you.
-
Insults? Woah there big fella, no need to get your boxers in a twist. And lack of attention span does not mean you have to stop trying in school. using it as an excuse is a easy way to give up. Everyone has hardships in life, wallowing about them isn't going to help you.
If we all wallowed in them, then what's the point of trying to live for tomorrow?
( A.K.A I concur with SilentMartyr)
-
I agree about ADHD/ADD. Are they made up? Not really. Can kids some kids get bored more easily than others? Absolutely. Is it a DISEASE? No way in hell. I'm bored in school, and just because I'm not paying attention to my teach'ers boring lecture about sedimentary layers, doesn't mean there's something wrong with my brain. South Park did a brilliant episode on this.
-
Insults? Woah there big fella, no need to get your boxers in a twist. And lack of attention span does not mean you have to stop trying in school. using it as an excuse is a easy way to give up. Everyone has hardships in life, wallowing about them isn't going to help you.
Who said I was using it as an excuse for not trying in school? I said it is hard for me! I AM NOT GOING TO GIVE UP! I want to make somthing of my life! And no, I don't take ritalin, I believe that pills are an excuse in itself, You need to conquer things like this on your own.
-
Making the 64 cartridge based instead of cd-based. Yea big mistake. Probably the biggest besides being a bully and overcharging for licencing back in 8-bit and 16-bit days.