Nosebleed

One thing I've always found kind of stupid about when people bash the Xbox is comments like Microsoft has no history of console video games. Well, did Sony ever make any systems before PS1? Did they even make video games for that matter? At least Microsoft has a history of computer products and games. Sony builds VCRs, TVs and **** like that. Now everyone thinks that Sony is the best and this is only their 2nd system. I'll bet you people said the same thing about PS1 when it first came out. Sony has no history of console video games. N64 rulez!

Aghama

So not having a history in the video game market is a strength? Just because the PSX was popular doesn't mean that point is totally invalid.

darkside

The PSX was not the most anticipated console at the time and people were very nervous about Sony. However, they won the war because they had the best overall software. Microsoft will have a tough time in this area. Sony had every major Japanese game developer and most of the minor ones jump on the bandwagon and that was their secret of success. From Namco and Tekken to Square and Final Fantasy VII, it was the Japanese games that put them on top.

My worry for Microsoft is how much Japanese support they will get. I know the support is building, so there is hope. If Microsoft relies too much on American made games they will fail.

young

uhm, there has got so be some people who don't care about PS2 vs Xbox vs GC. i am one of them.

just get the system(s) you want and be happy about it. if someone gets a different system, this does not mean your system sucks. there seems to be a lot of bashing/defensiveness about systems.

HN

for real. why does one system have to suck for another to be good? can't it be that they're all gonna be good? I mean, i loved golden eye, zelda, mario kart (bite me :P ), and perfect dark on the N64. tho they were the only 4 games i had i thought it was well worth. On the same note, i played MGS and Gran Turismo to death and just those 2 made the PSX well worth it.

You chose a particular console, fine, that's your perogative. No need to put one down to make you feel better.

worse comes to worse, just get a PC

--HN

Tigger

Two things to consider:

1) Which Console has the overall best performance based on what your looking for? E3 shocased all 3 consoles this year. PS2 having an edge in being established and having a supply of games out. So with a year under their belt and hardware performance established, The PS2 had a good showing but still is technically third as far as performance specs. By far the Gamecube had the best all around games. Playability wise, polished, variety, graphics and sound. I didn't see one Gamecube system crash or have problems. PS2 either, but a number of X-Box systems were removed, reset and unveiled to reveal PC's emulating a X-Box. X-Box's lineup was in very poor showing, with only one title that appeared decent, "Munch's Odyssee". All other games had performance issues of slowdown, poor control, and graphically inferior. So it very much comes into play that Microsoft has never made consoles before. The hardware they produce along with the OS is critical to the success of it. It dosen't help that the console alone is expensive. Although every console losses money for the hardware.

2) Console loyalty is based on the history of the company's track record and the most important aspect, the games for the system. To sum it up, purchase a console because you like the games. Not because of hype or feeling bad for Microsoft or Nintendo or whatever. Buy the games and systems you like, keep an open mind to games that may have looked bad and focus on the experiences, not on what others may think.

evenflow

The reason Sony was a successful newcomer with the PS was because of the amazing(for the time) first-gen games like Ridge Racer, Toshinden, and Tekken. The Saturn didn't have any ground breaking 3-D game at the time. The 3rd party companies started making games for Sony because of the huge fanbase and it went from there: Square made games exclusive for the PS because of its huge established user base. It also helped that the N64 came out so late. This time, it will be different. X Box doesn't have any game that is ground breaking, its games are only prettier PS2 games. It will also have to compete with the Gamecube, which already has a huge Nintendo following. Also X Box doesn't have big exclusive games. DOA 3 is great but remember at the PS2 launch, TTT outsold DOA 2 Hardcore. The DOA series is not popular enough to carry a system like the Tekken series did. The other two big games Halo and Munch are too niche. Halo is a FPS and console FPS are and never will be as good as PC FPS. And I don't understand the hype about Munch. The Oddworld series didn't sell much on the PSone. The game is too advanced for most casual gamers anyways.

Nosebleed

This wasn't a bashing thread or anything like that, I don't know where you guys got that from. I'm buying an Xbox and I don't care if you guys think it sucks.

