XBox 360

Wow. All of the sudden I think the XBox 360 totally kicks ass and I want to buy one!

MASA <3 XBOX AND MICROSOFT BFF 4 LIFE

Wow, I am totally blown away by the fact you know DICK about the X2 (my pet name of the XBOX 360). I think you should just stop posting. Your name does not lie.

Why don't you be a a good little DORK and stfu. We'll see how the new consoles fair in the coming year.

I think any company will want to throw the "revolution" word around a couple times, except Nintendo is the only company who actually decided to make sure people knew it.

I'm not sure that I've seen any company reveal stuff that is "revolutionary". I like the idea of downloading Nintendo games (or any older game), but that idea wasn't really created by Nintendo. Thats been done illegally for years on the PC.

Nintendo are the ones that I see "claiming" that their system is a revolution, for one because its named that way. But they're so secretive, you really can't side with them because you know its revolutionary, because you don't know, because they haven't said anything.

They do have quirky ideas, and they like to be different. One can hope that they do have something neat and refreshing, but it might not be until the TGS this September, Space World (if they have one this year), or even next E3 before something is revealed. We'll just have to be patient I guess.

But back on topic. Xbox 360 is the only thing I see thats in playable form. Microsoft may not be the innovator or the revolutionist, but they did have a pretty good service with Live on the Xbox, and they really want to push that with the next system. I think thats good. If you have something solid, make it more robust, and market that. I think the Xbox 360 has some neat features, even though I'm not into the whole "media center" idea. Its a good concept.

What I really like about Xbox 360, is more about Microsoft in its gaming division. They went as far as saying they want to broaden the market, keep the hardcore gamers, but try to open up more venues for the non-gamer gamer. Get more people who aren't hardcore playing the Xbox. I honestly don't see how they would do it, but this was so similar to Nintendo's philosophy about having games for everyone, and not centering on one group of individuals. This almost brought tears to my eyes. :tongue:

Has anyone noticed an influx of "gang" or "underground" related games. Its been crazy the last few years. I can only hope that companies don't think that the hardcore gamers breathe this stuff. And if they do, I'm so glad that two companies are trying to broaden things.

Where is this quote that Microsoft said the 360 was revolutionary? Granted, I don't like Sony and Microsoft's philosiphies on gaming, but they haven't been doing bad, namely Microsoft, who in a way revolutionized online console gaming. I really like a lot of the ideas that Microsoft and Sony have shown. No system is greater than the other three, it's just simply a matter of gamer's preference.

You show no evidence why the 360 "sucks" as your extraordinarily vast vocabulary would have us believe. You are just a fanboy who looks for every opporitunity to trash what you dont like. And I kill fanboys. It's true, cuz my title says so.

This thread has prooven to be nothing more than a Microsoft bash-fest from the get-go.

I forgot where I read it, but they used the word revolutionary.
All three of these consoles are going to be wicked powerful. Omfg just because PS3 is 1.32012535x faster then XBox360 doesn't mean that it sucks all of a sudden.

Exactly what is a "virtual frame?"

And at the very least, it's looking better than the PS3 so far. At least Microsoft didn't pull some prerendered crap. I don't care if their system has more than double the power to pull it off, no company should try to pass off videos as in-game action. It'd be like taking a cutscene from a game and calling it in-game just because it's "in the game."

But I think every new game system is touted as revolutionary. It's like a rule or something. They also get called groundbreaking, superior, more powerful, faster, easier to program for, smaller, lighter, etc., regardless of reality.

And Microsoft is the only one who's managed a semi-decent online plan. Nintendo has NONE as of now, and Sony's is basically go make your own. Microsoft has XBox Live. Bringing that to a console system was revolutionary, at least.

Ganondork wrote:This is a spin-off of the "Nintendo Revolution" thread. I'll start.

First off, the XBox 360 is clamed to be a "revolution" but do you see anything revolutionary here? Didn't think so. Its just an upgraded XBox that weighs a wopping .03 pounds less than the XBox.

Second, a revolutionary feature is a major feature that changes how the product handles, feels, simplicity, and basicly it changes the industry for ever. But the only thing I see that comes close is the guide button. The Rev has a whole bunch of truely "revolutionary" features, like the ultimate playback, the controller, the virtual frame, and a whole bunch more nintys saving for the unveiling.

THE POINT IS, IN MY OPINION, THE XBOX 360 SUCKS!

Wow, that's quite stellar logic you're using there.

Maybe you should, you know, wait for it to come out and TRY IT before saying it sucks. Or at least wait for more specs. I don't particularly like M$ or $ony, but give them a halfway fair shot at being good. You never know.

I want M$ and $ony to go up in flames as much as anybody, but then, Nintendo would have no competition. At this point, all anybody can do is wait, anticipate, and try not to froth at the mouth (or anywhere else, for that matter).

I have proof that it sucks!

1. The Rev's has way more power. (there was a trailer for metroid prime 3 on G4)
2. The Rev's online service will be FREE!
3. X360 games will be 60$ a pop, Rev games will only be 50, and PS3 games will be 100-200.
4. Judging by the price (300) and the fact that it takes 400 to make one, ms could lose around $500,000,000

Call me a fanboy, but I don't give a crap.

