Xbox 360 Official Price

[Lenny]

Today at the Leipzig Gaming Convention, Microsoft has announced that their latest Xbox360 console will be released in two versions. "Xbox 360 Core System" directed at the mainstream audience and the premium "Xbox360" at the hardcore fanbase. The consoles will be sold at a price of $299 and $399, respectively.

"The Xbox360 Core System" will not include the much anticipated 20GB hard disk drive. Instead the $299 core system owners will receive a wired controller (sorry, no wireless here), a detachable faceplate, A/V cables and Xbox Live Silver membership.

"The Xbox360" or lets call it the premium $399 version of the new Xbox will include the 20GB hard disk as a standard and bundles with a wireless controller. Other luxuries of owning this pricey Xbox are getting a limited time offer remote control, Wireless Xbox Live headset, High-Definition A/V cables, an Ethernet cable, detachable faceplate and Xbox Live Silver membership.

Speaking with the press, corporate vice president, Peter Moore emphasised that the Xbox360 console is slated for a simultaneous release in North America, Europe and Japan.

Here is a list of Xbox360 accessories that can be purchased seperately at the time of launch.

Face Plate ($19.99 / 19.99 Euros / 14.99 pounds)
20GB Hard Drive ($99.99 / 99.99 Euros / 69.99 pounds)
64MB Memory Unit ($39.99 / 34.99 Euros / 22.99 pounds)
Wireless Networking Adapter ($99.99 / 79.99 Euros / 59.99 pounds)
Wireless Controller ($49.99 / 44.99 Euros / 32.99 pounds)
Play and Charge Kit ($19.99 / 19.99 Euros / 14.99 pounds)
Rechargeable Battery Pack ($11.99 / 14.99 Euros / 9.99 pounds)
Wired Controller ($39.99 / 34.99 Euros / 24.99 pounds)
Headset ($19.99 / 19.99 Euros / 14.99 pounds)
Universal Media Remote ($29.99 / 29.99 Euros / 19.99 pounds)
Component HD AV Cable ($39.99 / 29.99 Euros / 19.99 pounds)
S-Video AV Cable (US) or SCART AV Cable (Europe) ($29.99 / 24.99 Euros / 17.99 pounds)
VGA HD AV Cable ($39.99 / 29.99 Euros / 19.99 pounds)

So far there has been no annoucement regarding the launch titles for any territory. We'll bring you more news once more updates are disclosed.




Taken from www.ps3portal.com (http://www.ps3portal.com)

It's gone midnight, I can't be bothered typing anything.

[Xenn]

Ah Microsoft... ripping people off by forcing them to buy the more expensive version to get features they basically need anyways. Genius!

Wait, no... It's just stupid. I seriously hope the PS3 utterly destroys Xbox 360.

[Raziel]

Anyone who buys the $299 console is a fucking moron. That's not a bargain in the slightest. You're saving $100 dollars by omitting accessories that would cost twice that amount to buy separately.

I cannot wait to see how many dumbass 13-year-olds wind up with that "bargain" package, and complain about it because they were too dense to do a little research. Kudos, Microsoft!

[Penguin]

"Joey wanted an xbox360 for christmas, lets get this one its 100 dollars less"
-christmas-
"God damnit mom"

omg fun holidays ahead.

[Raziel]

Seriously, as much of a non-fan as I am toward Microsoft, this is a great move. If for no other reason than my own entertainment, of course.

[Lenny]

One bad thing...

This means that the PS3 will probably be quite expensive. If Microsoft feel safe with prices up to $400, then that means the PS3 will be something around that price...now we've got to save up more for a PS3...screw...


Slated for a worldwide release...25th November for everyone then. Looking at the accessories that the premium has, it hasn't got half as much as the PS3...I wonder what the Wireless controller will be like as well...

Maybe it will be a receiver plugged into the controller socket and an infra-red controller...:p

I could see that actually happening. If people with the Core version want to play multiplayer at a friends house who has got the Premium version, they how will they if the premium has no actual sockets for wired controllers? Whereas the PS3 has wireless no matter what, so all you do is take your boomerang to your friends and have fun.

[Sum Yung Guy]

If people with the Core version want to play multiplayer at a friends house who has got the Premium version, they how will they if the premium has no actual sockets for wired controllers?

They all have sockets, the controllers are USB from what I understand, and the cheaper version comes with a USB controller. You will be able to use any variation of controllers on the systems. For example you could bring 2 wireless controllers to a friends house who has the cheap version and his buddy has a usb controller, and you could still play 4 player Halo 3 or whatever.

[S2 AM]

Ah Microsoft... ripping people off by forcing them to buy the more expensive version to get features they basically need anyways. Genius!

::cough:: memory card ::cough::
::cough:: network adapter ::cough::
::cough:: Sony HD ::cough::

Before you lick Sony's ass, make sure it's clean please :p

[Lenny]

If they have sockets then you don't get the full experience of wireless.

Any idea what the range of the wireless controllers is?

[Sum Yung Guy]

lol the full experience of wireless? why so you can go stand 100 feet away from your tv and get your ass stomped by the guy plugged in? The advantage of wireless is not so you can stand far away, but so your cords dont get tangled up with each or tripped on and stuff like that.

[Lenny]

You're limited with wired controllers. You can only play the game within a few feet of the console...something I absolutely hate having to do.

With wireless I can finally sit somewhere comfortable and play the game.

[Lenny]

*cough*Face Plate ($19.99)*cough*
*cough*20GB Hard Drive ($99.99)*cough*
*cough*64MB Memory Unit ($39.99)*cough*
*cough*Wireless Networking Adapter ($99.99)*cough*
*cough*Wireless Controller ($49.99)*cough*
*cough*Play and Charge Kit ($19.99)*cough*
*cough*Rechargeable Battery Pack ($11.99)*cough*
*cough*Wired Controller ($39.99)*cough*
*cough*Headset ($19.99)*cough*
*cough*Universal Media Remote ($29.99)*cough*
*cough*Component HD AV Cable ($39.99)*cough*
*cough*S-Video AV Cable (US) or SCART AV Cable (Europe) ($29.99)*cough*
*cough*VGA HD AV Cable ($39.99)*cough*

I think we can safely say that Microsoft are just trying to milk their customers for all it's worth?

"Oooh great! I'm an individual because I've spent $20 on a mass-produced faceplate that half a million other people in the world will have. Rock on!!"

[Sum Yung Guy]

"Oooh great! I'm an individual because I've spent $20 on a mass-produced faceplate that half a million other people in the world will have. Rock on!!"

I was actually planning on buying a faceplate then painting it myself.

[S2 AM]

Yea... you may wanna get that cough checked on, too.

[Lenny]

I was talking about the shop bought ones with designs already on them.

Up until now I didn't know that you could paint them.

Maybe I should rephrase it...

Don't not get something because of remarks others have made...else you get nowhere in life...

[Xenn]

I'm not a Sony fanboy.. I would like to see Nintendo crush both Sony and Microsoft. It won't happen though, because Nintendo has already said they are interested in making affordable products to appeal to a mass audience. Boring to people like me, but economically intelligent.

Although it would be hilarious to see a headline like "Zelda: Twilight Princess single handedly bankrupts Microsoft; Sony"

[Penguin]

Although it would be hilarious to see a headline like "Zelda: Twilight Princess single handedly bankrupts Microsoft; Sony"

It would be more likely that d3v shows up at your house tonight at exactly midnight and murders you with a plastic spork.

[Titusfied]

Heh, I'm not getting anything extra that I don't need to continue playing Halo 2 backward compatible online and Halo 3 when it gets released.

Until the first spectacular RPG comes out at least...

[Sum Yung Guy]

Oblivion

[JRwakebord]

Heh, I'm not getting anything extra that I don't need to continue playing Halo 2 backward compatible online and Halo 3 when it gets released.


My thoughts exactly.

[tidus2005]

okay this is going to sound kind of dumb but what is the silver xbox live membership?

[S2 AM]

The thing with Nintendo is that they made a few lovable characters "back in the day" and now they are just replaying those same characters over and over. They don't have much more than that, other than childish games. Nintendo seems to only appeal to ages 3-8, then around 18-30. I'll be the first to admit that I'm going to buy the next generation Nintendo console just to play Zelda, Mario, Castlevania(possibly), Kirby, and Metroid, in that order.

[Acer]

the Xbox wire is long enough as of now... if you need it longer then you have penis security issues

[Lenny]

It'll be membership to Xbox live (play the games online), but special membership I'd expect.

If you want to be successful in attracting new customers, however, you've got to offer them something special, something that they can't get anywhere else. Microsoft, realizing that everybody likes free stuff, decided to let every Xbox 360 owner get on Live without having to pay one red cent. How are they doing this, you ask? Well, when you purchase your Xbox 360, you'll immediately be enrolled in the Silver plan, which is the most basic service. Silver members will be able to create a profile, browse and download from the Live Marketplace, and send text messages to or voice chat with friends.

