Next Gen Console Disscusion

[Sirion]

A new wave of systems is coming, and these ones look like the best yet. I''ve devoted some time to searching the internet to find the credible and/or believable rumors about the new systems and am going to post them here for your disscussion. Enjoy!

THE NINTENDO REVOLUTION

Nintendo really has had a bad few years. With almost no third party support, they are forced to rely on first party games like Mario and Zelda. Even though these games are fun, their graphics are missleading, and thus they have been labeled "kiddy", along with Nintendo. However, Nintendo is more determined than ever to change that.


One of the earliest announcements about their new system was the fact that it was going to revolutionize the way we play games. Much speculation has ensued, with theories on touchscreens, gyroscopic sensors, and even holographic projection. The most believable rumors come from someone only known as "Aries", who is supposedly a developer working on a game for the Revolution. He didn't tell us anything about the revolutionary feature itself, but does mention a boatload of other things. Here are his posts, made on the Broken Saints blog. Link:

http://brokensaints.com/blog/?p=48#comments

Aries Says:
April 26th, 2005 at 4:41 pm

Here you go:

Brooke got some things right, but much of it is flawed. I don’t know whether he just made up a lot of that stuff, because many of the points have been disproven before. For instance, Game Informer wrote an article on the next generation consoles in which it claims the Revolution’s controller will have one giant touch screen. I’m thinking this is where Brooke got that idea. The Revolution will not have a touch screen. Iwata has stated this before. The controller will be quite normal in the sense that it will have a d-pad and buttons. Like I said, I’m not going to tell you the revolutionary aspect of the system. Nintendo has some cool pre E3 plans for that.

First off, the 3D visuals he mentioned have nothing to do with the system. Nintendo isn’t crazy.

It will also have gyroscopic controls, but like Brooke said, not all the games will use it. For instance, earlier I mentioned Nintendo has a Halo killer in development for the Revolution. This game will use the gyroscopic controls for aiming as wel as other things. Our game isn’t using this function.

The controller will be wireless; he’s right about that. As you also know, the Xbox 360’s controllers will be wireless as well. Where do you think they got this idea? That’s why Nintendo is still trying to determine what to show at E3. From what I’ve heard, they will show the design of the system as well as games. I’ll tell you about the software later though.

The controller will also be pressure sensitive. The pressure you put into it will determine certain things, such as movement. This is another optional capibility. Someone on Nintendo’s board mentioned this months ago. They said that “touching is good, but feeling is better.” This may sound strange, but it provides great controls. Racing games will really be helped by this control setting.

The Nintendo Revolution will also include voice control more advanced than anything seen so far. Nintendogs is just the beginning. To achieve this, Nintendo sent us headsets (similar to ones you can use for Xbox Live) that are wirelessless communicating with the console. Imagine being able to merely call for an airstrike or reload your gun by giving out commands orally. So far, we have put this feature to the test the most; as you can see, I’m excited over this feature.

From a graphical perspective, the Nintendo Revolution is very powerful. Many people seem to think this won’t be the case, but rest assured. The games I saw while working at Nintendo were very beautiful. I’ll tell you about those later.

As Nintendo has stated before, the system will be online. In my eyes, the online system they have set up is the most revolutionary part of the system. While Sony and Microsoft are busy turning their systems into trojan horses for their other electronic devices, Nintendo is going to use the Revolution for direct communication with gamers. The only way I can describe it is as an internet service. Imagine turning it on and checking your mail on the system. You see previews and demos of DS and Revolution games that you can download. A magazine similar to Nintendo Power will be exclusive to the system, and you will be able to access it on the Revolution’s homepage. As you check you mail, you will also see various invitations from gamers on your buddy list who want to play you. There are so many other ways this is going to be used. Once the Revolution comes out, there will be no reason to hang out on message boards. Message boards as well as chat rooms will be available on the Revolution so that gamers can discuss and challenge each other all day. And the best thing is that the entire thing is totally free and easy to use. Why play Madden on Xbox Live when you’ll be able to play it for free on the Revolution with much better services?

That’s all I’m going to reveal for now. There are some very interesting games in the horizon for the Revolution; I’ll talk about them later.

Quote:
Aries Says:
April 26th, 2005 at 5:04 pm

Like Brooke said, console ideas are nothing without good games. Once you see the games, you will understand. I would go as far to say that the Revolution isn’t as revolutionary as Nintendo is saying. It should be called the Nintendo Simplicity, because every aspect I mentioned greatly simplifies the gaming experience. For instance, the pressure sensitive grips on the controller make racing games much easier to control and play. Wave Race (yes, it will be at E3) is going to be very impressive because it will use this function. It will be sort of like controlling a game with one of those stress balls. You squeeze it and you go faster. It’s hard to explain though.

Don’t expect to see too much if any of the controller at E3 though. Nintendo is still trying to decide what to show and what not to show. The games will be revealed, as well as specs and the system design. But the controller is still being considered.

To Jesus: when you see the voice controls, you will be blown away. Go back and watch some sci fi movies with voice controlled vehicles (such as AI or I am Robot).

Quote:
# Aries Says:
April 26th, 2005 at 2:14 pm

You guys are still talking about the 3D angle of that article? Check the date of the patent in question. This has already been used in a game that’s out right now. I would suggest you pay attention to IGN or N-Sider more.

Like I said, I’m going to give out some details on the next gen hardware, especially the Nintendo Revolution. You guys already know a lot of information on the Xbox 360; you guys have already seen the specs of the system. Gamespy released them around GDC. I was at GDC, and I’ll fill you in on some stuff that IGN can’t talk about. Specs and details on the Nintendo Revolution were given out to developers during the conference. I can verify that my company as well as EA and Midway received them at GDC. I’m positive other publishers received them as well.

From what I’ve heard, Capcom and Namco are sold on the Revolution and are currently playing around with the development kits. I don’t know whether they are actually making games for it though. I was suprised to hear that Square Soft has a game in development for the Revolution. It will be at E3 as well as some other next gen titles for the PS3.

