Post by: BrianSLA on May 20, 2005, 10:21:32 PM
Right now I will be getting both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 at launch. IF the PS3 is $400 to $ 500 then I won't. The Revolution underwhelmed me and since the only thing they really showed was the design ... it makes me think the Revolution will face the Gamecube's fate.
Post by: Caillan on May 20, 2005, 10:33:57 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on May 21, 2005, 04:33:36 AM
Post by: anubis6789 on May 21, 2005, 05:25:34 AM
the Phantom.
All jokes aside I know for sure I will get a REV. They had me at online SSB3, that is all I needed. Well that and the complete GCN backwards compatibility. The classic stuff is just icing to me.
As far as the 360 and PS3 goes, I will not even think of getting a PS3 if they keep the controller design. Does that thing look uncomfortable and badly designed to anybody else? The 360 is appealing to me for some reason I can not define though. I still would not buy either of them right now or at thier repective launches.
I only had a GCN this gen and it has kept me perfectly happy so I don't see a need to upgrade right now.
Post by: ThePerm on May 21, 2005, 04:58:46 PM
Post by: Pale on May 21, 2005, 05:19:43 PM
I fully plan on purchasing both the PS3 and the Rev. The Rev I will get at midnight launch day no matter what. The PS3 I will get whenever the first game I want launches, be that at system launch or later. It will most likely be FFXIII or KHIII that will do it for me. (Yes, I'm a square freak.)
As far as the 360 goes...I am genuinely interested in Blue Dragon and if the SK thing turns out true, I will be interested in Too Human as well. Kameo is one of the games I was excited about at the GCN launch, so that may tempt me too. The problem is, as of now, I still can't stand what MS is doing in the industry. I don't think I'll ever buy a MS console because of that.
Post by: Ymeegod on May 21, 2005, 09:53:50 PM
Didn't care for the design of the PS3 but then again I'm a gamer and wouldn't care if the damn thing was a cardboard box if it plays :0. The controller has me worried but there's plenty of third party controllers and hell since all three use Wi-fi then you might even be able to use RES or Xbox 360 controllers too.
Not sure if I'll get the Xbox 360 at launch or even at all (I also do though) but the PS3 is almost a safe bet at this point.
Don't care if it's $500--that's less than my PC graphics card alone.
Post by: Koopa Troopa on May 22, 2005, 12:29:22 PM
Post by: BrianSLA on May 22, 2005, 03:14:04 PM
Yeah I've been pretty busy at work ... working on Revenge of the Sith to other flicks. PLUS I got an ALienware Aurora system so I am more heavily into PC games now. I do still drop by and read the posts but I gotta say Planetgamecube & the forums are A LOT deader than they were a year ago. Since I've got my souped up Alienware ... all current consoles & their games look bad to me. And with the next gen around the corner, if the next gen demos look anywhere near the real games, I will be a console gamer again. But right now it is PC games for me.
Yeah it seems like a lot of the posters from the previous years have gone away. Anyone remember DrGakman ?
Like I said I will probably get the 360 & PS3 ... but if one or both are in the $ 500 range... I can do without. I can afford it but for some reason I dont ' think I can get myself to drop $500 on a game machine. HOPEFULLY BOTH Sony & Microsoft know this and the magic $300 price point remains in effect. As for PS3 ... if it is $300 and a Blu-Ray player... I can't go wrong. At the very least I would have a new Blue Ray DVD movie player.
As for Revolution... it better be a Nintendo revolution and I mean in their way of thinking / game thinking. For me to get Nintendo next round it better offer better graphics than atleast one of the other two , better have outstanding exclusives that I want to play ( a Resident Evil 4 type exclusive ) and they better have A LOT of third party games and mature games. If they go the same way of Gamecube ... I seriously doubt I will ever pick up the Revolution.
>> I will not even think of getting a PS3 if they keep the controller design. <<
Yeah the PS3 controller sucks. I hate those sharp looking long ends.
Post by: WuTangTurtle on May 22, 2005, 08:40:01 PM
XBOX 360 needs to impress me at launch cause at E3 the demos sucked, I played Burnout and it looked ok but the control was crap, and Condemend was crap too, it had Half Life 2ish graphics and the gameplay sucked. By the way at E3 i took a xbox 360 bag and wrote ".....Not Impressed" in big letters with a marker, i hope Microsoft saw my baggy!