Taken from http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox-360/perfect-dark-zero/613233p1.html.

the Xbox wire is long enough as of now... if you need it longer then you have penis security issues

What are you talking about now? You're confusing little old Lenny... :(

[Acer]

i was just being sarcastic... just saying, some people want wireless so they aren't bound by the length of the Wire, but the xbox wire is 9 foot i beleive and that is far enough. I've never had one problem, and if i did, i'd just got by the extender.

Im not a fan of this wireless controller idea really

[Lenny]

9 feet?!

Extender?!

Why on earth would you need a wirelss controller, let alone think it's a bad idea!

[Titusfied]

I'm assuming that is an RPG getting some decent acclaim?

[Lenny]

How did you guess?! :rolleyes:

http://games.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1041/The-Elder-Scrolls-IV-Oblivion/

You must be able to read SYG like a book!

[Titusfied]

Damnit, "Games" is filtered at my work.. I'll check it out later.

[Lenny]

In development since 2002, Oblivion is another leap forward in role-playing with its combination of freeform gameplay and cutting-edge graphics. Oblivion is the sequel to the best-selling, award-winning role-playing game, The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind, named 2002 RPG and Game of the Year for both PC and Xbox.

That's basically the whole article.

[Raziel]

The thing with Nintendo is that they made a few lovable characters "back in the day" and now they are just replaying those same characters over and over. They don't have much more than that, other than childish games. Nintendo seems to only appeal to ages 3-8, then around 18-30. I'll be the first to admit that I'm going to buy the next generation Nintendo console just to play Zelda, Mario, Castlevania(possibly), Kirby, and Metroid, in that order.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Look how many Crash Bandicoot games Sony pumped out over the lifespan of both Playstations. Ratchet & Clank, by the end of this year most likely, will have seen four entries in five years. Same with Jak and Daxter. GTA has been pumping out sequels, special editions and so forth since 2001. Resident Evil has seen an unbelievable number of sequels since it's inception in the mid-90's. And, of course, let's not forget SEGA and their undying servitude to Sonic and his arsenal of titles.

Again, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Nintendo keeps making Mario, Zelda, Metroid and Star Fox games because they sell. However, what you ignore about each franchise is the fact that no game is a carbon-copy doppleganger of the entry before it. The 2D Mario games single handedly resurrected the console videogame industry from the brink of death, while the 3D entries have both given birth to the realm of true 3D gaming (Mario 64) and have refined and tailored what a 3D platformer should be (Mario Sunshine). The Zelda games as well have done their fair share of innovating. Ocarina of Time brought with it the lock-on camera, auto-jump, and many of the 3D action/adventure standards still used by current-day games. Metroid Prime did what many thought was impossible, by transferring the near-perfect experience of a game like Super Metroid not only into 3D, but into first person as well.

Yes, Nintendo continues to rely on franchises that are 20 years old. However, give GTA, Metal Gear Solid, Halo and Resident Evil another ten years and just see if they're not still around. On top of that, regardless of the fact that you can be guaranteed Mario will star in at least one game every single year, it's never the same game as last time. His definition as a videogame character is pushed, altered and refined with each new title he stars in. Sonic cannot say the same.

To criticize Nintendo for doing something that both of their competitors are also actively engaged in, and will no doubt continue to do as long as they dominate the market, is asinine. Nintendo continues making Mario, Zelda and Metroid games because they sell. It's ridiculous to criticize them for doing exactly what Sony and Microsoft do and will continue to do just because Nintendo has been doing it longer.

[Sum Yung Guy]

God I hate Nintendo... there characters for lack of a better word are gay. Also Im damn sure video games would still be here in full force even if there never was a Mario game. I want more original titles with all new worlds, characters, storylines and gameplay. Thats why I am addicted to Guild Wars right now.

[Acer]

Mario Party fucking rocks... end of story

[Titusfied]

Get back to playing Live and keep yer mouth shut!

[Raziel]

Also Im damn sure video games would still be here in full force even if there never was a Mario game.

Not a chance. Atari firmly rooted the public concept of videogames being trite, pointless and juvenile with the 2600 and 5800 systems. If it hadn't been for Nintendo, they would have continued to be seen in that light and would have died in the mid-80's. Nintendo turned a throwaway timewaster into a bonafide industry. Nobody else cared enough to try and revive videogames after Atari so spectacularly fucked them up. If it hadn't been for the Big N, videogames would be a dead laughable fad, like Pogs.

I want more original titles with all new worlds, characters, storylines and gameplay.

Sure, because every RPG plotline ever made hasn't already been done, right? Oh, and Halo's "evil aliens attack the world" plot is completely new and original too, huh? Spare me.

God I hate Nintendo

And I'm sure they really feel the sting when you say it, too. You keep crusading against a company that doesn't even know you exist, and I'll keep playing Zelda games. Deal?

[Acer]

i do need to play Live!! im always bored and i forget it have Halo2!

[S2 AM]

Let's agree to... agree?

Raziel you're an idiot, I never said I didn't like Nintendo I was nearly stating how they do it. If you read the last sentence(I'm sure it got tough half-way through) It said that I was going to buy the next generation console to play the adventures of my favorite Nintendo characters. I also agree with your view of Sonic games. They're really all the same, and their shots at 3D are just... ::shudders::

As much as I liked the NES, you couldn't be more wrong with your bold statement about the NES being the father of all video games. That's just, for lack of a better word, retarded. Games are inherent in people, and with the development of computers and people having loads of free time, games were an inevitable evolutionary branch of computer technology.

MAYBE the NES was the father of console games, but that's still a very looooong shot.

Oh ya and since you wanna knock HALO, and at the same time talk about innovation. You know what, nevermind, you probably stopped reading this post halfway through because your head hurt.

[Lenny]

Oooh, you've done it now.

Raziel you're an idiot.

You might not have heard the quote yet, but arguing with Raziel is like: "A cripple slapping a cruise missile". Guess who is who.

Just found the thread that that quote comes from...man alive, was I a jerk back then...http://zelaron.com/forum/showthread.php?t=33018&page=2&pp=40&#post453575 We thank Slim for the timeless phrase btw.

You've just given Raz an oppurtinty to vent his anger and frustrtaion which would be directed at D3V if he wasn't banned. And he was banned a few months ago. That's a lot of anger and frustration needing to be released.

[Raziel]

Raziel you're an idiot

Did I make attacks? Did I call you names? All I did was provide a counterpoint to your statements, schmuck. Don't get snippy with me.

I never said I didn't like Nintendo

Please, by all means direct me to the place where I accused you of doing so, putz.

I was nearly stating how they do it.

I was merely providing a counterpoint to your opinions. Loosen those trousers, Gilligan.

As much as I liked the NES, you couldn't be more wrong with your bold statement about the NES being the father of all video games.

I never said that the NES was the father of all videogames. That would be the Magnavox Oddyssey. The NES saved the videogames industry from certain death at Atari's misguided hands. The majority of the videogame press agrees with me, butt-stain.

That's just, for lack of a better word, retarded. Games are inherent in people, and with the development of computers and people having loads of free time, games were an inevitable evolutionary branch of computer technology.

Sure, games are inherent in people. However, the fact remains that console videogames could very well have become the electronic equivalent of professional roller derby these days. Nobody watches the sport, but it still exists. That was the path that console gaming was heading toward before Nintendo made the industry into a viable presence.

And stop drawing parallels between PC games and console games. I never said Nintendo saved the entire electronic game industry. I said they saved the console industry. There's a big diference, skippy.

MAYBE the NES was the father of console games, but that's still a very looooong shot.

The NES was the savior of console games. I never said father. Stop taking my words out of context.

Oh ya and since you wanna knock HALO, and at the same time talk about innovation. You know what, nevermind, you probably stopped reading this post halfway through because your head hurt.

I'm not knocking Halo anymore than I am knocking Zelda and it's tried and true "save the Princess" rountine in every single game. Halo did not create the "alien menace attacks the world" device, therefore Halo is not a pioneering bastion of innovative story. That's not a bad thing, but for SYG to try and claim that all Nintendo does is rehash old crap while Microsoft and Sony do nothing but excrete pure, creative gold is a load of absolute malarkey.

Let me summarize this post with the following:

SIMMER DOWN, FUCK-PUP.

Nobody here said that Nintendo is the be-all end-all of videogame genius. Nobody said that Nintendo is the father of electronic gaming. Nobody has said that everything Nintendo does is pure gold while everything any other company does is sheer, unbridled crap. Nobody except you, that is.

You are taking my statements so far out of context that the distance between the truth and your perception of the truth would require the use of Astronomical Units to properly measure. You assume that I'm attacking you, whereas in reality, I'm simply providing an alternate view of your statements. You assume that I'm lionizing Nintendo and demonizing everyboy else, whereas in reality, I'm simply stating a few positive-note observations about their accomplishments. You assume that I'm championing Nintendo games as being at the forefront of innovation and creativity, while Sony and Microsoft games stand with their thumbs up their asses, waiting for the next big trend. In reality, I am simply equalizing the playing field by saying that all parties do their fair share of innovating and rehashing. The only difference is that Nintendo has been doing it longer.