I’m currently working on a game for the Revolution as well. I can’t guarantee that it will be at E3 though. I think people are going to be very suprised. When I worked with Nintendo, I was able to see the earliest builds of the system. It has come a long way, to say the least. There are a lot of graphics whores out there who feel the Revolution will be a weak system. They will be very suprised come E3. Microsoft is banking on stealing the show, but I think they will be upstaged by Nintendo as well as Sony. It’s going to be very funny to see them trying to get people excited about Perfect Dark 0 when both Nintendo and Sony will be showing off Halo killers.

Quote:
# Aries Says:
April 26th, 2005 at 3:28 pm

I’m not going to share specs with you because they aren’t really that important. I think Iwata said something like that when asked the same question. All three consoles are going to be very powerful, trust me. I’ll give you some information though: it will be more powerful than the Xbox 360. Much more powerful. Many gamers seem to think it will be as powerful as the GBA or something. That isn’t the case at all. From what I saw during my time their as well as our game, it will be very capible.

But having the most powerful console doesn’t guarantee that gamers are going to buy it. Software sells the games. And if that statement holds true next generation, the Nintendo Revolution will be very popular.

In my next post I will “spill the beans” on everything I know about the Revolution. I’ll give you some hints though. All the rumors out there are not mere rumors. Some are planted by people who are working on the consoles. In fact, Nintendo is doing this right now with the information they’ve released on the Revolution. You are going to see why Nintendo hasn’t just come out and said confirmed that the Revolution is going to be very powerful. You’re going to be punk’d by them in a couple weeks. Pay attention to the boards, especially Nintendo’s board. It’s much better than OurColony.

Aries goes on to say a little more later, but unfortunately he runs into some problems as people start making comments under his name (The blog uses a comment system, you just enter your name and your comment and your done, you can use any name you want to) and start sayings things like "I made the whole thing up".

Other anoucements from Nintendo have made statements that confirm a free internet program out of the box, the size of the revolution (three dvd cases stacked on top of each other is the approximate size), a CPU by Intel and GPU by ATI, and other functions such as DVD playing capability. They have also annouced that they are going to be working on getting third party support to come back and help them.

All in all, Nintendo seems to be putting together a system that could give Sony a run for their money.



I'll be posting information on the other console later.

[Modred]

At GDC, Iwata confirmed that Revolution will come ready for wireless internet out of the box. In addition, wireless internet play will be expanded to the DS as well.

I don't know much about PS3 or Xbox360.

[uchafu]

Oh no...here we go again with the next generation consoles' hype...As far as I know everytime a console comes out, the creator says that it will revolutionize the way we play games (remember Dreamcast hehehe). I don't buy this anymore...And even if they pull out a kick-ass console the publishers will ruin it with rejurgitated crap...Especially in Nintendo's consoles, I mean ever since the Nintendo 64 came out, only like 4 or 6 games were worth buying each year, and those were made by Nintendo. Besides, PC's will always be much better and will outperform consoles always. So I say that we shouldn't get so excited with the new consoles because they will end up being just like the ones today.

[Toucan]

I can still remember when the only consoles you could get were the Atari, Tennis and this freaky little battleship simulation (it was cool though)

There was a couple that followed, but none stick out so much in memory as the Sega, followed by the sega master system, I remember I thought the nintendo had nicer graphics at the time.
And I remember before the sony ps ever came out. When Sega and Nintendo basicly had the market, the general conversation was "how could sony compete with companys that have been established in the game industry for so long"

My point is, every once in a while you stick your head up, take a look around and the entire game industry is different, so who knows wich will be the next big console.

[Sirion]

uchafu, that is true. Many companies do say that their console will "revolutionize" the gaming industry. But this time, it truly is different. Nintendo is no longer simply increasing graphical power, they are now creating new control systems that will allow us to litterally play games differently. Like they did when the introduced the analog stick, or the L and R buttons, or even the NES itself, they are bringing something new to the plate, only even more so. If half of the Aries rumors are true, then the Revolution will already contain some new control methods, and the revolutionary part isn't even mentioned. I do believe that Nintendo will be making an amazing product for us, not just increasing the horse power.

[Neo]

mmm.

Anything that uses (What the hell is it called?) movement via the controller to... uhm control is going to flop.

How many of you hold the controller steady when your playing? I know I dont -- half the time ill move it around as I adjust or lay down, or wahtever.

Yeah sounds cool at first, but its like that wizard-glove power-glove thing from like what the 80s? it may not do well, or do anything. Besides that arent most people used to 'aiming' via conventional means? Why change something if its not broke?

Its going to be interesting if the PS3 will carry over its backwards compatibility, since there are many many PSX games I wouldnt mind replaying... :D

-Neo

[GrassDragon]

Its going to be interesting if the PS3 will carry over its backwards compatibility, since there are many many PSX games I wouldnt mind replaying... :D
It does. Press release here (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050516/sfm178.html?.v=2). 2 teraflops, dang.

[Nuts]

I can still remember when the only consoles you could get were the Atari, Tennis and this freaky little battleship simulation (it was cool though)

I had a PONG console with knobs on the deck itself. Joysticks are for wimps. ;)

[Toucan]

I had a PONG console with knobs on the deck itself. Joysticks are for wimps.
Man... I'm not that old :)

[dirty_raider]

Surely the Revolution will come off 3rd best again to the PS3 and the 360 if only because it'll be released afterwards by which time the other two will already cost less.

[Neo]

Well Revolution may come out on top for 'old school' gamers. Since apparently you will have access to a huge library of past n64, SNES and even nes titles that you can download and play on the revolution.

Wow.

I still hope that xboxes will flop, but sadly they wont, seems there are to many FPS-Fanboys and shit who find 1 (one) game kickass enough to trumpet the xbox... *continues ranting*

-Neo

[pixels]

Well Revolution may come out on top for 'old school' gamers. Since apparently you will have access to a huge library of past n64, SNES and even nes titles that you can download and play on the revolution.