Ganondork wrote:PS3 games will be 100-200.

I think you must've confused AGN with IGN.

Here you go.
http://boards.ign.com/

Ganondork wrote:I have proof that it sucks!

1. The Rev's has way more power. (there was a trailer for metroid prime 3 on G4)
2. The Rev's online service will be FREE!
3. X360 games will be 60$ a pop, Rev games will only be 50, and PS3 games will be 100-200.
4. Judging by the price (300) and the fact that it takes 400 to make one, ms could lose around $500,000,000

Call me a fanboy, but I don't give a crap.

Ganondork, PLEASE, if you are going to post information, make sure it is correct. No prices have been announced for anything yet, so everything you have said is purely speculation, not fact. Your information is obviously slanted because you favor Nintendo.

Ganondork wrote:I have proof that it sucks!

Ganondork wrote:1. The Rev's has way more power. (there was a trailer for metroid prime 3 on G4)

Ganondork wrote:2. The Rev's online service will be FREE!

Ganondork wrote:3. X360 games will be 60$ a pop, Rev games will only be 50, and PS3 games will be 100-200.

Ganondork wrote:4. Judging by the price (300) and the fact that it takes 400 to make one, ms could lose around $500,000,000

Ganondork wrote:Call me a fanboy, but I don't give a crap.

Kairyu wrote:No, not really. Unless wild, baseless accusations count as proof, in which case I hereby prove I'm a millionare.

No. Nintendo's current specs put it behind both other systems, even with their inflated stats. Nintendo's not going for power anyway, they're going for fun. Which is Nintendo's way of saying "We aren't trying to make the most powerful system."

So will the X360's normal plan... did you have another part of the argument?

Where are these numbers from again? A reliable source, right? I mean, you didn't just ask on a Gamefaqs board or pick numbers from a hat, right? You went to a store, looked at the next-gen games on display, and wrote down the numbers, right?

Please see the previous question.

Well, I guess you are.

1. Come on! Don't tell me you didn't see the Metroid Prime 3 trailer that was shown on Filter last night? Best of E3?6-04-05? 10:00PM?

2. Yea,the 360 silver will, but who cares about 360 silver? You can't even play multiplayer with silver!

3. Yes. X360 games will be 59.99 (might as well call it 60) and rev games will stay at 50 ( at least, according to EB Games). But I may have exaggerated with PS3 games though, they really will cost 69.99.

4. I guess I am a Nintendo fanboy.

Ganondork wrote:Yes. X360 games will be 59.99 (might as well call it 60) and rev games will stay at 50 ( at least, according to EB Games). But I may have exaggerated with PS3 games though, they really will cost 69.99.

Please go back and read my last post. The prices you list are estimates or guesses, not final prices.

Ganondork wrote:I have proof that it sucks!

1. The Rev's has way more power. (there was a trailer for metroid prime 3 on G4)
2. The Rev's online service will be FREE!
3. X360 games will be 60$ a pop, Rev games will only be 50, and PS3 games will be 100-200.
4. Judging by the price (300) and the fact that it takes 400 to make one, ms could lose around $500,000,000

Call me a fanboy, but I don't give a crap.

You are sooo lucky this is GGD. What company in their right mind would make an console to lose money? Besides it dosen't cost $400 to make a console it probably only costs about $50. They only jack the price up to make a profit. Do you really think it costs $1 to make a chocolat bar? No, it's costs like 5 cents.

Also, a game that costs between $100 and $200? I don't think any game will be that much. If anything they'll be the same price as the games are now. Games have always been that same price. They only go down because they're old.

You see, I too am a Nintendo fan boy. But I know reasonable logic. I don't bash other systems, I just don't buy them. You're not a Nintendo fanboy, you're a Nintendo Nazi.

Archibaldo wrote:You are sooo lucky this is GGD. What company in their right mind would make an console to lose money? Besides it dosen't cost $400 to make a console it probably only costs about $50. They only jack the price up to make a profit. Do you really think it costs $1 to make a chocolat bar? No, it's costs like 5 cents.

Microsoft has still yet to break even on the Xbox.

Uh.. and the Gamecube is horrible. It really is. I know you're all Nintendo fanboys on here, but the console has sold less and a good chunk of it's games are marketed toward children. But that's a debate that I'll never win against you guys and I could care less to make a stellar debate out of it.

Anyway, given the three next-generation consoles in front of me, I'd chose the Xbox 360 hands down. Play with XP Media Center yet? To have a similar concept hooked up to my TV that plays some fun games online looks like it might beat the PS3 in enjoyablity for me, personally. And will definately smack the shit out of the "Revolution" like the wicked stepchild it is... what's it going to have, fucking rainbow shaped discs now? Go bankrupt already - or atleast resign yourselves to the fact you can't do anything right but handhelds (watch out for the PSP, too, you Japanese bastards!)

Toolie wrote:Go bankrupt already - or atleast resign yourselves to the fact you can't do anything right but handhelds (watch out for the PSP, too, you Japanese bastards!)