All of these assumptions are wrong. I have said nothing to indicate any of these ridiculous charges you level against me. You're fighting against an argument that doesn't exist, pal. You appear to truly be itching for a fight, and if that's what you're lookin' for, you'd better find some substantially more solid ground to do it from. Taking my statements completely out of context, putting words into my mouth and just generally being a soggy douche from the moment the starter pistol fires is not the way to earn a foothold in a discussion.

Take a deep breath and have yourself a dose of Midol, crampy. You're in desperate need of a break.

[S2 AM]

To put it simply, Lenny, I'm not afraid of vented anger from little girls.

Where to start, where to start. I mean I could do the same thing you seem to like to do. Take snippets from other people's arguments, and defile them. For talking about context you certainly are a hypocritical one.


Oh, and Halo's "evil aliens attack the world" plot is completely new and original too, huh? Spare me.
The Zelda games as well have done their fair share of innovating. Ocarina of Time brought with it the lock-on camera, auto-jump, and many of the 3D action/adventure standards still used by current-day games.I'm not knocking Halo anymore than I am knocking ZeldaOf course, of course.


Not a chance. Atari firmly rooted the public concept of videogames being trite, pointless and juvenile with the 2600 and 5800 systems. If it hadn't been for Nintendo, they would have continued to be seen in that light and would have died in the mid-80's. Nintendo turned a throwaway timewaster into a bonafide industry.And stop drawing parallels between PC games and console games. I never said Nintendo saved the entire electronic game industry. I said they saved the console industry. There's a big diference, skippy.Well I thought "VideoGames" was pretty much the equivelant of "Electronic Games". You sure got me here, though. I mean when we factor in the counting Skip-it, Giga-Pets, Tickle-me Elmo, and your battery operated Barbie car, "Electronic Games" really does take on a much broader view.


To criticize Nintendo for doing something that both of their competitors are also actively engaged in, and will no doubt continue to do as long as they dominate the market, is asinine.Did I make attacks?AS-I-NINE - of, relating to, or resembling an assYou don't have to call someone Shit, to call them Shitty.


Sure, games are inherent in people. However, the fact remains that console videogames could very well have become the electronic equivalent of professional roller derby these days.Now it's Console Videogames. I'm not so sure, but if I were you, I would have edited my post so I didn't look like a jackass.


SIMMER DOWN, FUCK-PUP.Oh yes, I'm way out of line.


I could do this all day because you're posts are full of contradictions. You want to dissect other people's good word to blow them completely out of proportion and context. I believe I left most of your futile arguing in context. I really added nothing whatsoever, you practically shot yourself in the foot this time. It's unfortunate because most arguments in REAL LIFE consist of people saying their parts, and then they go back and forth. However, arguing with someone as childish as you ineptly consists of picking through someone elses' posts like a vulture and arguing over exact wording and such. You Raziel, not me, are the one who takes peoples' statements out of context and puts words in other peoples' mouths. For the record, I was fighting nothing and noone. Let me remind you that you're the one who brought out the gloves.

In all fairness, there's no point in arguing with someone as childish as yourself. You've made no good points. Your argument is meaningless. You're so far up Nintendo's ass that you can't even give them a reach-around anymore. You're a dejected and pathetic person. I won't baby you Raziel, so go home to your mommy, maybe she'll put up with your crap.

[Lenny]

You are really in for it now. I'm quite interested to see how Raziel takes it.

Btw, don't forget the quote from Slim:

Arguing with Raziel is like a cripple slapping a cruise missile.

You might like to get your post sorted out as well. It's all fragmented and you've messed up your first set of quotes.

[S2 AM]

Ya I know the quotes part really irritated me. Something happened with the spacing and it went crazy.

Uh Lenny.. ya got a little.. ya got a little... a little bit of crap around your mouth.

Unless this inflated egotistical turd decides he wants to ban me, there's not much he can do. His arguments are weak as is his intelligence.

[Titusfied]

There is nothing wrong with good, old fashioned debates among forum members. I don't really see any need for a ban, so you shouldn't worry. Anyway, most games are rips of other games nowadays, because there aren't many orginal ideas to come up anymore.

HALO was so great for a number of reasons. The gameplay was amazingly smooth and interactive. The graphics are bar-none, and the weapon selection was intense and original. The story line was new, but not the premise, and the multi-player option was ripped from Golden Eye, but took it to the next realm. The same can be said about Zelda, which is why these gaming titles are the most successful for their individual consoles.

[Grav]

HALO was so great for a number of reasons. The gameplay was amazingly smooth and interactive. The graphics are bar-none, and the weapon selection was intense and original. The story line was new, but not the premise, and the multi-player option was ripped from Golden Eye, but took it to the next realm. The same can be said about Zelda, which is why these gaming titles are the most successful for their individual consoles.
I felt like I was reading the back of the video game box.

[Raziel]

Where to start, where to start. I mean I could do the same thing you seem to like to do. Take snippets from other people's arguments, and defile them. For talking about context you certainly are a hypocritical one.

Absolutely nothing I posted in my last statement was taking your quotes out of context. I left the comments whole when extra text was required to covey the full meaning of the statement. Every claim I made about your post was dead-on, chump. You show me where I played it different and I'll show you a man with two dicks.

Of course, of course.

Remind me again what gameplay and story have to do with one-another, shit-squeeze? Remind me where I said anything about Halo's GAMEPLAY being trite and cliche? Oh, that's right, I didn't. I said the plot has been done before, and in the very same paragraph, I said Zelda was guilty of the same thing. You're really grasping at straws here, Chauncey. Try again.

Well I thought "VideoGames" was pretty much the equivelant of "Electronic Games". You sure got me here, though. I mean when we factor in the counting Skip-it, Giga-Pets, Tickle-me Elmo, and your battery operated Barbie car, "Electronic Games" really does take on a much broader view.

Picking at straws again, S2. We weren't discussing PC games, we weren't discussing "Skip-It." We were talking about CONSOLE games. I figured you'd have enough grasp of context to understand that, but considering what a spectacular job you've been doing of mutilating every last word I've posted so far, it doesn't surprise me that the omission of a single word had your brain tied up in knots.

You don't have to call someone Shit, to call them Shitty.

AS-I-NINE - of, relating to, or resembling an ass.

Oh, let's conveniently ignore the primary definition of the word, shall we?

1 : marked by inexcusable failure to exercise intelligence or sound judgment <an asinine excuse>
2 : of, relating to, or resembling an ass


Now, please, once again point me to to the place where I said you were "asinine". I labeled your behavior as asinine, which would fall under the first definition. Way to mangle my words, bro.

Now it's Console Videogames. I'm not so sure, but if I were you, I would have edited my post so I didn't look like a jackass.

I edit my posts for grammatical and spelling errors, just as you did with your last one. Making asumptions only serves to make you appear as if "relating to or resembling an ass." Then again, making assumptions and taking statements horribly out of context seems to be your specialty.

Oh yes, I'm way out of line.

Raziel you're an idiot

You stooped to name calling before I did, Tastycakes.

I believe I left most of your futile arguing in context.

You've got to be kidding me. I posted a fairly non-biased response to your statements and you responded with a flame-laced diatribe about my love-affair with Nintendo. I did no company bashing, game bashing or people bashing of any sort. I simply levelled the playing field by giving a different perspective

Let me congratulate you on yet another spectacular failure of an argument. You've managed to once again completely defile the original context of my statements and feebly attempt to stretch semantic nonsense into your own brand of insane logic. You turned this into a fight, goat-choker, not I. My original post was a mere response to your blanketed and generalized statements, and for it I was labelled an "idiot" and handed a basket full of flames.

Do you respond this way when anyone disagrees with you? Do you start tossing insults and throwing toys around when your parents call for tuck-in time? Are you completely incapable of engaging in a debate without your arguments degenerating into a series of muddled attacks and semantic backtracking? I simply presented my opinion on your statements, and immediately you start shoving words into my mouth and redefining the intent of every single sentence I posted. Read back through it, numbnuts. I was talking about videogames, you started whining about semantics.

I honestly have to say that, in my years as a longstanding member here, you are by far the worst opponent I've ever faced in a debate. It took you a single post before your arguments turned into trite "he said, she said" bickering. You've done nothing but backtrack and squabble over minor details to try and forge an argument out of absolute shit. You have no case, yet you continue to bicker over which definition of the word "asinine" you assumed I was using.

Just stop now. You're done. You are a hypersensitive, thin-skinned simpleton with no ability to hold his own in a genuine argument. You've done nothing to enrich the atmosphere or nature of this debate. You've taken a simple counterpoint to your ridiculous intitial statements and have turned this into a war of semantics. You lost the very second you tried to assume the intent behind my words, and guessed wrong.

Sit down and shut up, Sparky. You were dead yesterday.

[Sum Yung Guy]

Ow. I'm throwing in the towel for him.

[Titusfied]

Oh yeah, well he has a gun and can shoot you! So there! (Actually, I don't even know if communications officers carry a gun around regularly, do they?)