Wow.
and thats precisely the reason its number 1 on my list, so far. thats just so amazingly cool ;) 20 years of games... all mine!

[Modred]

Surely the Revolution will come off 3rd best again to the PS3 and the 360 if only because it'll be released afterwards by which time the other two will already cost less.
Um...GCN didn't flop because it cost more. If I recall correctly, GCN started at $200, soon dropped to $150, and then within a year or two was only $100. Xbox and PS2 started at $300, and were at $250 when GCN debuted at $200.

Like Neo, I'm more inclined to attribute Nintendo's failure not to a mistake on their part, but Halo. And a press that likes to suck up to Microsoft (although EGM predicted Xbox will fall flat this year while GCN has trouble and PS2 reigns, as usual).

[Spartan-II]

I disagree Neo, they have other fun games, although alot are 3rd party titles. That and the Xbox isn't meant for RPG freaks and little "Girly men!". *Lol* From my experience, Xbox is basically a multiplayer system, and that's why I love it. Why be playing sad RPG's in your dark room when you could be playing action packed shooters with thousands of other people?

[Dayoh]

y is it that all of the good nintendo games were made by either nintendo or Rare (god i wish microsoft never got Rare)

[Whiteknight]

I disagree Neo, they have other fun games, although alot are 3rd party titles. That and the Xbox isn't meant for RPG freaks and little "Girly men!". *Lol* From my experience, Xbox is basically a multiplayer system, and that's why I love it. Why be playing sad RPG's in your dark room when you could be playing action packed shooters with thousands of other people?

Woo woo, here comes the clue train!

Nintendo has every single genre there is. Name on, I'll name a game. Just because there are actually some *successful* (note: sucessful) RPGs for it that actually suceed doesn't mean that the GCN is purely an RPG machine.

That girly men comment is way misplaced also. Just because *some* (I repeat, some, as in a fraction, as in basically just a few percent) don't look like super realistic blood and guts action and instead have smooth lines and graphics like that doesn't take away from the gameplay. Then there are games that look just as realistic as everything else, like Splinter Cell. Another "fact" distorted and exaggerated.

Xbox is mainly for multiplayer? How is GCN not? Almost every single game for GCN has at least 2 player and usually 4. Some games are even based around multiplayer (EG. SSBM). Just because you actually have to have friends come over and participate in some actual interaction doesn't mean it's any less multiplayer.

[kongurous]

Xbox is mainly for multiplayer? How is GCN not? Almost every single game for GCN has at least 2 player and usually 4. Some games are even based around multiplayer (EG. SSBM). Just because you actually have to have friends come over and participate in some actual interaction doesn't mean it's any less multiplayer.

He means Xbox Live. The Gamecube has a broadband adapter, yes, but that was only for Phantasy Star Online. Xbox Live is, right now, the best online console multiplayer system. Sony fanboys, shut up. Do you need a different name for every game on Xbox Live? No. Is Xbox Live faster? In most cases, yes. Do all competitive Live games support voice? Yes. I'm gonna try to look up the PS2 Online requirements and all that to prove Xbox Live is superior, but I do have this:http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/about/top10getlive.htm

(Yes, I know its on xbox.com. Its kinda hard to find unbiased information on the internet, or information that doesn't come from Sony, Microsoft, or Sony fanboys.)

[Neo]

Well while yall enjoy the whole xbox live thing, I will enjoy realy online play, with, omg, a computer and broadband.

A console is a *console* not a computer. I don't look at my PS2 and think something like "oh yay time to get online with it!"

RPGs are fun, you know, they really are. They add depth to stories, and don't result in just you shotting some guy in the head, seeing blood spurting around, etc... My brother picked up some old GCN games recently (Metal Gear Solid: TT and Mortal Kombat/starfox adventures) first: What the fuck? Do people really get off on the whole blood craze? Omg blood is spurting out of his leg! hahahha!!!!

At least most rpgs (as I havent played them all I couldnt tell ya :P) don't have blood spurting out of every possible angle when your character is hit. Besides, some rpgs allow for serious tactics -- ie: low level games and such.

Anyways... Whatever. The Xbox has like maybe 1 or 2... plus halo 1 and 2 that are actually exlusive games to the xbox -- and are actually uhm, good, not that i care for halo or 2, since I consider any and all FPS games beyond moronic. GCN has all the old school titles, Metroid, Zelda, SSBM, SMK, etc... plus a bunch of other oddball games (like metal arms, that game was surprisingly fun).

I don't know, I just don't see the point in getting a console, getting online with it, and then paying for the online play, when I can just boot my computer up and play online for free (or rather, for paying for broadband and then playing a game online for free, unless its like WoW or some such).

-Neo

EDIT: AND THATS ANOTHER THING. Why in the hell do people use voice microphone/headset things when playing a video game?! Thats appealing? Listening to and talking to people you don't even know? Doesn't that take the hacker/elite talk to a whole new level? Speaking does not kickass. They actually list creating a special account and a password for that account as features? As opposed to what? A completely open online arena where anyone can be under any name? Wtf do people expect? *walks away*

[Dayoh]

screw consoles hail StarCraft!!!!!

[Spartan-II]

Neo, your little rant about communicators is really off track. With communicators you don't have to have Über typing skills not to be left out of conversations with faster-paced people. It adds tone quality, and it's easier to detect sarcasm/anger/ and other emotions when people speak. Unless you're afraid to use your voice, you really shouldn't be opposed to communicators that much.

I agree, some RPG's are fun. It's the fact that some RPG's require a large monthly fee, and have people spewing about their "Über 1337 lvl 78" characters is annoying. I really don't derive any entertainment from Fairies, Unicorns, and games that take months of playing time just to get your guy to the last boss. Shooters deliver fun directly from the start, and usually with fast paced action. I don't like trolling dungeons for hours just to get my character to the next level when in the same time I could have played with 20 people across alien landscapes with high-tech weaponry spewing doom at every incoming enemy.