What I was saying is people put down the Xbox and say "Oh, Microsoft will fail 'cus they've never been in the console market before" like it's a bad thing. I just find that funny because a few years ago Sony was the newcomer and now they're on top. It's like they're running out of bad things to say about it so they have to use that as some kind of put down.

Tuan Jim

Check out http://xbox.ign.com and look at their Tokyo Game Show coverage and other stuff. Xbox has picked up a load of Japanese developers and more are signing on every day. Looks like some very good stuff will be coming out.

Tuan Jim

mkdevo

amen!

mmconhea

Also the Sony Playstation, in the very early stages, was actually a nintendo system. They were developing a system together. This was yeasr before the PSone was actually released. But compaining for developers starts early in the creation of a system. I wouldn't be surprised that while developing the Nintendo CD system, Nintendo actually gave Sony a lot of experience with console creation.

ScandalUMD

Sony broke into the industry at the best time possible. Sega made a major blunder by designing the Saturn to provide evolutionary 2D sprite graphics, while Playstation was configured to provide what was, at the time, top-notch 3D graphics. Additionally, the Saturn cost $400, which pushed gamers to the cheaper $299 Playstation. Sony already had an entrenched user base by the time the N64 came out.

Additionally, the N64 was hindered by its cartridge format, which made it nearly impossible for it to render FMV. Everyone thought FMV was really important at the time, so that was a major downside.

So essentially, Sega and Nintendo dropped the ball, and the market was there for Sony to just take.

Microsoft is in a much less enviable situation. The hype among gamers for the X-Box peaked months ago, and now the Gamecube is getting much more attention. The X-Box will launch into a market that is already controlled by the PS2. This isn't a matter of beating a competitor out of the gate, but, rather, of toppling an established and entrenched competitor. And Sony has some huge games coming out next month, with which to battle the other systems. Most retailers believe that PS2 will sell not only the most games, but also the most units over the holiday season.

The Gamecube, meanwhile, has a lot of convincing titles for many consumers. Star Wars is a powerful lure, as are Luigi and Smash Bros. The $200 price tag is an advantage as well.

Things are shaping up, saleswise, to put X-Box in third place, and, if history has shown, there's no room for a third place in the console market.

Decker

VERY nice analysis, Scandal. I agree 100%. It's all about timing. Sony has really positioned itself well, with 19 million PS2 units sold already, and plenty available for the holidays as well as a catalog of hundreds of games and dozens of hot must-have titles available. Having to go head-to-head with Nintendo and playing catch up to Sony is not a good position to be in, even in the best of economic times, which this is certainly not. I wonder how many parents will be willing to plunk $300 down this Christmas on a console that doesn't seem to be very kid friendly (just look at that controller!) and without a lot of must-buy titles. The X-box is the most powerful console, and if the games pick up (and I'm sure they will), there will be a demand. Just remember, the best technology doesn't always win (if it did, we'd all have betamaxes in our homes).

mmconhea

ScandalUMD, I totally agree with you... do you work in the industry or something?

Kaiser Soze

Look...it all comes down to the games. Whichever system has the best games will stand the test of time. The reason Nintendo and Sony have been so successful through the years is because of the software they've had.

X-Box could have the best look ever. The graphics/sound/gameplay could all be fantastic. But if all of the games suck, who's gonna buy it? I sure won't.

I think both the Gamecube and the X-Box look pretty good from some of the screen shots I've seen. Actually, the re-make of the Resident Evil series on Gamecube looks amazing! But it will take a lot from both manufacturers to get me to spend upwards of $200+ on another system. The games would really have to blow me away for me to pick one of those two up. PS2 has the best games right now. Isn't this a great time? Within the last 6 months we've gotten, or will be getting:

Resident Evil Code Veronica X
Devil May Cry
Onimusha-Warlords
Metal Gear Solid SOL
Tony Hawk 3
Madden 2002

The list can go on and on. More competition from other manufacturers can only be a good thing. It will weed out the weak, and make the games even better.

ScandalUMD

Whichever system has the best games will stand the test of time... and the best movies will make the most money... and the most qualified candidate gets to be the President.

yeah. sure.