[Titusfied]

Not a chance. Atari firmly rooted the public concept of videogames being trite, pointless and juvenile with the 2600 and 5800 systems. If it hadn't been for Nintendo, they would have continued to be seen in that light and would have died in the mid-80's. Nintendo turned a throwaway timewaster into a bonafide industry. Nobody else cared enough to try and revive videogames after Atari so spectacularly fucked them up. If it hadn't been for the Big N, videogames would be a dead laughable fad, like Pogs.

Actually, Nintendo was simply the next step in video game evolution, just as SNES was next, then N64, PS1, PS2 and XBox, etc. Of course, I'm not saying that is the order of console evolution, just a broad course over the years. Nintendo might have been more successful in selling than Atari, but that is only because the quality was greater. The same can be said about PS2 right now. It is selling 100 times better than Nintendo, but that doesn't mean it resurrected the industry and brought it to the next level, does it?

Remind me where I said anything about Halo's GAMEPLAY being trite and cliche? Oh, that's right, I didn't. I said the plot has been done before, and in the very same paragraph, I said Zelda was guilty of the same thing. You're really grasping at straws here, Chauncey. Try again.

Sure, because every RPG plotline ever made hasn't already been done, right? Oh, and Halo's "evil aliens attack the world" plot is completely new and original too, huh? Spare me.

Just to nit-pick and be a severe anal itch, you didn't mention Zelda in the same paragraph. Actually, when I first read that paragraph, I took it as you taking an e-jab at Halo. The difference with Halo is that it actually is original in its own sense. Sure, they are aliens and you can't get away from that, but the whole premise is that the aliens worship these Halos, which is a destructive ring that annihilates planets, however, they don't even know that is it's purpose. They simply think it is a holy ground where they are supposed to go and colonize. Humans find the Halo, land on it, and the aliens then attack us. So technically, it is original in its own sense.

And I'm sure they really feel the sting when you say it, too. You keep crusading against a company that doesn't even know you exist, and I'll keep playing Zelda games. Deal?

I hardly see what SYG wrote as "crusading against a company". You seem to be on more of a crusade to suck off the inventors of "the Big N", as you put it. He simply said Nintendo has gay characters. I don't think anyone will argue that the Nintendo consoles are geared towards fantasy/kiddy characters and gameplay. Don't get me wrong, I love the Zelda series because the story is completely kickass, but the graphics, fighting sequences, etc. are extremely 6-10 year old-ish.

[S2 AM]

I still think it's funny how Raziel claims not to take someone's words out of context, but continually does so. The only real reason that I even entertained that nonsensical idea of yours was an attempt to show you how juvenile of a tactic it actually was. An attempt that obviously failed, as I open the page and see that you have quoted me even more so than before.

I'm not going to quote you, Raziel, I don't really care to do so. I'd just be posting your diluted words a second or third time. As far as arguing goes, this one doesn't really exist. I've read what you've posted. You on the other hand, don't really seem to read what someone else posts, you just requote them and throw an insult their way. The argument of who started mudslinging doesn't exist. If you had read my last post, I'm sure that all of Zelaron and the world would agree. Your response to my original post was not only far out of line, and you threw the first insult by not only quoting what I said, bashing it(not offering a counter-proposal), then saying that anyone who would accept such views is asinine. That's too simple to ignore. Oh and no I didn't ignore the first definition. I actually considered posting them both, but the latter seemed to show more emphasis. Either way, it was still a negative comment on your part. If you're still wondering why my first slanderous comment was thrown your way, it was because you are an idiot. You took what I said, and then launched an argument as if my original post even contradicted yours.

I'm also sure that you're trying for an unachievable goal here. If everyone will simply thumb back through the posts, I'm sure you'll see where Raziel claimed that the NES was(not the father, because if I post that you'll take everyone's attention off the main point here and claim you never said 'father'), but instead said it was the savior of modern video games. I'm not quoting you exactly, because that's too primitive a way of debating, as you have proven already kid. I'm sure that all of Zelaron would again agree with me. I don't think I really have to prove the meaning of each and every word in your sentence, the overall meaning was conveyed. If you're going to argue about that, then just stop for a second before you dig up five quotes and write a meaningless paragraph and I guess try to impress people. Stop and think. Instead of arguing that point, MOST people would just say that they made a typo, forgot to include console, and console videogames is what they really meant to say. You didn't.

Raziel you seem to like to end each of your misleading logically blundering sentences about my posts with some sort of petword. This is the only time I will "quote" you. I.E. Tastycakes, goat-choker, butt-stain, chump, FUCK-PUP, crampy, skippy. You've been attacking me from the moment we started debating. I'm not sure if you're trying to establish some sort of superiority because of your obvious lack of intelligence, or you simply don't know much else. I think goat-choker is the only creative of the bunch. Please, dissect your own post and show me more creative name-calling if you wish, I don't care much for it. I could always make up names describing you: cum-dumpster, cockholster, cream puff, cock dock, sissy girl, pantywaste, etc...

That's not how you win a debate, though. I'm not sure the people you usually debate with, I haven't been here long enough to know or care. I'm not even sure of your tactics, you contradict yourself so many times, it's as if you're debating yourself. Anyways, I'd guess that most people got tired of you requoting them over and over and writing chapter long rebuttles that just show a few simple and already repeated ideas and simply gave up. However you used to win debates, it's not working this time. Your last three paragraphs are really just a reshowing of the last few paragraphs of your last post. You claiming victory over something you haven't come close to winning, I'm ridiculous to 'argue' with the great Raziel. Skimming through... I squander of small details? I start tossing insult first? I shoved words into YOUR mouth? Those paragraphs are really the only meaningful part of your debate, the rest is just the normal requoting. In this space that you could have put something useful, you've instead just described yourself.

[Raziel]

First and foremost, the quotes are there for the sake of referencing your argumentative points. In an actual debate, opposing members counter each point in succession, taking them one at a time. Online, the equivalent to this is quoting another person, for the sake of referencing their individual arguments. If you want to boil this down into a mass of paragraphs that consist of one-sided scream-fests, you go right ahead. I'm doing you a courtesy.

How is calling your generalized comments "asinine" in any way an attack against you, S2? Explain that one to me, because criticizing one's actions and criticizing their identity are two completely separate things. I didn't call names, I didn't hurl insults. I merely observed that you posted a couple of lame, generalized blanket statements. Again, is this how you respond to all non-positive comments directed your way? Calling names and immediately launching into an offensive diatribe? Grow up, kid.

I'm not quoting you exactly, because that's too primitive a way of debating, as you have proven already kid.

Too "primitive"? I suppose you're posting your thoughts onto the boards via telepathy then? Spare me your egomaniacal pablum. I already tossed this pathetic excuse of yours out the door. Quoting and referencing specific arguments is the online equivalent of an actual debate. What you're preaching is the online equivalent of a temper tantrum.

The fact of the matter is, you are the one that took a slightly negative comment as an attack and decided to start hurling insults. I'm not going to just sit here and be labelled an "idiot" by a mumbling buffoon like you, so I lashed back. You can't handle not being praised at every turn of the day? You can't handle a non-positive comment on your opinions? Tough shit. Ain't my bitch.

That's not how you win a debate, though.

That's not how you win a debate? This stopped being a debate the moment you took a harmless comment as an attack and started hurling insults, Ponch. You can't win a debate because you can't handle the idea of being told you're acting like a twat without leaping off the deep and and turning a structured exchange into a bare-knuckle melee. Everything you've done since the moment you responded to me has been an absolute farce of rational thought. I never accused you of hating Nintendo, as you claim I did. I never stated that Nintendo excretes pure gold, while Microsoft re-hashes tired garbage, as you claim I did. And I didn't attack you until after you tried to bare your measly-ass fangs at me, as you'd like to convince yourself of otherwise.

Everything you've posted over the last 24 hours has been a total waste of your time, I can tell you that right now. You have the mental caliber to pretend like you're a sane, intellgent individual, but you don't have quite enough to actually be one. I repeat: you are a hypersensitive whiner that can't take a pinch of criticism without losing his head, you misconstrue every statement your opponent tries to make, and you attempt to use lame ass criticisms like "quoting" to divert attention away from the fact that you've already lost the battle. Honestly, I've never seen anyone crash and burn as badly as you have over the last few posts, and with each new entry that you post in this anthology of failure, you only bury yourself deeper in the mindless, backtracking stupidity of your own garbled nonsense.

Stop now. Everything you do is laced with failure. You reek of it.

[Raziel]

Actually, Nintendo was simply the next step in video game evolution, just as SNES was next, then N64, PS1, PS2 and XBox, etc. Of course, I'm not saying that is the order of console evolution, just a broad course over the years. Nintendo might have been more successful in selling than Atari, but that is only because the quality was greater. The same can be said about PS2 right now. It is selling 100 times better than Nintendo, but that doesn't mean it resurrected the industry and brought it to the next level, does it?

It's not the same thing, Titus. The videogames industry was in a state of steep decline as a result of Atari's buffonery. Developers were making nothing back on their games, hardware sales were slumping and the general public concensus was that console videogames would be dead in a few short years if the industry continued to progress in that manner.