Post by: couchmonkey on May 23, 2005, 12:30:37 PM
As for the other systems, they seem to be all about graphical improvements, and I don't think those improvements are enough to justify spending around $500 CDN. I don't see how these graphics are really going to improve the gaming experience other than to make it slightly more pretty. If Nintendo's third party support is as bad or worse than the N64, then I'll probably buy one of these systems eventually, but I'll wait until they get significantly cheaper.
Post by: Ian Sane on May 23, 2005, 01:34:40 PM
I intend however on buying only one console. I won't be pleased if owning a second console will be a requirement for owning a Rev. It might end up that way but I certainly want to see effort from Nintendo to ensure that I need a Rev and nothing else.
Post by: Bill Aurion on May 23, 2005, 02:21:28 PM
Looking at the DS lineup, it's like a whole new console, so I might only be able to support purchases for solely Nintendo systems...
Post by: Arbok on May 23, 2005, 02:26:36 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
Looking at the DS lineup, it's like a whole new console, so I might only be able to support purchases for solely Nintendo systems...
That's what I'm looking at, the GCN and the GBA combined more than helped keep my wallet at a healthy empty for most of the time since the two were released, save that one dry spell early on. The DS is already shaping up to be a great system for the future line up of games, and assuming the Revolution has a line up of games anything like the Gamecube then I should be set with just those two. I need a good Namco RPG to be happy, though... so I hope they come through there.
Post by: jasonditz on May 23, 2005, 04:12:49 PM
Post by: allcaps on May 23, 2005, 07:56:57 PM
PS3 looks great. The tech in this thing is serious...bluetooth controllers and built in Wi FI, 1080p, SD, etc...its a technophile's wet dream. Since I have a PSP, connectivity there is a big deal for me as well. I think the best feature, and what's going to help them beat MS, is Blu Ray. I was really surprised MS decided against using HD-DVD...even though it doesn't hold as much info as Blu Ray, its still better than DVD. Those 50 some Gig disks are going to entice 3rd party developers who want to put huge amounts of information into their games. Its also good just to own something that can play high definition stuff. I'm sick of watching regular free TV in high def and having it look better than the DVDs I drop my hard earned cash on. I think MS kinda dropped the ball on that one.
I like that Nintendo is going in a different direction with its games, but I haven't really seen what that direction is to comment on it. I'm a little disappointed they didn't go HD-DVD or Blu Ray, but I can understand since they might be trying to keep this in the sub $250 range. If they keep the price low, this will probably end up being my first next gen console. I know Nintendo will, at the very least, have a ton of great first party titles. The fact that these games will now be online is another great thing...I really hope they can somehow get online features in some of those retro games as well. Connectivity with the DS (my new favorite toy) is also a big deal to me, so I'm definitely getting a Revolution.
In short, I'll end up with all three eventually, just like this generation. Probably the Nintendo first if its cheaper than the PS3 and there aren't a ton of PS3 games available...a PS3 after I get a TV capable of 1080p, and an Xbox360 later on. A lot of it depends on price tho, so if PS3 is in the $500 range, I will definitely be waiting for a while.
Post by: Arbok on May 23, 2005, 08:00:13 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: jasonditz
Wasn't Namco reportedly working on a Baten Kaitos prequel for the DS?
Ah yes, thank you for reminding me about that one, had slipped my mind. Can't wait for it, if it's anything like the GCN offering. Now if only we could get a Tales game on the Revolution I will be set.
Post by: Nephilim on May 23, 2005, 08:22:37 PM
360 seems to have the goods and they have a HUGE lineup, while ps3 is off showing a eyetoy demo's which could of been done on a pc 6years ago using voodoo2. There line up looks like it will depend on sports game and the francises they had to pay to make exclusive (GT, GTA ect.)
Post by: vudu on May 24, 2005, 09:13:50 AM
QuoteOut of curiosity, why? If Nintendo completely drops the ball and release something you're not interested in at all, you're going to stop playing new games completely?
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
The options for me are likely Revolution or nothing.
You always seem interested in games that aren't coming out for GameCube so one would think if Revolution didn't have anything you'd want, you'd switch to either PS3 or Xbox 360. Or is it more of a 'I don't want to play those games, but other people do so Nintendo should have them' kind of thing?