Your multiplayer comparison is basically moot, in each nstance, if a game is XBox Live enabled, it's also enabled for normal multiplayer with 2-4 people. And relating playing XBL to not having friends is stupid, I almost routinely play people from school and my city. We have fun without the hassle of minimizing the picture on the television, deviding snacks, and making room in our messy living spaces.

[Toucan]

screw consoles hail StarCraft!!!!!

Wasnt there an N64 starcraft released?

[kongurous]

Wasnt there an N64 starcraft released?

Yea. For what it was worth, it was a good game. At least, I liked it.

[Neo]

Note: I didnt say anything about friends related to multiplayer.

But I did say that (multiple times) if I am going to play online -- anything, and most especially if I am paying for it, I am sure as hell doing it on my computer. Not through a CONSOLE and HEADSET.

-Neo

[Nuts]

I still hope that xboxes will flop, but sadly they wont, seems there are to many FPS-Fanboys and shit who find 1 (one) game kickass enough to trumpet the xbox... *continues ranting*
Why would you desire the failure of a console? As much as I dislike Nintendo, I don't see how wishing for their failure will help me enjoy my Xbox any more.

A console is a *console* not a computer. I don't look at my PS2 and think something like "oh yay time to get online with it!"
Actually, it is a computer, (it can run linux afterall) just optimzed for console gaming.

Anyways... Whatever. The Xbox has like maybe 1 or 2... plus halo 1 and 2 that are actually exlusive games to the xbox -- and are actually uhm, good, not that i care for halo or 2, since I consider any and all FPS games beyond moronic.
Thanks for insulting 90% of Warboards members, including myself.

I don't know, I just don't see the point in getting a console, getting online with it, and then paying for the online play, when I can just boot my computer up and play online for free (or rather, for paying for broadband and then playing a game online for free, unless its like WoW or some such).
What makes WoW or Everquest any more worthy of paid online play than Halo or Doom? You should recognize that your personal preferences are not shared by everyone.

EDIT: AND THATS ANOTHER THING. Why in the hell do people use voice microphone/headset things when playing a video game?! Thats appealing? Listening to and talking to people you don't even know?
Two things, firstly, why must you play with people you don't know? Can't you play with your friends whom have an Xbox as well? Secondly, if you're ever played Splinter Cell or similar military/stealth type games, you would know that voice communication can enhance gameplay immensely.

Seriously Neo, you're a smart guy and I like you personally, but you seem to have some rather unfounded opinions about the Xbox. Based on your comments, I wonder if Bill Gates has wronged you in some fashion? :concern:

[Neo]

Why would you desire the failure of a console? As much as I dislike Nintendo, I don't see how wishing for their failure will help me enjoy my Xbox any more.

Becuase Xbox is not innovative at all. Its just another one of microsoft's "lets throw money at it" projects. At least nintendo has remembered they sell gaming consoles. ANd trying thier best to come up with new/different things.

Actually, it is a computer, (it can run linux afterall) just optimzed for console gaming.
PS2 (well the models that support the hard drives) can run linux, I believe, with alot of tinkering, Xbox can run linux, but thats besides the point. They are gaming consoles. Ok yes, the consoles have computer parts insides, the xbox is basically a computer (its damn near as heavy as one), and so is the old version of the PS2 to a small extent... I think.

But I am so tired of people bringing up that arguement. A console will never be as versatile or as useful as a desktop pc gaming rig. I don't care how much you love your xbox and its online play, a computer will always be more useful. I don't look at a console as a means to play online games. It seems so worthless! I always thought of consoles as a... Solo-gaming sort of a thing, or as a thing to get a few friends over to play super smash brothers, or whatever. Not as something that I pay for, to play online, and talk over a headset (!) (something I still cant get over).

Thanks for insulting 90% of Warboards members, including myself.
Ok, but, I hold firm by what I said. I find most, if not all FPS games to be moronic. I never said the people who played them were (though I think I insulted FPS fans in another post, but I didnt really mean it). I have decided to add other games to the list as well, FPS Games, and any game, at all, that has gushing blood pouring out of a paper cut >_>

What makes WoW or Everquest any more worthy of paid online play than Halo or Doom? You should recognize that your personal preferences are not shared by everyone.
Ok, I admit, it probably is a personal preference because: My computer is better then my console. I dont have to use a freaking headset to communicate with others, and while WoW and/or Everquest and the other MMORPGs maybe fun, I meant generically. I am not one to pay monthly for a game unless its *really* good, becuase I am one of those stubborn "omg but I bought the game now, I have to pay to keep playing it?!" types.

WoW, first off, probably diserves my money simplyfor being from Blizzard, and from what I have heard, and seen, they did pretty damn well (What is it, the fastest growing online community/whatever.... ever?). Everquest -- meh, I dont want to kill myself with a 72 hour gaming spree, or get killed over some virtual item. But on the other side, isnt CS:S still one of the most popular FPS online? Counterstrike is/was the most popular game in the world (so disturbing), so why does one goto a console to get a FPS fix? omg im rambling.

Two things, firstly, why must you play with people you don't know? Can't you play with your friends whom have an Xbox as well? Secondly, if you're ever played Splinter Cell or similar military/stealth type games, you would know that voice communication can enhance gameplay immensely.
Voice Communication, is I am sorry, beyond annoying. Its a game. Ok yes you can play with friends who have an Xbox, but that means they have to be paying for Xbox live as well (well not them if your younger, thier parents) which I find... lame for lack of a better thought here. I have played stealth games, but I find them them, also, lacking of uhm, playability. Its boring to play those games. And geting a headset to talk to other wierdos (omg sneak over there man!!!) wouldn't really get me into one.