Along came Nintendo, they started making creative games that were worth the buyer's 80 bucks, and they revived an industry that was on the brink of collapse. Sony isn't in the same boat. They joined the race as the entire industry was picking up steam. Granted, Sony one-upped Nintendo by turning the videogames industry from a nerdy hobby into a genuine multimedia threat, however the industry was in no danger of dying when Sony did so. It's not the same thing.

Just to nit-pick and be a severe anal itch, you didn't mention Zelda in the same paragraph.

I'm not knocking Halo anymore than I am knocking Zelda and it's tried and true "save the Princess" rountine in every single game. Halo did not create the "alien menace attacks the world" device, therefore Halo is not a pioneering bastion of innovative story. That's not a bad thing, but for SYG to try and claim that all Nintendo does is rehash old crap while Microsoft and Sony do nothing but excrete pure, creative gold is a load of absolute malarkey.

Yes I did. You and I are referring to two completely different posts. I've said nothing about Microsoft or Sony's games that can't be applied to Nintendo as well. The fact is, I merely levelled the playing field. The complaint from S2 AM was that Nintendo just rehashes old crap. The comment from SYG was that Nintendo simply rehashes old crap while Microsoft births nothing but sheer art at every turn. Both companies do their share of re-hashing and innovating. That was my whole point, which was so woefully taken out of context by S2.

So technically, it is original in its own sense.

I never said it wasn't. I merely said that the basic premise, that being "evil aliens attack the world" is no more innovative than Zelda's tried-and-true "save the Princess" routine. If you go into specifics, neither game is as cliched or rehashed as the basic premises would lead you to believe. That was my entire point, once again, completely manhandled by S2.

I hardly see what SYG wrote as "crusading against a company". You seem to be on more of a crusade to suck off the inventors of "the Big N", as you put it. He simply said Nintendo has gay characters.

I'm simply correcting ridiculous blanket statements. If someone was making the same generalized comments about hair gel or black people, I'd be saying the exact same things I'm saying now.

Plus, it's an opportunity to debate. You know me enough to know that I'm gonna jump at the chance when it's provided.

[Titusfied]

Plus, it's an opportunity to debate. You know me enough to know that I'm gonna jump at the chance when it's provided.

Oh, I know that, which is exactly why I decided to interject with my 2 cents and get in on the fun! So, here we go:

It's not the same thing, Titus. The videogames industry was in a state of steep decline as a result of Atari's buffoonery. Developers were making nothing back on their games, hardware sales were slumping and the general public consensus was that console videogames would be dead in a few short years if the industry continued to progress in that manner.

That isn’t entirely true. The video game industry was not in a steep decline directly because of Atari’s weak attempts to make better games, there were numerous reasons behind the sales slumps. Aside from the shortage of quality games, there was extremely aggressive marketing of cheaper home computers, combined with an overall weak economy during the mid-80’s. Like any introduction of a new and improved technology, there will be relapses in old technology, hence Atari’s sales dropping significantly. Now couple this with a poor economy and you suddenly get the claim that Atari royally screwed up the video gaming industry and Nintendo revitalized it. Truth is, it was a matter of various outside constraints that caused this thinking to arise.

Along came Nintendo, they started making creative games that were worth the buyer's 80 bucks, and they revived an industry that was on the brink of collapse. Sony isn't in the same boat. They joined the race as the entire industry was picking up steam. Granted, Sony one-upped Nintendo by turning the videogames industry from a nerdy hobby into a genuine multimedia threat, however the industry was in no danger of dying when Sony did so. It's not the same thing.
Again, this can be directly correlated to the computer industry. I know we are talking about consoles, but in essence, they should be included in this argument. During the time when Atari was floundering around, computer prices became extremely cheaper, and gave consumers the option to connect to a TV, which obviously offered better quality graphics, color, and sound. It was because of this insurgent of quality to the gaming industry, that Atari became sloppy and started releasing potentially huge hits way too early, and it showed in the final product. Perfect example was the E.T. game that was released and sold terribly.

Now, I can’t argue that Nintendo didn’t up the bar in the console gaming industry, but that wasn’t because Atari sucked and Nintendo was God. Nintendo simply saw what had happened to Atari because of computers introducing much higher quality, and like any good business, they adapted and evolved their platform to be competitive. If anyone is going to get the credit for saving the console gaming industry, it has to be home computers. Then again, they were also more than half the downfall for the slump in the console gaming industry.

I've said nothing about Microsoft or Sony's games that can't be applied to Nintendo as well. The fact is, I merely leveled the playing field. The complaint from S2 AM was that Nintendo just rehashes old crap. The comment from SYG was that Nintendo simply rehashes old crap while Microsoft births nothing but sheer art at every turn. Both companies do their share of re-hashing and innovating. That was my whole point, which was so woefully taken out of context by S2.
Now, I can’t speak for S2 and SYG, but I think their thinking was that basically all of Nintendos success is based off of their first generation gaming titles. I agree with you when you said, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”, but at the same token, it appears as though the old saying “You can’t teach and old dog new tricks” applies to Nintendo as well. I mean, at least Halo’s success is based off an original idea based in the 21st century, and not some mid-1980’s idea that was a hit. Microsoft, to me, seems to be able to keep coming up with great gaming ideas, while Nintendo is literally functioning on one leg, made up of Zelda and Metroid… At least that is the only reason I bought and still own a Gamecube at the present moment. Online gaming was revolutionized by Microsoft, and their games just keep getting better and better. [/End of Microsoft Crusade] ;)

[Raziel]

That isn’t entirely true. The video game industry was not in a steep decline directly because of Atari’s weak attempts to make better games, there were numerous reasons behind the sales slumps. Aside from the shortage of quality games, there was extremely aggressive marketing of cheaper home computers, combined with an overall weak economy during the mid-80’s. Like any introduction of a new and improved technology, there will be relapses in old technology, hence Atari’s sales dropping significantly. Now couple this with a poor economy and you suddenly get the claim that Atari royally screwed up the video gaming industry and Nintendo revitalized it. Truth is, it was a matter of various outside constraints that caused this thinking to arise.


Again, this can be directly correlated to the computer industry. I know we are talking about consoles, but in essence, they should be included in this argument. During the time when Atari was floundering around, computer prices became extremely cheaper, and gave consumers the option to connect to a TV, which obviously offered better quality graphics, color, and sound. It was because of this insurgent of quality to the gaming industry, that Atari became sloppy and started releasing potentially huge hits way too early, and it showed in the final product. Perfect example was the E.T. game that was released and sold terribly.

You're missing one key element though, Titus. At the time when Atari was in the midst of their heydey, the term videogame "console" didn't really even exist. The terms "computer game system" and "TV game system" were the standard nomenclature for home videogames at the time. The 2600 and 5800 were, in essence, percieved as home computer systems designed primarily for the purpose of gaming. They were lumped right together with conventional computers simply because people didn't know how else to define them. As a result, people saw that they could afford to buy real computers for much cheaper, and gave up on a type of machine heretofore seen as a shallow toy.

Then Nintendo came along, bringing with it the definition of a "videogame console". They introduced a device that, unlike Atari's hardware, strove to present a pure videogame experience without trying to also be a diet-PC at the same time. Nintendo created the rift between consoles and computers, allowing people to distinguish between the two, saving the industry from Atari's bumbling hands. Witout the introduction of the NES, the console videogames industry would be in a very different place today.

Now, I can’t argue that Nintendo didn’t up the bar in the console gaming industry, but that wasn’t because Atari sucked and Nintendo was God. Nintendo simply saw what had happened to Atari because of computers introducing much higher quality, and like any good business, they adapted and evolved their platform to be competitive. If anyone is going to get the credit for saving the console gaming industry, it has to be home computers. Then again, they were also more than half the downfall for the slump in the console gaming industry.

I couldn't disagree more. Home computers had much to do with the downfall of the console industry, simply because Atari wasn't willing to build a machine dedicated solely to idea of games. Nintendo took that chance and it saved console videogames as we know them.

Now, I can’t speak for S2 and SYG, but I think their thinking was that basically all of Nintendos success is based off of their first generation gaming titles. I agree with you when you said, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”, but at the same token, it appears as though the old saying “You can’t teach and old dog new tricks” applies to Nintendo as well. I mean, at least Halo’s success is based off an original idea based in the 21st century, and not some mid-1980’s idea that was a hit. Microsoft, to me, seems to be able to keep coming up with great gaming ideas, while Nintendo is literally functioning on one leg, made up of Zelda and Metroid… At least that is the only reason I bought and still own a Gamecube at the present moment. Online gaming was revolutionized by Microsoft, and their games just keep getting better and better. [/End of Microsoft Crusade] ;)

And again, I can't see how it's fair to admonish Nintendo for doing something that works, and at the same time, Microsoft and Sony will be guilty of should they be given another decade with which to do so. As I've already pointed out, Ratchet & Clank will, by the end of this year, have seen four entries in five years, as will Jak and Daxter. GTA has been releasing sequels and updates consistently since 2001. Final Fantasy has seen a new installment on Sony consoles every single year since 1999. Resident Evil has been pumping out new titles non-stop since 1996. Why do these franchises continue to exist? Because they continue to sell.