As far as I go, I'm almost definately (98% chance) getting a Revolution at or near launch. I doubt I'll get either of the other consoles. I'll probably just buy a new graphics card and up my RAM and play the PC ports of PS3/Xbox 360.
Post by: Pale on May 24, 2005, 09:29:02 AM
Anyway, for anyone truly interested in the 360, the anti-microsoft person inside me would like to make one request to you. Most likely you will blow me off, but that's cool, I just think it needs to be said.
Please, at least hold off on getting a 360 until both Sony and Nintendo have shown the final versions of their systems. If the 360 is going to succeed, I don't want the only reason to be because they jumped the gun and shortened the lives of the current consoles...
Post by: jasonditz on May 24, 2005, 10:22:21 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: kingvuduQuoteOut of curiosity, why? If Nintendo completely drops the ball and release something you're not interested in at all, you're going to stop playing new games completely?
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
The options for me are likely Revolution or nothing.
I'm with him. The Xbox doesn't interest me in the least, and even though the PS3 might have some enjoyable RPGs, its also likely to be priced out of my range.
If Nintendo seriously drops the ball with the Rev, I might just stick out the next generation with my DS.
Post by: Bill Aurion on May 24, 2005, 05:40:18 PM
Post by: Koopa Troopa on May 24, 2005, 06:53:32 PM
Post by: Spak-Spang on May 24, 2005, 07:03:57 PM
Since Revolution is trying to keep prices low, and has that awesome backwards compatiability with all Nintendo systems, it is my choice.
There are too many great SNES games I miss playing. Not to even mention N64 games and NES games.
Post by: Ian Sane on May 24, 2005, 07:35:12 PM
The only non-Nintendo console I own is the original Playstation and I don't like it very much. The lack of Nintendo really hurts that console. Now you would think that since I feel that third party support is so important that that shouldn't make a difference. If I own an N64 and a Playstation I pretty much have the 32/64 bit equivalent of the SNES, right? It doesn't work that way. The attitudes of the console maker directly rub off on the developers that support them. The controller and the graphic style of the console for example really affect game design. Plus the console maker has certain ideas for how games should be made and the userbase is largely "trained" to accept that style and third parties have to adapt. Nintendo prides on gameplay above all else so high quality gameplay is common on games designed specifically for their consoles. Sony focuses more on a cool image so the games on Playstation reflect that as well. For the obvious example compare Square's Nintendo output to their Sony output. The influence of Sony's "cool image" is immediately apparent in Final Fantasy VII and all the Square games that follow.
So since I don't like Sony's (or Microsoft's) approach to gaming Nintendo really is the only way to go. So if they screw up I really don't see the industry offering much that interests me. I'm hard on Nintendo but that's because I don't want what the competition offers. So I need them to be doing well and I would benefit the most if they were number one.
So if Nintendo doesn't make the Rev something that interests me no one is. I don't think I'll quit games but I'll probably spend my time catching up on all the SNES titles I haven't really given a fair playthrough.
Post by: Pale on May 24, 2005, 07:49:03 PM
You like Nintendo games.
You don't like third party games on other consoles.
You like third party games on Nintendo consoles.
You claim that the reason for this is that Nintendo influences third parties to make better games?
Uhm... what?
If you think for one minute FFVII came out the way it did based off the fact that it was on the playstation... you are completely wrong. FF VII was on playstation because square wanted it to come out the way it did.
Third parties are going to make games influenced by the games the makers like, not by the games that are on the same system they intend their game for.
Post by: Spak-Spang on May 25, 2005, 04:35:44 AM
Ian supports Nintendo because of their philosophy in gaming and their history of innovating gaming and actually trying to advance gaming not just graphically but in gameplay. Nintendo looks at gaming as an artform.
Sony and Microsoft look at gaming like a business.
However, Ian is practical and understands that a console without 3rd party support and a console that doesn't appear to be as powerful as the competition will have a hard time competing...and nobody wants to buy a system that will not garner support in the coming years.
Also the 3rd party debate is more complicated, because Nintendo's philosophy pushes 3rd party developers to atleast try new things. They attempt to bring new experiences. Where Sony and Microsoft don't care as long as the game sells and is on their system it could be anything.