Seriously Neo, you're a smart guy and I like you personally, but you seem to have some rather unfounded opinions about the Xbox. Based on your comments, I wonder if Bill Gates has wronged you in some fashion? :concern:
Dont get me wrong. I don't like the trend that any of the consoles are headed in (gcn is going to support online something? or is that only the revolution? PS2 has online play -- erhm, sorta? lol) becuase I will always look at my computer and think, ok time for some online play, and look at my console and think "time for a kickass solo game" (which incidently, its hard to find good ones anymore, it seems the best games push multiplayer, which is fine and everything for games like Half life I guess, Starcraft, War3, etc... all the other computer games... but for consoles?).

And if you must, just ignore me, I feel like one of those lodged right or left -winger wackos who refuse to change thier point of views :P

-Neo

[Nuts]

PC Fascist! :)

[Toucan]

I totaly agree with NeoX, all consoles must be gatherd and tossed into the depths of hell where they will burn for all time, PC's are just superior and all must bow to there glory.
You cant tell me there not AI either because you just cant be that much of a bastard without putting some thought into it.

But seriously, as much as I may find this new trend "disturbing", I think alot of people will love it.
I mean think about it, no installations, just sit down, throw the disk in and multiplayer carnage baby,,(cough, cough) sorry Im one of those moronic FPS fans to :P
With the new trend as you pointed out Neo, games are leaning towards multiplayer, in order to stay in the market, consoles really need this.
I dont know about you, if its not multiplayer, FPS is boring.
I cant keep playing a game genre unless it is multiplayer, it becomes boring i guess, I think because of this its hard to keep new solo games coming out, there all just rehashes of old games with better graphics.
Its hard to create a new genre and if you can, you will be ritch beyond your wildest dreams.

[kongurous]

Ugh... Neo, why do you hate online console multiplayer so much? What if people don't have enough money to upgrade their computer to play Counterstrike:Source or something? What if people want to hear an opponent's voice? Yes, little kids getting on Xbox Live are annoying, but being able to annihilate them because they suck but say they own, and yell at their body while teabagging them seems... enjoyable. Besides, you don't have to press the enter key and type some stuff, when someone can kill you while you're typing. And not having that annoying enter key helps, because you say something when you want to say it, and not see, "Bob says, "wwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaassssssssss". Xbox Live opened up a lot of options for people who don't have powerful computers or anything, and it doesn't cost much to play. And if you're bringing up that consoles shouldn't go on the internet, cell phones do the same. The DS does the same. And internet play over consoles actually makes multiplayer useful for those who don't have many friends. Let's face it, some people aren't publicly pleasing enough to warrant attention. Let's also say they aren't l33t computer aces like you, Neo. Let's also say they have Xbox Live, and don't have enough money or computer knowledge to build a computer with 40 Geforce 6800 Ultras and 12 gigs of RAM to run Half-Life 2 or Halo on their PC. It opens online playing to more people, and allows for more fun to be had, since I know a minority of people know computers.

[Sikawtic]

The Revolution (imo) is going to be too inferior to PS3, or even the 360, to deserve to be the top selling system. The whole backwards compatible deal will be there only saving grace...

[kongurous]

The Revolution (imo) is going to be too inferior to PS3, or even the 360, to deserve to be the top selling system. The whole backwards compatible deal will be there only saving grace...

Why do you think that? Why do you think Guild Wars is better, when you probably haven't played WoW? Why do you think MSN is superior? Why do you think anything? You PROVIDE NO FUCKING PROOF for claims!!!!

[Sikawtic]

revolution:
Xbox spokesmen have pointed out that 360's specifications are 10 to 13 times more powerful than those of the original Xbox; Sony said Monday that the processor in Play-Station 3, which will come in several colors and be out next spring, will be 35 times more powerful than the PS2 processor.

Nintendo makes more modest claims that Revolution is two or three times more powerful than GameCube. "It's not all about having 'turbo power,' " Nintendo's Perrin Kaplan says. "It's about what you do with it
xbox:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox360/factsheet.htm
ps3:
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614682p1.html?fromint=1

Why do you think that? Why do you think Guild Wars is better, when you probably haven't played WoW? Why do you think MSN is superior? Why do you think anything? You PROVIDE NO FUCKING PROOF for claims!!!!I don't need proof for my OWN OPINIONS do I ? didn't think so, as for why MSN > Trillian I stated that trillian is buggy... ask any trillian user and they'll tell you the same thing (if they are telling the truth). It will mess up usernames (it kept one of mine for 2+ months on one of the pplz trillian list ... even after numerous changes...). That's one bug I've noticed. As to WoW? I read reviews from mmorpgs.com, and developed an opinion as to which playing style would suit me more and chose guildwars, purchased it and love the game. Addicted in a way I don't think WoW could have ever done... I don't wanna sit playing a game for 100+ hours with no storyline... (i realize it prolly has one, just probably not very developed, and nowhere near as interesting as GWs, if the reviews I've read are correct).

[kongurous]

O_O... congratulations, Sikawtic. You got off your fanboy high chair and make a statement that wasn't your opinion.

[CrankyBuddha]

hmm
i thought this was a discussion thread about the next gen systems...so im just gonna leave before i get roped into the WoW/Guild Wars thing, because i havent got to play either, and so it would be unfair for me to make an opinion based on nothing but reviews. But, just for the record...Guild Wars is free. I still dont get why they didnt put WoW over Battle Net. Then i would probly buy it. CrankyBuddha out.

Oh yeah, for the console thing, ill more than likely buy a revolution. Not to put down all of you people saying that its going to suck and teh controls will be awful and blah blah blah, but think about it. Itll have online, which was teh only thing keeping the GameCube from being equal with the ps2 and xbox, and i still liked the Cube anyway. If Nintendo says they are going to revolutionize the way we play games, how about we wait till the thing comes out before we judge it. Nintendo has been making games longer than both Sony and Microsoft, and im sure they know what they're doing. So, lets all settle down and wait and see what happens. (And ill laugh like a maniac if the revolution completely blows the other systems out of the water. its already got 360 beat cause it will have free online.)