On top of that, you can't praise Microsoft too much for releasing a lot of new IPs. It's their first generation. They can't release anything but new stuff.

And it's not as though Nintendo just sits on their hands and rebuilds the same game over and over again. You can't claim that they don't make new stuff, because that would indicate you haven't played a lot of the great new games they create. The Pikmin games are fantastic, Donkey Kong: Jungle Beat is one of a kind, Animal Crossing is a must-own, Paper Mario, F-Zero GX and a large number of great 3rd-party titles like Eternal Darkness, Resident Evil 4, Viewtiful Joe and Baten Kaitos were introduced via Nintendo's console.

Not seeing the merits of Nintendo's library beyond Zelda and Metroid has nothing to do with them, but entirely to do with your own tastes. If those two franchises are the only thing that keeps your interest, that's not the fault of the developer. It's the same way with me and my PS2. I play it, I love it, but I don't own much beyond the three LOK games, the Ratchet games, Silent Hill, Metal Gear Solid and Devil May Cry. A lot of the Sony library just doesn't do much for me, and in particular, I'm not a giant fan of the controller. Does that mean it's Sony's fault for not catering to my desires? No.

Opinions are opinions, but it just strikes me as a little ridiculous to criticize somebody for doing something that works. Give Sony another decade and just see if they're not still riding the GTA-train. Give Microsoft another ten years and watch as Halo 12 continues to sell into the stratosphere. If they could sustain public interest in those franchises for another decade, you can bet your ass that they'll keep making the games. Nintendo has kept their biggest sellers alive for 20 years. That's not something to be condemned for, that's something to be congratulated on.

[Shroom]

I'd like to get a revolution, is there an eta or a price yet??

[Raziel]

2006. Most likely November. Price will absolutely be the lowest of the three, considering that it's going to be the least-powerful. I'd imagine close to $250 at launch.

The only next-gen console that I'm skittish about picking up is the PS3, to be quite honest. It's undoubtedly going to be the most expensive, it's huge, and the controller looks like compressed shit. The 360 is actually interesting me more and more. I hear that the controller is a work of art, and the size is a lot more manageable than the PS3 appears to be. If the console launches with a good Rareware title, I'll most certainly be picking one up.

[Sum Yung Guy]

Perfect Dark Zero and another Rare platformer are coming for launch or soon after. Yea I like the controller alot, and sheesh that damn PS3 is ugly and the controller looks uncomfortable and uncool. Silver is soo 90's.

[Raziel]

If that Rare platformer happens to be a Banjo game, that's a guaranteed sale. PDZero should be pretty badass, too. The photos of the 360 controller look great, I just need to actually hold one before I can make a final judgment.

Honestly, I don't understand why Sony felt the need to redesign the controller. Granted, the Dual Shock 2 isn't my absolute favorite design, but it's a hell of a lot better than that ridiculous Boomerang looks. It's as though they just tossed functionality out altogether in the name of aesthetics. I'm really hoping that they do what Microsoft did with the S Controller, and offer an alternate design to that stupid, silver hunk of crap.

[Xenn]

You realize the PS3 controller is alot smaller than it looks. It's actually smaller than the Dualshock, I think.

Also, Nintendo MAY have leaked it's controller design. Basically its supposed to be force responsive, sort of like a more high-tech rumble. Doesn't sound too impressive, but it could be cool. This is all rumor though.

[Raziel]

It uses gyration technology, from the rumor mill. So, some games will appparently be manipulated by actually moving the controller. I can see force feedback being used in conjunction with it, so that moving the controller under certain circumstances would cause the controller to resist.

One of the coolest fan mock-ups I've seen had the controller actually separated into two handheld pieces, with buttons and joysticks of course. Imagine if you took the standard GCN controller and removed the chunk that connects the two handles, and you've got the basic idea. Completely wireless. Imagine playing a boxing game, or something to that effect, and every time you swung your fists you could feel the controller vibrate against your fist, as though actually striking your opponent.

That's the coolest theory I've heard as of right now. However, Nintendo has said it won't be as outlandish as most fan mock-ups have theorized.

You realize the PS3 controller is alot smaller than it looks. It's actually smaller than the Dualshock, I think.

Sure, but that doesn't change the fact that it looks like a clumsy hunk of crap. It's just a small, clumsy hunk of crap.

[S2 AM]

Well I hope since Raziel got his last word in, he feels satisfied with himself, thus meaning that this pissing contest is over. I mean, if you want another rebuttle, I can happily supply it to you, but it would just argue the same pointless ideas from page one. You can continue to beleive what you do about NES, and think that your perverse insults are not such. I will continue believing what I believe, too. We disagree, period.

Gyration? Never really heard of it, I wonder if it will flop or not. If it is a success and is implimented, then people will finally be able to jerk their controller upward to jump, just like we ALL did when we first played Super Mario 64. You're all guilty, admit it.

To me, Perfect Dark Zero is the Zinge of first-person shooters. I'm sure you all played Rare's Perfect Dark for the Nintendo 64. That, my friends, was a revolutionary game. No it didn't create bots, but it capitilized on them, allowing the user to control the AI and difficulty of the bot, as well as some of their actions during the game. The weapons were outstanding. One must realize the leap in gaming technology Perfect Dark was for first-person shooters. The only resentment I ever had was the framerate, which I understood. Rare is known for great games, and I'm sure that Perfect Dark Zero will not only be a great game, but will bring new ideas with it to the playing field that create a fun and enjoyable experience for anyone who plays the game.

Oh yea, and I was just thinking as I played other xbox live games. With all this talk about revolutionary ideas, I feel it's only fair to say that Halo 2 created the matchmaking system. I wish other games would catch onto the idea, because I hate having shitty hosts who restart games when they aren't winning. For some reason, little kids always have the best connections.

[Raziel]

I am pretty satisfied, to tell you the truth.

The Rev controller will still have a joystick, face buttons and triggers, as per usual. However, it will most likely also sport the gyration tech, as well as maybe one or two other surprises.

PDZero should be fun, but it's nothing I'm frothing over at the moment. I've seen a few screens and one video from E3 and it didn't look awe-inspiring. However, I'd bet money that what we saw was pre-beta, and that the game still has a ways to go before it's a finished product. If I decide to pick up a 360, which is becoming a likely possibility, I'll most certainly grab it.

[pr0xy]

You aren't to popular on this forum are ya buddy...

Warcraft 3 had a matchmaking system =/

Hell maybe "Skip-It" even did... I seem to recall something like that from my old "Skip-It" competition days.

[Sum Yung Guy]

Most multiplayer games nowadays have some sort of matchmaking system.... I was playing Fight Night for ps2 with matching making before I was playin Halo 2

[S2 AM]

Well I'm happy for you then Raziel :rolleyes:

I wouldn't really know. I gave Warcraft III a spin when it first came out at a LAN party. I gotta tell ya, I didn't find it too intriguing. I think personally it lacked the strategy to be considered a decent RTS. The role-playing aspect just brought it down even further. I know it was supposed to be a hybrid, but not every hybrid is good... IE: "Pig & Elephant DNA just won't splice."

The user made maps and Scenarios were fun, though.

[Lenny]

Honestly, I don't understand why Sony felt the need to redesign the controller.

Sony didn't patent the Dual Shock technology. Another company did and Sony used it without permission. As a result they were sued, meanign that most games in North America with Dual Shock function might have the Dual Shock bit taken out. I followed the story for a couple of days but not since so I haven't a clue what's happening.

I also seem to remember Sony saying that the pictures of the contoller are subject to change as they've not completely finished designing it. Chances are I dreamed this after the PS3 conference, but what they hey? It sounds like it's possible, so I'm gonna believe it. :p

Maybe if you try the controller you'll like it. Never judge a book by its cover Raziel, it may look like if you threw it out of the window it would come back and hit you, and a bit weird, but when you actually try it you might like it. This design could be more ergonomical than the Dual Shock controllers.

Yea I like the controller alot, and sheesh that damn PS3 is ugly and the controller looks uncomfortable and uncool. Silver is soo 90's.

I must be the only one who still likes the PS3 here. :p

Don't forget that the PS3 is coming out not only in Silver but Black and White. Of course, that doesn't make it any more pleasing to those who don't like the shape, I'm just saying you don't have to have it in Silver. I quite like it in Silver,, it'll complete the collection:

- Grey Playstation
- White PS1
- Black PS2 (that no longer works :()
- Silver PS3

Now all I need is luminous orange and sky-pink. :weird:

[Acer]

yeah PGR2 had matchmaking... first game i played with it i recall... way before the H2 days

[Titusfied]

You're missing one key element though, Titus. At the time when Atari was in the midst of their heydey, the term videogame "console" didn't really even exist. The terms "computer game system" and "TV game system" were the standard nomenclature for home videogames at the time. The 2600 and 5800 were, in essence, percieved as home computer systems designed primarily for the purpose of gaming. They were lumped right together with conventional computers simply because people didn't know how else to define them. As a result, people saw that they could afford to buy real computers for much cheaper, and gave up on a type of machine heretofore seen as a shallow toy.