I completely understand this logic.
Post by: Pale on May 25, 2005, 04:54:33 AM
I agree that Nintendo's philosophy of games is better and I was never saying otherwise, but saying that and then saying you won't buy a nintendo console unless they whore themselves out more than the companies you hate in order to get more third parties just doesn't make any sense at all.
Like I said, the cause and effect of your argument are backwards. In an ideal world, third parties will put their games on consoles that facilitate their ideas. In the current gen, every console was basically the same in concept so it would turn into targeting the audience they thought was best. If you can sit here and argue that you think a game like GTA or God of War would sell as well on a Nintendo console as they did on the PS2 you're crazy. Nintendo gamers like different games. Because the current population of gamers is made up the way it is, Nintendo is definately a niche system. If you like the niche Nintendo fills, then why would you not buy the console based on lack of third party _non-niche_ games? If you want to escape Nintendo's niche, why would you not buy a console that gets the third parties.
Ignoring the perfect world described above, currently most exclusivity deals are decided by throwing money at developers. I hope you don't think this is a good track to be on. We know Nintendo cannot compete in a bidding war. Then it comes down to why teams like the Chicago White Sox always suck and the Yankees always compete.
Your melodrama is disturbing. You are worrying way to much if you really are going to let The Rev's (a single console) third party support decide whether or not you are even going to continue being a console gamer in the next gen.
Post by: vudu on May 25, 2005, 08:51:22 AM
QuoteWhile I agree with what you say, Pale, your reasoning is a bit flawed. Your argument seems to say people either like Nintendo games or they don't. What if they like both? What if my first love with always be Zelda, Mario and Metroid, but I also have an interest in GTA or Square-Enix games? Assuming I can only buy one console, if I can't get those on Nintendo, I'm forced to make a choice. And while Nintendo will definately win my choice, it may not win everyone's.
Because the current population of gamers is made up the way it is, Nintendo is definately a niche system. If you like the niche Nintendo fills, then why would you not buy the console based on lack of third party _non-niche_ games? If you want to escape Nintendo's niche, why would you not buy a console that gets the third parties.
QuoteFine. I didn't mean drop the ball. How about what if Nintendo's corporate headquarters collapses and kills everyone inside?
But Ninty WON'T drop the ball, so stop thinking like that! :massiveangryfacepunchyouinthegobemoticon:
Post by: jasonditz on May 25, 2005, 08:54:38 AM
Post by: vudu on May 25, 2005, 08:56:32 AM
Post by: Pale on May 25, 2005, 10:22:22 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: kingvuduQuoteWhile I agree with what you say, Pale, your reasoning is a bit flawed. Your argument seems to say people either like Nintendo games or they don't. What if they like both? What if my first love with always be Zelda, Mario and Metroid, but I also have an interest in GTA or Square-Enix games? Assuming I can only buy one console, if I can't get those on Nintendo, I'm forced to make a choice. And while Nintendo will definately win my choice, it may not win everyone's.
Because the current population of gamers is made up the way it is, Nintendo is definately a niche system. If you like the niche Nintendo fills, then why would you not buy the console based on lack of third party _non-niche_ games? If you want to escape Nintendo's niche, why would you not buy a console that gets the third parties.
Hmm I guess my original complaint got lost in my argument. I acknowlege that fact. If players are forced to choose they need to decide whether or not the Nintendo games are more worth it to them, or the Third party games available on the other console. Even in that case, there is no reason to not buy any console as some are suggesting in the thread. My complaints arise from the silly all or nothing, overly serious attitude people are taking when it comes to something that, at its core, is supposed to be entertaining.
Post by: Ian Sane on May 25, 2005, 10:24:14 AM
"Better" is relative. In my opinion third parties make better games when they're designed exclusively on Nintendo consoles. I can spot the difference even if you can't and since it's MY decision to pick Revolution or nothing what do you care? Each console has a slightly different audience. There's a lot of crossover but it's pretty clear to me that the Cube, Xbox, and PS2 each provide different experiences and cater more to different types of gamers. Therefore third parties design exclusive games using that same philosophy. Sega is the most obvious example since they intially made completely different games for each of the three consoles. Sometimes (most blatantly on the Xbox) they didn't quite get what the audience wanted but the differences were clear. If Nintendo has crappy third party support then there are less third parties making the types of games I want to buy. They won't be targeting me. They'll be targeting the Sony and MS audiences.