[kongurous]

I don't need proof for my OWN OPINIONS do I ? didn't think so, as for why MSN > Trillian I stated that trillian is buggy... ask any trillian user and they'll tell you the same thing (if they are telling the truth). It will mess up usernames (it kept one of mine for 2+ months on one of the pplz trillian list ... even after numerous changes...). That's one bug I've noticed. As to WoW? I read reviews from mmorpgs.com, and developed an opinion as to which playing style would suit me more and chose guildwars, purchased it and love the game. Addicted in a way I don't think WoW could have ever done... I don't wanna sit playing a game for 100+ hours with no storyline... (i realize it prolly has one, just probably not very developed, and nowhere near as interesting as GWs, if the reviews I've read are correct).

True, you don't need proof for your opinions. However, they are wrong and insulting. PS3 3x the 360? Total crap. Guild Wars better than World of WarCraft? You've yet to play the latter. You form your opinions around cock-eyed reviews and you're own preference, which equals up to close-mindedness towards other games in a genre(WoW)or against consoles(Xbox 360).

hmm
i thought this was a discussion thread about the next gen systems...so im just gonna leave before i get roped into the WoW/Guild Wars thing, because i havent got to play either, and so it would be unfair for me to make an opinion based on nothing but reviews. But, just for the record...Guild Wars is free. I still dont get why they didnt put WoW over Battle Net. Then i would probly buy it. CrankyBuddha out.

What would battle.net have improved? We're talking an MMORPG, where running a temporary, 8 player server is out of the question.

[Sikawtic]

True, you don't need proof for your opinions. However, they are wrong and insulting. PS3 3x the 360? Total crap. Guild Wars better than World of WarCraft? You've yet to play the latter. You form your opinions around cock-eyed reviews and you're own preference, which equals up to close-mindedness towards other games in a genre(WoW)or against consoles(Xbox 360).Oh my bad, it's like 2.4 times faster, I was close...

[CrankyBuddha]

Im sure blizzard would have found a way for battlenet to support WoW. But thats all im saying. I said i wasnt getting roped into this, and im not.

[kongurous]

Oh my bad, it's like 2.4 times faster, I was close...

Let's review: PS3 has a Cell Processor PowerPC-base Core @3.2GHz

Xbox 360 has three symmetrical cores running at 3.2 GHz each.

Xbox 360 wins.

[Sikawtic]

That's only processing speed kong... and besides, adding 3 processors doesn't bump up the processing speed, it's still 3.2, it can just do several tasks at once.

[kongurous]

That's only processing speed kong... and besides, adding 3 processors doesn't bump up the processing speed, it's still 3.2, it can just do several tasks at once.

Ok, 360 has

512 MB of 700 MHz GDDR3 RAM
PS3 has 256MB XDR Main RAM @3.2GHz 256MB GDDR3 VRAM @700MHz.

360 still wins.

[Sikawtic]

actually... ps3 wins on that

xbox: 512 at 700MHZ

not only does ps3 have 256 at 700mhz, it has 256 at 3.2GHZ.

how the hell does xbox win on that one?

On the whole WoW vs GW: I say we agree to disagree... I realize they are geared differently, and have very different playing styles.

[kongurous]

actually... ps3 wins on that

xbox: 512 at 700MHZ

not only does ps3 have 256 at 700mhz, it has 256 at 3.2GHZ.

how the hell does xbox win on that one?.

You misinterpret that. I admit, I don't know what it means. Perhaps NeoX could decipher it, but it seems impossible to have 256 at both 700MHz and 3.2GHz.

[ZeroDarkStar]

You misinterpret that. I admit, I don't know what it means. Perhaps NeoX could decipher it, but it seems impossible to have 256 at both 700MHz and 3.2GHz.

They don't make RAM at 3.2ghz. It's 700MHz.

And actually, symmetrical cores DO improve speed dramatically. 3 different cores means that the proccessor can do 3x the mulitasking a single core could do.

And also, an observation: this conversation is so riddled with fanboyism and biased opinions I'm surprised that you're not still shouting at each other "Xbox is better!", "No, PS3 is better!".

[Sikawtic]

Here we go:

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=59133

Last Thursday night, I spent the best part of eight hours sat at my PC watching Xbox 360 launch, continually gossiping with some of you about the various rumours doing the rounds, getting excited about leaks, scans and previously unseen details, and eventually erupting with delight as the whole picture became clear and I had J Allard marching around my desktop waving his disco fingers and telling me that everything I'd thought was true for weeks and months was, in fact, true.

I woke up the following morning very excited. I wanted an Xbox 360. A lot. But I was a little wary. It definitely wasn't a mainstream console. It felt a bit like a console gunning for a subset of a subset - effectively legalising the "chipped" Xbox's finest features, slapping in what PJ McNealy rather astutely labelled a "broadband cash register", and making the whole thing so fully featured, customisable and comprehensive for Xbox Live users that the hardcore Xbox following rightly woke up with me thinking "that's exactly what I was after".

But for all Microsoft's crowing about the "HD era" and dragging the console toward the mainstream, the company has made a pretty substantial HD error; it hasn't actually given us the next generation of gaming technology. Despite supporting virtually everything we could want, it doesn't do it all out of the box and to a high enough standard. Having sat through Sony's exhausting and meticulously detailed conference in LA's Culver City this afternoon, I can tell you with some certainty that PlayStation 3 does these things.

Microsoft was right; this next generation is about high definition, but Sony's going to be the standard bearer. PS3 is ridiculously powerful. It supports progressive scan up to 1080p - significantly better than the Xbox 360's top-end 1080 interlaced resolution - and can do it on two screens at once. It can do things graphically that PCs cannot do, let alone Xbox 360. And things that PCs won't be able to do at least until after the console launches next spring. Xbox 360 games look like high-end PC games; gorgeous, but like games. EA was standing at the PS3 conference talking about dumping status indicators in its Fight Night boxing game because you won't need to look anywhere but the other guy's face to tell what the score is. And we could see the truth of that. When games look so realistic that you don't need status bars, the average person who has no idea about them is likely to have their interest piqued.