The Dreamcast had tons of great games, and Sega still choked to death on it. The fact is, it all comes down to the hype, and the buzz, and who moves the most hardware.

The games from now through early December, the launch titles, will have an effect on which platform is successful. After that, if X-Box isn't in at least second place, it will be dead, because it depends on third parties, and they'll bail like rats from a sinking ship. Microsoft fans boast of the X-Box's impressive list of developers, but most of them are taking a wait and see approach. If X-Box units sell like hotcakes over Christmas, then top developers may will sign on for exclusive X-Box games. If the units aren't there, the games won't be, either.

The forecast for X-Box isn't looking very good. Retailers are expecting X-Box to be a distant third to PS2 and Gamecube, and their in-store display space will likely be allocated accordingly. The X-Box is a lot less kid-friendly, and costs $100 more than Gamecube, so parents shopping for Christmas will find Nintendo to be an obvious choice. Many gamers will also tend towards Nintendo because of the positive buzz on the system at E3, and because of Rogue Squadron.

The X-Box killer app is Halo, and, while I have no doubt it's great, Metal Gear Solid 2 is probably more of the sort of action game that people will find cathartic right now.

As for competition, I don't think it benefits us very much. Nearly everything in the game market is priced at the highest point the market will tolerate, and it doesn't fluctuate very much based on how many competitors are in the market. More platforms means, to some of us, that there will be more games I can't play, and, for some of the rest of ya'll, that there are more systems you have to shell for.

Giantrobo

So am I to understand the ONLY way a video game can kick ass and become a success is if the Japanese support it?

Can we not make great games here in America? Are the developers here stateside all braindead lacking any creativity?

Maybe NEW CONCEPTS in gaming is what we all need....Maybe NOT having the same old crap from Japan is a GOOD THING IMHO.

I mean how the F#ck many more STREET FIGHTER games do we need? How many lame assed RACING and FOOTBALL(barring updates in sports rosters) games does one need?

And don't get me started on JAPANESE RPGS!!!! They all look and play alike!

I'm only asking.

evenflow

Most racing and football games are from the US.

ScandalUMD

The Japanese own consoles in higher percentages, and buy a lot more video games per system than Americans do. Therefore, Japanese developers often tend to develop huge, elaborate games.

The Japanese also take games very seriously. Sometimes, the result of this is sometimes ridiculous, like, in my opinion, Tekken. You could take the time and practice necessary to become a Tekken "expert" and better invest it in learning an actual martial art. Many Japanese gamers, and many American gamers as well, spend a lot of time learning how to play as each of the different characters. Personally, I don't find that rewarding.

Sometimes, though, that care results in something like Gran Turismo. No American developer would ever make a game quite that detailed, because it's simply an insane thing to do. They spent about a week modeling each of the 150 cars in the game, and they recorded the actual engine sound for each car. Each car in that game handles differently, and the vehicles are all endlessly tweakable.

We occasionally see this kind of detail in games from outside Japan; Grand Theft Auto 3 apparently employs it, and Halo has been in development for four years, so I'd assume it's a very deep game, as well as being pretty. But the Japanese put out most of the best games.

Giantrobo

I think you're right!

I don't buy either genre so I wouldn't know

Giantrobo

I'm not saying the Japanese don't put out GREAT STUFF. I like many Japanese games just like the rest of you.

But hey! When will AMERICAN game makers step up to the plate? Could the Xbox usher in a new era of great games designed in America?

That's all I'm asking.

ScandalUMD

There are great American games. You have Blizzard, Ensemble, Westwood, and id, though most of their games are primarily PC based. Also, you have EA, putting out most of the sports games. And there are quite a few American and European development teams working as first and second party to Nintendo and Sony. "Wave Race: Blue Storm" was developed by Americans.

As far as X-Box bringing an end to Japanese dominance on consoles, don't count on it. Events have conspired against the X-Box, and I think it probably won't gain enough of a foothold to bring about a new era of anything. And it certainly couldn't succeed without Japanese developer support, because many Americans won't buy a system that they can't get the Japanese games on. And you can't get Japanese developers without appealing to Japanese gamers.