If you don't notice the difference then good for you but don't get into a pissing match with me because I notice the difference.
Post by: Pale on May 25, 2005, 10:52:09 AM
Are you asking that Nintendo shell out the money to force companies to make gamecube/rev games which in turn forces them to target us as gamers? That doesn't seem like its very good for the industry either.
Post by: slacker on May 28, 2005, 11:16:35 AM
Post by: mantidor on May 28, 2005, 08:04:30 PM
Nintendo consoles are really about the games, ms and sony's consoles are about some sort of "cool" attitude that I find inmature and annoying, and its true that its reflected in the games. Its harder to notice right now because the ps2 became so extremely popular that it seems all third parties develop for them, even the one with original titles that put the "fun factor" above the "cool factor". Games like Okami or Katamari Damacy doesnt seem to fit with the ps2 philosophy, but since the ps2 has the biggest market, the devs prefer to release those type of games in sony's console instead of Nintendo's, pretty much for their own demise, as the Viewtiful Joe sales in GC and ps2 proved.
Post by: Chode2234 on May 28, 2005, 08:57:50 PM
...I don't want to put words in Ians mouth...
...but I agree I don't want to buy another system, I hope the rev is able to meet all of my needs. From third party gems, to even the ones that you just want to pick up and rent for the weekend, I really want a variety of games. I know the first party games will be good, but I don't want to feel like I am missing out on anything by not having all three systems. I somewhat feel this way now, and I think that Nintendo needs to work on getting more third parties, for the variety to keep me entertained so I don't have to get multiple machines. Is it to much to ask for nintendo to make a machine that allows nintendo to make great first party games, yet is attractive to thrid partys who make the supplemental great hits?
I really hate the trend that that you need multiple machines to get a good all around gaming fix. That is what made the SNES so wonderful.
Post by: Pale on May 28, 2005, 09:03:14 PM
Buying an extra console isn't really THAT bad of a thing. This gen I own a PS2 and a GCN and I am overwhelmed with titles to play. I can't keep up with them.
The only time buying multiple consoles can really turn into a raw deal is if MS continues to shorten the life span of consoles. Just hope the next gen lasts 5 years, and a second console is definately worth the investment.
And be happy that all three consoles aren't required purchases... (at least not imo) =P
Post by: Ymeegod on May 28, 2005, 10:12:00 PM
LOL---falls out of my chair. Yeah I guess P.N. 03, Custom Robo, Tube Slider, and don't forget Diehard Ven on that list are all great Exclusively developed titles :0.
Making an exclusive game really doesn't mean much, it's the talent behind the game that make all the difference.
My biggest gripe is still with Big N--to sell they have to get BACK the publishers/developers they lost. They finally gotten around to getting some loving from Square/Enix but they really have to go for the big score--FF XII or Dragon Quest VIII (both of those series sell millions). MS must have paid a king's randsom to get GTA but there's plenty of small fries for Big N to go after without handing over handfulls of cash. For example would be the Burnout series (there's not alot of arcade racers on the GC that are worth a damn), it's not exclusive and it's nothing the GC can't handle and it's popular.
Post by: Arbok on May 28, 2005, 11:21:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ymeegod
LOL---falls out of my chair. Yeah I guess P.N. 03, Custom Robo, Tube Slider, and don't forget Diehard Ven on that list are all great Exclusively developed titles :0.
Hey, I liked Custom Robo... last time I checked, it wasn't a third party game either (hence the trophies from earlier games in the series in SSB:M).
Post by: Deguello on May 29, 2005, 01:10:51 AM
Quote
LOL---falls out of my chair.
Who is LOL? Why was he in your chair? And why did it take three pauses for him to fall out of your chair?
Post by: Ymeegod on May 29, 2005, 05:18:31 AM
I do realize it's his opinion but I'm just pointing out the flaws with that statement
.Post by: Dirk Temporo on May 30, 2005, 11:41:17 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
And Ian did say it was in his opinion, guy.Quote
LOL---falls out of my chair.
Who is LOL? Why was he in your chair? And why did it take three pauses for him to fall out of your chair?
LOL internet caveman. LOL no like LMFAO. LMFAO bad man.