Equally thanks to its utterly comprehensive support of every conceivable format, form of media playback and more. The new IP camera will basically let you whack up live video streams wherever you are. It's compatible with everything: PS1 games, PS2 games, EyeToy, PSP (and, as Rob suggested to me earlier, you wouldn't bet against PS3 wirelessly streaming video to the PSP as a kind of remote video handset), Memory Stick, wireless networks, and so on. Xbox 360 does things like this, but it's "ready" to do most of them, rather than doing them out of the box. The only wildcard is online gaming; Sony screwed that up with PS2 Online, which is a woeful service next to Live, and will need to make serious amends with PS3. But when everything else seems so right, it's hard to imagine them letting that slip twice.

But the real reason PlayStation 3 is now far and away the console I'm most looking forward to of these two is simply the games. I didn't wake up last Friday and think "I can't wait to play Xbox 360"; I woke up wanting to own one. Preferably with a Eurogamer faceplate on it. I will wake up tomorrow (or later today for those of you reading this in the UK) wanting to PlayStation 3. And half the stuff I want is brand new; MotorStorm is making my head spin and Eyedentity could be extraordinary. And I honestly want to play Killzone most of all, despite Killzone on PS2 being a game I find soul destroying to even watch someone else play.

Perhaps the biggest blow for Microsoft though isn't that PlayStation 3 is absurdly powerful by comparison, or that it seems to do everything Xbox 360 is talking about as its USPs without those features even making the first page of the press release, or that it seems to have the support of every major company to a far greater degree, or that it has an enormous software line-up already, or that it... Well you get the picture. A console can win through that with decent direction and software; hence PS2 winning the last round.

What's going to be a huge blow is that having spent at least the last couple of years watching its share of the multi-platform market grow and Nintendo's dwindle and Sony's erode slightly, as Xbox proved the best platform for most of those titles, PS3 is not only going to be the platform most developers pin their banner to first in the next generation; the games are actually going to look better this time too. And with that, it's hard to take seriously Microsoft's assertion that it can be number one in this generation. You know what? Frankly, going on what I've seen so far, I'm not even convinced Xbox 360 and PS3 are the same generation.

more: PS3 vs X360

PS3 ~ 100 billion shader ops per second
X360 = 67.2 billion shader ops per second

PS3 ~ 51 billion dot products per second
X360 ~ 33.6 billion dot products per second

PS3 ~ 2 TFLOPS
X360 ~ 1 TFLOPS

PS3 normalised total system + VRAM =412.5 MB
X360 normalised total system + VRAM = 326 MB

[kongurous]

They don't make RAM at 3.2ghz. It's 700MHz.

Sikawtic said it, not me.

PS3 vs X360

PS3 ~ 100 billion shader ops per second
X360 = 67.2 billion shader ops per second

PS3 ~ 51 billion dot products per second
X360 ~ 33.6 billion dot products per second

PS3 ~ 2 TFLOPS
X360 ~ 1 TFLOPS

PS3 normalised total system + VRAM =412.5 MB
X360 normalised total system + VRAM = 326 MB

I'm curious as to where you found that. A third-party site or a reliable source(such as IGN, GameSpot, etc.)?

[Sikawtic]

From Gamespot:Console specifications are a lot like statistics in that you can really change perceptions by paying special attention in selecting what you measure and how you go about measuring it. Microsoft may have been the first manufacturer to announce its next-generation console, but in order to gain that advantage Microsoft also had to reveal its console specs first--giving a fat target-list for Sony's marketing team. Do you really think that Sony would have even mentioned the 51-billion-dot-product-operations per second number during the PS3 press conference if Microsoft hadn't boasted that the Xbox 360 could do 9-billion-dot-product-operations per second? What if we told you that Sony combined the CPU and GPU performance numbers to come up with the 51-billion number while Microsoft only reported its CPU performance number? The Xbox 360 actually has 33.6-billion-dot-product-operations per second if you also include GPU performance.

We're not saying to ignore specifications altogether--most of them are relevant in some way or another. And we're going to talk about the specifications that really jumped out at us at first glance. Let's start with the processor. Sony has announced that the PlayStation 3 will have a 3.2GHz Cell processor that consists of a PowerPC-based core with seven synergistic processing units. The PS3 spec-sheet says that there's an eighth SPE reserved for redundancy--whatever that means. The Xbox 360, in comparison, has a multicore PowerPC processor that has three dual-threaded cores that can handle six total threads at a time. You might be able to call the Cell's SPEs overgrown math units, but we think Sony's Cell processor wins from a brute power perspective.
One thing that I read (repeatedly) is that the systems are genna be so powerful, it won't matter which one is stronger, as it will be around the same overall looking (hit our graphical max???).

[kongurous]

Hmm... so, from a power perspective, PS3 wins... no matter. Its the games that matter the most.

[ZeroDarkStar]

From Gamespot:
One thing that I read (repeatedly) is that the systems are genna be so powerful, it won't matter which one is stronger, as it will be around the same overall looking (hit our graphical max???).

I don't think there will ever be a graphical max until we reach perfect reality simulation (indistinguishable from real life).

[Spartan-II]

And again, the OFFICIAL tech specs.

XBox 360.
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox360/factsheet.htm

PS3.
http://www.ps3portal.com/?page=ps3_tech_specs

[kongurous]

And again, GameSpot doesn't lie. So what if one system is more powerful? It goes down to the games. Games make a system, not its power.

[Sikawtic]

Many people suspect all the big names will sign up with PS3, as they did when xbox came out. (xbox was the giant back then).

[kongurous]

Many people suspect all the big names will sign up with PS3, as they did when xbox came out. (xbox was the giant back then).

Xbox still has Dead or Alive and Halo!!!

[Spartan-II]

Oh SiKawtic, you said "suspect".

I suspect that the government is making deals with Aliens.

I also suspect that SiKawtic is pretty biased.

[kongurous]

I suspect that the government is making deals with Aliens.