Then how can you say Nintendo saved the console industry? You just said it right there, that technically, consoles didn't even exist. Without doing any research and just taking you on your word, which is usually correct anyway, Nintendo started the console gaming system, and cheaper, real home computers revolutionized gaming and saved Atari's royal screw up.

Then Nintendo came along, bringing with it the definition of a "videogame console". They introduced a device that, unlike Atari's hardware, strove to present a pure videogame experience without trying to also be a diet-PC at the same time. Nintendo created the rift between consoles and computers, allowing people to distinguish between the two, saving the industry from Atari's bumbling hands. Witout the introduction of the NES, the console videogames industry would be in a very different place today.

Alright, I guess we are simply arguing semantics then, because based on your previous paragraph, we are now saying the exact same thing, but you are taking a different route, or should I say opinion. I say home computers were upgrades to Atari, and NES was basically a brand-spanking new technology that started console gaming, while you say NES saved Atari's bumbling idiocy.

Either way, NES was great, agreed, but it really isn't any different than the progress of cars throughout history. Ford first built cars, but they didn't sell very a lot because they were intended for the rich. Then, mass production was introduced and manufacturing cars in bulk allowed companies to sell cars for cheaper, hence saving the automobile industry the same way the introduction of cheap home computers opened the door for Nintendo to revolutionize/begin the console gaming industry. Both opened the doors and paved the way to innovative thinking, which enabled other companies (i.e. car companies and NES) to become successful and change the way we looked at cars/games.

I couldn't disagree more. Home computers had much to do with the downfall of the console industry, simply because Atari wasn't willing to build a machine dedicated solely to idea of games. Nintendo took that chance and it saved console videogames as we know them.

How could Nintendo save an industry that you said didn't even technically exist? They took one of the ideas from Atari, and because computers made the gaming industry more competitive and upped the scales of quality, NES made a console that changed gaming.

And again, I can't see how it's fair to admonish Nintendo for doing something that works, and at the same time, Microsoft and Sony will be guilty of should they be given another decade with which to do so. As I've already pointed out, Ratchet & Clank will, by the end of this year, have seen four entries in five years, as will Jak and Daxter. GTA has been releasing sequels and updates consistently since 2001. Final Fantasy has seen a new installment on Sony consoles every single year since 1999. Resident Evil has been pumping out new titles non-stop since 1996. Why do these franchises continue to exist? Because they continue to sell.

On top of that, you can't praise Microsoft too much for releasing a lot of new IPs. It's their first generation. They can't release anything but new stuff.

First, that is a good point. Miscrosoft is new and had to come up with original titles and characters to get that base, true. Second, I'm not knocking on NES for pumping out sequel after sequel, because like I said before, I agree with your policy that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I guess I'm just waiting for the next gaming title that is original to come out from Nintendo that will attract the same future attention some of it's major hits of the past have... I haven't seen that in a while, so I'm a skeptic.

Also, we all grew up with the Mario and Zelda gaming titles, so we got addicted to the kiddy worlds and gameplay style. As I get older, and the technology gets better, I have more and more desire to play in a realistic gaming atmosphere. I'd like to see Nintendo get away from basing most of their games on the same style of play I loved in the early 90's...

Not seeing the merits of Nintendo's library beyond Zelda and Metroid has nothing to do with them, but entirely to do with your own tastes. If those two franchises are the only thing that keeps your interest, that's not the fault of the developer.

Well there is clearly something wrong with Nintendo, being it is the worst of the 3 major console sellers, by far. PS2 and XBox kill Gamecube in sales, and with the introduction of XBox 360 this year, it's all but a console killer for Gamecube..

Opinions are opinions, but it just strikes me as a little ridiculous to criticize somebody for doing something that works. Give Sony another decade and just see if they're not still riding the GTA-train. Give Microsoft another ten years and watch as Halo 12 continues to sell into the stratosphere. If they could sustain public interest in those franchises for another decade, you can bet your ass that they'll keep making the games. Nintendo has kept their biggest sellers alive for 20 years. That's not something to be condemned for, that's something to be congratulated on.

Again, I'm not criticizing them, I agreed with you. I actually am looking forward to seeing the progress of Microsoft over the next 10 years. If I was a betting man, I'd say they will surpass all console sales and original gaming hits by far. Already, XBox sales are catching up to PS2, which was by far a favorite just a few years ago. Microsoft simply has too much money to just burn for it not to be the best, and that makes me happy, because they will only keep raising the bar for everyone else to match. :)



Oh, and has anyone seen The 40 Year Old Virgin? I only mention it because in it, Steve Carrel had a chair for gaming that broke up the controls into two pieces, one for each hand. Is that the same technology you are talking about that could be standard in gaming controls in the future?

[Raziel]

Then how can you say Nintendo saved the console industry? You just said it right there, that technically, consoles didn't even exist. Without doing any research and just taking you on your word, which is usually correct anyway, Nintendo started the console gaming system, and cheaper, real home computers revolutionized gaming and saved Atari's royal screw up.

I said that the public separation between consoles and computers didn't exist. Nintendo saved electronic, TV-display game-playing devices. They created the rift between PCs and consoles, thereby allowing consoles to continue existing.

Either way, NES was great, agreed, but it really isn't any different than the progress of cars throughout history. Ford first built cars, but they didn't sell very a lot because they were intended for the rich. Then, mass production was introduced and manufacturing cars in bulk allowed companies to sell cars for cheaper, hence saving the automobile industry the same way the introduction of cheap home computers opened the door for Nintendo to revolutionize/begin the console gaming industry. Both opened the doors and paved the way to innovative thinking, which enabled other companies (i.e. car companies and NES) to become successful and change the way we looked at cars/games.

Sure, the parallel works. However, that doesn't mean it was destined to turn out this way. Both were the result of a gamble taken by a specific group of individuals and it paid off. You can't write off the significance of these events simply because it feels natural. There's no evidence to support the notion that anyone would have taken the gamble breathing life back into the console industry had Nintendo chosen not to.

How could Nintendo save an industry that you said didn't even technically exist? They took one of the ideas from Atari, and because computers made the gaming industry more competitive and upped the scales of quality, NES made a console that changed gaming.

I never said the console industry never existed. I said that the separation between consoles and computers didn't exist in the mind of the public until Nintendo made it so. People percieved consoles as being nothing more than toys. A fad destined to fail. Nintendo changed that perception. Nintendo did not invent consoles. They simply gave them public definition.

First, that is a good point. Miscrosoft is new and had to come up with original titles and characters to get that base, true. Second, I'm not knocking on NES for pumping out sequel after sequel, because like I said before, I agree with your policy that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I guess I'm just waiting for the next gaming title that is original to come out from Nintendo that will attract the same future attention some of it's major hits of the past have... I haven't seen that in a while, so I'm a skeptic.

I can fully understand that sentiment. I've been waiting for the next big thing from Nintendo as well, and although this generation has been spectacular in my opinion, the closest that they have delivered on the "next big thing" front was Metroid Prime, and that's still a resurrection of an older franchise.

Also, we all grew up with the Mario and Zelda gaming titles, so we got addicted to the kiddy worlds and gameplay style. As I get older, and the technology gets better, I have more and more desire to play in a realistic gaming atmosphere. I'd like to see Nintendo get away from basing most of their games on the same style of play I loved in the early 90's...

Yet, there are people, like me, who still prefer that style of gaming. Different strokes.

Well there is clearly something wrong with Nintendo, being it is the worst of the 3 major console sellers, by far. PS2 and XBox kill Gamecube in sales, and with the introduction of XBox 360 this year, it's all but a console killer for Gamecube..

Well, first off, the problem with Nintendo is image. Advertising, promotion and solid 3rd-party relationships are all weak areas for them, and it's what killed them this gen. Not to mention their stubbornness in regard to online expansion. The games themselves are not the problem, because Sony still kills on sales with cartoonish games like Ratchet and Jak. Advertising and image are the issue.

Second, the XBox, in worldwide numbers only stands a mere 1,900,000 units above Nintendo, the last time I checked NPD numbers. That's less than the population of Idaho. XBox is crushing Nintendo in terms of momentum, but the actual hardware numbers aren't anything to scream about.

On top of that, if you factor in handheld numbers, Nintendo is doing better than both of their competitors in terms of hardware sales.

Oh, and has anyone seen The 40 Year Old Virgin? I only mention it because in it, Steve Carrel had a chair for gaming that broke up the controls into two pieces, one for each hand. Is that the same technology you are talking about that could be standard in gaming controls in the future?

First, I am literally dying as we speak because I haven't seen this fucking movie yet. Steve Carell is tumor-inducingly funny, and I've been aching to see this for months.

Second, I can't really comment because I haven't seen the film. However, I've seen people do some crazy modding shit like that before.

[Lawngnome]

All of this Xbox and Nintendo bickering makes me want to just wait and get a ps3.

[Raziel]

Nobody's bickering. It's a debate.

[Lenny]

And it's not just Xbox and Nintendo...there was a lot about the PS3 when I made the threads.