There's nothing nationalistic or patriotic about either Microsoft or Sony. They're both transnational corporations, and MS will probably give American gamers and developers the same amount of attention as Sony does.

Tuan Jim

If you're looking at Halo vs. MGS2 as a killer app, remember that Halo is a "killer app" available at launch (along with 15+ other good games), while MGS2 is coming out after the system has been around for a year. Who knows what games will be coming out for the Xbox within a years time, comparatively speaking.

I'm really looking forward to Morrowind as the next RPG thang. (I don't care if there is a PC port since my machine sure as hell won't run it). Like Fallout 2, this is a pretty open ended game (as opposed to the strict/rigid structure of FF (one of it's major shortcomings IMO), but this takes things several dimensions further in terms of interactivity and options.


Blood Wake, Hunter: The Reckoning, Jet Set Radio Future, etc, etc. - a lot of the games coming out for Xbox look like they're worth a rental - minimum - IMO, a lot more than can be said for most of what's coming out for the GC in the next few months or even most of what's been out on PS2 (how long did GT3 take to come out after the system launched?).

Personally speaking, a LOT of the games for the Xbox look like fun, compared to the vast majority of PS2/GC which really don't look at all appealing to me.

Tuan Jim

ScandalUMD

Number one, it doesn't really make a difference that MGS2 is second generation PS2, while Halo is first generation X-Box. X-Box is fundamentally similar, hardware wise to the PC, so it's not like Bungie had to learn to use anything new. Also, Halo has been in development for more than three years.

Any game that comes out within a year, will need to already be two years into development to include as much preparation and time commitment as Halo. I suspect that this game will be the high water mark of X-Box exclusives, at least for a while, simply based on the time and dedication put into it.

Also, while it may be subjectively judged that the X-Box launch is better than the PS2 launch, it doesn't really matter. PS2 launched into a wide open market, with no competition except the dying Dreamcast. The reason all these good games are coming out now instead of a few months ago is that they scheduled all the big games for now, and didn't force developers to release products that weren't finished. This, of course, is both to boost holiday sales of these games and as an aggressive tactic against X-Box and Gamecube.

So, while Halo, and Oddworld, and Project Gotham may be more enticing than most of the PS2 launch games, these games have to compete with what's out NOW, and that's MGS2, GT3, GTA3, Tony Hawk 3, Devil May Cry, 007, and the other second generation PS2 titles that are on the shelves.

And if X-Box doesn't move systems, then what they put out next year won't matter. Too many people will already have made their decisions, and no game will be able to sell systems to most consumers who already own a competing product (most people consider one console to be enough).

PS2 had the luxury of a flawed launch. X-Box and Gamecube have to hit the ground running, because neither has much chance to catch PS2's head start, and, if history is any indication, the writing will be on the wall by Christmas 2002.

It's important to look at the games coming out, to make your decisions, but you also have to consider the thing as a long-term investment, unless you can afford to write off the $300 if Microsoft can't fly with Sony and Nintendo. X-Box and Gamecube both have some impressive specs and exciting games, but the only sure bet in town is the PS2. I certainly wouldn't shell for an X-Box until I see if it establishes itself. We should know the loser by early January.

RudeBoie

Agreed. X-Box and GC launch titles shouldn't be competeting against last year's titles. That's ridiculous. While both consoles will have less titles than the PS2, if you buy a GC or X-Box titles and think to yourself, "gee, the PS2 version was much better," you shouldn't have wasted your money. When I get Halo, I won't be comparing it to Time Splitters. I'll be comparing it with Half-Life and the World is Not Enough.

I don't think a winner or loser will be declared by January though. I think it's basically catch up for both of them for at least a year. Scandal, I'm not sure why you think (well I kind of do from reading your other posts) the X-Box will do poorly.

Yes, I know there are statistics and all, and of course articles, but I can say directly from working in the VG industry that both are extremely hot. While if there's any hestitiation, it's usually reserved for both sides.

Maybe I'm just offended that a system that's sold out at preorders and will be damn difficult to pick up could be considered an underdog of sorts : P