Think whatever you want about how good/bad Nintendo has done with the Gamecube, but despite not being #1, they are still the most profitable of the big three.

Nintendo definitely needs work on is it's marketing though. They don't really target children - nearly all of Nintendo's 1st party titles are targetted at people of all ages (I will admit that the Super Mario Sunshine commercial was really queer). The problem is they don't do nearly as much marketing as Sony and MS.

The DS marketing has been good though.

Ganondork, the only reason I think the Revolution will be less powerful is because Nintendo is sort of already giving it away like that. They have said several times that the other two consoles allow you to make realistic graphics, and produce lots of polygons on the screen, but this means that you have to pay a lot more to make games look good. They want to make it easy for developers to make games as well as making it cheaper. I'm not saying it won't look good, but Satoru Iwata emphasized this in their E3 presentation. So from that, you can probably correctly assume it won't be as powerful.

As for the price of the Xbox games, don't listen to what EB says. :tongue: They as well as Gamestop like to speculate on the prices a lot. I'm not saying it couldn't be if development costs are high, but keep in mind that every DS game listed in EB and Gamestop's database was marked at $40, and how many are actually $40. Pokemon Emerald, Wario Ware Touched, Wario Ware Twisted, (notice the GBA games) were listed at $40 before they came out. Do they cost that much though? Nope.

Toolie wrote:Anyway, given the three next-generation consoles in front of me, I'd chose the Xbox 360 hands down. Play with XP Media Center yet? To have a similar concept hooked up to my TV that plays some fun games online looks like it might beat the PS3 in enjoyablity for me, personally. And will definately smack the shit out of the "Revolution" like the wicked stepchild it is... what's it going to have, fucking rainbow shaped discs now? Go bankrupt already - or atleast resign yourselves to the fact you can't do anything right but handhelds (watch out for the PSP, too, you Japanese bastards!)

The DS is has pulled back ahead of the PSP in Japan. Figures, since the DS is finally getting some good games out there and the PSP's library is still abysmal.

And Nintendo, in spite of the Gamecube not doing so hot, is still making the most money off of their consoles in total. Consider that they are doing this in spite of the fact that the PS2 has outsold the absolute hell out of the Gamecube. This is just in Gamecube sales alone people, not including handhelds. It's not going bankurpt for a long...long...long time.

The Xbox 360's tech looks really nice, but it needs a killer app. Looking at the lineup it has already, I don't really see any games that jump out at me.

vegeta1215 wrote:Think whatever you want about how good/bad Nintendo has done with the Gamecube, but despite not being #1, they are still the most profitable of the big three.

Nintendo definitely needs work on is it's marketing though. They don't really target children - nearly all of Nintendo's 1st party titles are targetted at people of all ages (I will admit that the Super Mario Sunshine commercial was really queer). The problem is they don't do nearly as much marketing as Sony and MS.

The DS marketing has been good though.

I will admit that the gamecube does not have the best library of games...in fact, I believe that most new games suck.

Back in the NES days, you didn't have any expectations. It hadn't really been done before. That's why developers could make games like Burgertime, Kirby, and other wacky things. No one expected anything. Developers had complete freedom. However, as time progressed, there was a limit developing, as to what's cool or not. Then people started being confined to expectations, gamers and developers. That's why the NES is fun, because it doesn't spout about good graphics, so you arent' expecting them. You just have fun with the games. Likewise, if you play a game on the PS2 that's supposed to be realistic, but it doesn't look realistic, you're going to be dissapointed.

That's why I think Nintendo will ultimately win in the end. They're going for fun, not graphics that will be outdated in the future.

Dechipher wrote:Back in the NES days, you didn't have any expectations. It hadn't really been done before. That's why developers could make games like Burgertime, Kirby, and other wacky things. No one expected anything. Developers had complete freedom. However, as time progressed, there was a limit developing, as to what's cool or not. Then people started being confined to expectations, gamers and developers.

Not to mention the gaming industry is a lot bigger today, and since it costs more money to make games, companies rely on big sellers (hence many many sequels and few new franchises)

About the expectations: I've always read Nintendo Power, but I didn't really read online reviews until a few years ago. I thoroughly research my game purchases so I don't get stuck with a bad one - which has happened to me in the past. Maybe I'm not alone?

vegeta1215 wrote:About the expectations: I've always read Nintendo Power, but I didn't really read online reviews until a few years ago. I thoroughly research my game purchases so I don't get stuck with a bad one - which has happened to me in the past. Maybe I'm not alone?

That's really not a bad idea, since if the game isn't that good you can usually get it for $20 if you wait a couple months. At that point, it's not that bad of a deal even if the game isn't that great. That's what I did with X8.

I made that mistake with Rebel Strike. It's pretty fun, but it got boring quickly. Now I reaserch a bunch of games to find one that sound really fun. Like I did for Baten Kaitos. I reaserched it ALOT and I wasn't disappointed.

Archibaldo wrote:I made that mistake with Rebel Strike. It's pretty fun, but it got boring quickly. Now I reaserch a bunch of games to find one that sound really fun. Like I did for Baten Kaitos. I reaserched it ALOT and I wasn't disappointed.