[Grav]

As if I'm going to read a thesis on fourth (?) generation video game systems. Sum it up; who won?

[Lenny]

Third gen I think.

We finally decided that the PS2 is great for single player, and the Xbox great for online multiplayer. Or did we decide that in the other thread...

Anyway, then I think Raziel came in, he and S2 AM debated...and I lost track of everything.

Out of who won...I don't think anyone did. We're all back at square one, some of us in the PS3 camp, more in the Xbox 360 camp, and Raziel debating with whoever tries to rip into the Nintendo camp.

[S2 AM]

Lol, it's more of writing books and not debating. Instead of writing gigantic responses, we should have debated each issue separately. As far as being as square one, I'd have to agree, we've gotten nowhere.

[Titusfied]

I said that the public separation between consoles and computers didn't exist. Nintendo saved electronic, TV-display game-playing devices. They created the rift between PCs and consoles, thereby allowing consoles to continue existing.

Gotcha. No doubt Nintendo did a great justice to the future of gaming, but lets agree that there were many factors that contributed, not just the brilliance of Nintendo.

Sure, the parallel works. However, that doesn't mean it was destined to turn out this way. Both were the result of a gamble taken by a specific group of individuals and it paid off. You can't write off the significance of these events simply because it feels natural. There's no evidence to support the notion that anyone would have taken the gamble breathing life back into the console industry had Nintendo chosen not to.

Of course it isn't destined. It was just something that came to mind when I was writing my response. The parallel seemed to great to ignore, in my opinion.

Yet, there are people, like me, who still prefer that style of gaming. Different strokes.

True enough, hence, half our debate gets settled.

First, I am literally dying as we speak because I haven't seen this fucking movie yet. Steve Carell is tumor-inducingly funny, and I've been aching to see this for months.

Second, I can't really comment because I haven't seen the film. However, I've seen people do some crazy modding shit like that before.

Holy shit. You have to see this movie. To be quite honest, and this is an understatement at best, this is one of the funniest movies I've ever seen. It hits on all kinds of stereotypes, outlandish acting, comments, and actions. Steve Carell is friggin' hillarious, and so are his co-stars in the movie. They did a good casting job, and until you see this movie, you are missing out on great laughs. Please see this ASAP then write a review in the Reviews forum. I just wouldn't do the movie justice in a review, since half my review would be filled with, "Holy shit, this movie is hillarious!" types of lines..

[Raziel]

Gotcha. No doubt Nintendo did a great justice to the future of gaming, but lets agree that there were many factors that contributed, not just the brilliance of Nintendo.

Agreed. There were numerous factors. To dispute such would be lunacy.

Of course it isn't destined. It was just something that came to mind when I was writing my response. The parallel seemed to great to ignore, in my opinion.

And, as I said, the parallel works well. The interesting thing is thinking about what state the automotive/videogame industries would be in had the key players been other people, with other ideals.

Holy shit. You have to see this movie. To be quite honest, and this is an understatement at best, this is one of the funniest movies I've ever seen. It hits on all kinds of stereotypes, outlandish acting, comments, and actions. Steve Carell is friggin' hillarious, and so are his co-stars in the movie. They did a good casting job, and until you see this movie, you are missing out on great laughs. Please see this ASAP then write a review in the Reviews forum. I just wouldn't do the movie justice in a review, since half my review would be filled with, "Holy shit, this movie is hillarious!" types of lines..

I'll most certainly do so. I've just recently procured a new car, meaning I don't have to persuade one of my friends to go see a movie starring a comedian they've never heard of. I've been waiting for Steve Carrell to earn a starring role since he left The Daily Show. He was the best thing that came out of that program, and he's been in desperate need of greater attention from the public in general. I'm stoked, to say the very least.

[Grav]

I saw the 40 Year Old Virgin the other day with my girlfriend and two friends. It's funny, because all the virgins in the audience never laugh at the sex jokes, while the couples do. Half of the theatre is just sitting in semi-awkward silence with boners while the other half laughs vigorously.

I thought the premise of the movie was ridiculous enough, but actually the humor is very rarely taken from that.. it's more from the outlandishly stereotypical behaviors and scenarios between the characters in the movie. All in all it was far more hilarious than I was expecting, and I was pleasantly surprised.

[Titusfied]

Best comedy in years. Comparable to Old School and Meet the Parents. I loved it, but haven't seen The Wedding Crashers yet. I heard 40 Year Old Virgin was funnier though.

[Raziel]

I keep hearing that Wedding Crashers and Virgin are the best comedies of the year so far. I'm gonna have to check them both out soon.

[S2 AM]

Not to kick around a dead skunk here, but there's something I have to resurface. I didn't know much about the Atari. I never had one, and so I wouldn't really argue whether or not Computer games and Atari games had been separate before Nintendo. I, unlike yourself, don't manifest facts in my head and argue things which I know nothing about. So I did some research.

http://www.atariage.com/2600/?SystemID=2600

That place has practically the whole history of video games up until the release of the NES. It explains the many other vendors that competed with the Atari 2600. I know Raziel will be reading with excitment and an erection as he gets to the part that talks about how, in 1986, after an oversupply of systems, and as sales slowed for Atari, the NES was brought over from Japan. Credit to Nintendo, good marketing move, but they definitely didn't save an industry. If NES hadn't come from Japan, then one of Atari's competitors would have stepped into their place. That, and one key element you conveniently forgot, was the Sega Master System. That's one I do know about, and have actually played. It was technically better than the NES, and if the NES had never existed, probably would have been the leading developer for the next decade.

Atari was more successful than PC computers. I doubt the NES(released in 1986) brought a separation between consoles and the PC . Especially seeing as in 1981, IBM introduced the IBM PC. That was just the first computer with a microprocessor, they came in many varieties before that. The Apple comes to mind. Do you still think that Nintendo saved something Raziel? Japan is on list 1, you can move there if you like. If you read the history you'll realize there was much difference between the IBM Portable PC(unit with keyboard, operating system, programmable interface, media and printer ports, and attached screen), and the Atari 2600(cartridge fed, game machine).

If these aren't pure gaming consoles, let me know.
http://www.machine-room.org/computers/40/
http://www.machine-room.org/computers/6422/
http://www.machine-room.org/computers/6423/
I can only guess the whole time you've been saying 5800, you mean 7800.

I finally had time to read all the crap and write a response. Raziel if you read those two largest articles in my sources, you'll realize that you couldn't have been further from the truth with your "guessing." If you actually read them, instead of your ADD taking control, resulting in the creation of facts. I know you won't admit that you're wrong, so I'm curious to see how you'll lie your way out of this one.

Sources:
http://www.ideafinder.com/history/inventions/story071.htm
http://www.atariage.com/2600/?SystemID=2600

http://www.machine-room.org/computers/40/
http://www.machine-room.org/computers/6422/
http://www.machine-room.org/computers/6423/

You're missing one key element though, Titus. At the time when Atari was in the midst of their heydey, the term videogame "console" didn't really even exist. The terms "computer game system" and "TV game system" were the standard nomenclature for home videogames at the time. The 2600 and 5800 were, in essence, percieved as home computer systems designed primarily for the purpose of gaming. They were lumped right together with conventional computers simply because people didn't know how else to define them. As a result, people saw that they could afford to buy real computers for much cheaper, and gave up on a type of machine heretofore seen as a shallow toy.

Then Nintendo came along, bringing with it the definition of a "videogame console". They introduced a device that, unlike Atari's hardware, strove to present a pure videogame experience without trying to also be a diet-PC at the same time. Nintendo created the rift between consoles and computers, allowing people to distinguish between the two, saving the industry from Atari's bumbling hands. Witout the introduction of the NES, the console videogames industry would be in a very different place today.

Not a chance. Atari firmly rooted the public concept of videogames being trite, pointless and juvenile with the 2600 and 5800 systems. If it hadn't been for Nintendo, they would have continued to be seen in that light and would have died in the mid-80's. Nintendo turned a throwaway timewaster into a bonafide industry. Nobody else cared enough to try and revive videogames after Atari so spectacularly fucked them up. If it hadn't been for the Big N, videogames would be a dead laughable fad, like Pogs.

It's not the same thing, Titus. The videogames industry was in a state of steep decline as a result of Atari's buffonery. Developers were making nothing back on their games, hardware sales were slumping and the general public concensus was that console videogames would be dead in a few short years if the industry continued to progress in that manner.

I couldn't disagree more. Home computers had much to do with the downfall of the console industry, simply because Atari wasn't willing to build a machine dedicated solely to idea of games. Nintendo took that chance and it saved console videogames as we know them.

[Lenny]

Heh heh heh...that looks like some kind of miniature essay. I especially like the bibliography.

[Titusfied]

Yeah, I couldn't read it this time. Maybe later, but not now..

Oh, and I finally saw Wedding Crashers over the weekend, and Virgin is defintiely better. I enjoyed the hell out of Wedding Crashers, because Vince Vaughn is one of my heros in life ( :) ), but Virgin had me laughing a whole lot more.

[Hades-Knight]

Can you use any other harddrie? like those external usb ones?