Shhh... no-one is supposed to know about that ;)

I also suspect that SiKawtic is pretty biased.

You be correct dere, mon!

[Dayoh]

fight fight

[Fate-Of-Newbes]

i have one thing that i have 2 say and that is i have never bought a system that nintendo has made (my brothers have and i dont play them cause i dont like the games that they have other then ff7 that is the only 1 i play cause it is one of the best rpg's out their other then super mario and the legend of the 7 stars.) but when revolution comes out it will be the fastest selling system due 2 the fact that many of the people that are making it have once either been with sony or microsoft. the Revolution will be able 2 play all the old skool games that came out with Nes and Super Nintendio and n64 and gamecube all they have 2 do is download them and play them the reason i no alll of this is because i am a big fan of g4 channel 162 on comcast and i watch all of the shows and all of them cant but up biased info it has 2 be all facts. so if u have anything 2 say about how ps3 and xbox 360 are ganno suck compared 2 the Revolution say it 2 me. and also the compression feature onm the controller can be turned off. all this info is from me Fate-of-newbes from all of the g4 i watch ill respond again so be ready REVOLUTION ALL THE WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Spartan-II]

Woah, disorganized and very fanboyish.

I plan on owning both a 360, and a Revolution. Seeing to the fact that my brother is a bigger Sony fan than SiKawtic, he will obtain a PS3 and i'll mooch the hell out of it.

Personally, I beleive the XBox-360 will have an advantage because of its Uber system specs, online play, and Halo3.

I really hope the Revolution keeps up with the other consoles this time, I <3 Nintendo. I think that with the old SNES/NES/64/and GCN titles that will be abailable with it will give it a good chance.

PS3 has Final Fantasy, KillZone, and Fanboys, whatelse do you need?

[Vhaeraun]

I'll most likely end up getting all three. However, we will most likely get PS3 first (seeing to the fact my father stood in line and got one of the first PS2 released...)

360 looks surprisingly good. While I haven't seen the E3 video of that or Revolution, I think that Nintendo will show that they still have the power and manuverability to run with the "big boys" (Microsoft and Sony)

But yeah, I'll prolly end up getting all three in time.

And Fate-Of-Newbes, try to use more spaces and returns more. It is kinda hard to read all of that -.-

[Fate-Of-Newbes]

okay i will use more spaces from now on

[kongurous]

Personally, I beleive the XBox-360 will have an advantage because of its Uber system specs, online play, and Halo3.

I'm gonna side with Gamespot on the system specs of the 360 and PS3: They're either on par, or one is slightly weaker than the other. The only thing I can really determine with any certainty, is that PS3 doesn't use normal ol' DVD for its games, like the Xbox and newer brother, the 360. It uses like blue-ray or somethin' like that. Search WarBoards for it, I've seen it somewhere.

[ZeroDarkStar]

I'm gonna side with Gamespot on the system specs of the 360 and PS3: They're either on par, or one is slightly weaker than the other. The only thing I can really determine with any certainty, is that PS3 doesn't use normal ol' DVD for its games, like the Xbox and newer brother, the 360. It uses like blue-ray or somethin' like that. Search WarBoards for it, I've seen it somewhere.

PS3 uses Sony's Blu-Ray DVD-Discs, which use a blue focusing laser instead of a red one to write data. Because blue light has a shorter wavelength than red, more data is able to be written in a space than traditional red laser. I've heard claims that it can hold up to 25 gb on one disc, though I doubt the reliabilty of that statement.

Xbox 360 uses HD-DVD, a technology by Toshiba. I don't know exactly what makes HD-DVD so special, but many movie companies are embracing it (Universal, for one). I've heard that it can store up to 17gb, a more realistic claim than Sony's 25gb.

[Sikawtic]

Oh SiKawtic, you said &quot;suspect&quot;.

I suspect that the government is making deals with Aliens.

I also suspect that SiKawtic is pretty biased.suspect, yes. I said suspect... your point?

Yes, they are.

Yes, I am (take a gander at the status...) I know I'm biased, but for a system I knew would be awesome, and is so far pulling it's weight.

Personally, I beleive the XBox-360 will have an advantage because of its Uber system specs, online play, and Halo3.PS3 has better system specs, read the battle on the last few pages... ps3 has online... halo? - got me there... damn it anyway. (altho... I still say 1 was better than 2, maybe 3 will mess up as well :))

[Spartan-II]

SiKawtic, read the OFFICIAL tech specs. XBox beats the PS3 EVERYWHERE except Floating Point and Memory Bandwidth.

[Sikawtic]

Those are by official specs, you just don't know how to read them... bigger numbers doesn't always mean better buddy. Just because a nickel looks better than a dime, doesn't mean it is. The Cell is more powerful then the x3 core deal xbox has got going on, did ya know that? didn't think so. you don't know what your talking about.

[ZeroDarkStar]

Those are by official specs, you just don't know how to read them... bigger numbers doesn't always mean better buddy. Just because a nickel looks better than a dime, doesn't mean it is. The Cell is more powerful then the x3 core deal xbox has got going on, did ya know that? didn't think so. you don't know what your talking about.

The only thing the Cell architecture has going for it is that it can utilize the processes better than the Xbox 360 can...but the Xbox 360 still has more brute force than PS3 (much more! Three cores is amazing!). Still, I think at the beginning Xbox 360 will look better than PS3, but after programmers learn how to use the Cell architecture, they will perform almost exactly the same.

[Sikawtic]

The only thing the Cell architecture has going for it is that it can utilize the processes better than the Xbox 360 can...but the Xbox 360 still has more brute force than PS3 (much more! Three cores is amazing!). Still, I think at the beginning Xbox 360 will look better than PS3, but after programmers learn how to use the Cell architecture, they will perform almost exactly the same.
The "experts" seem to think differently ZDS:
Let's start with the processor. Sony has announced that the PlayStation 3 will have a 3.2GHz Cell processor that consists of a PowerPC-based core with seven synergistic processing units. The PS3 spec-sheet says that there's an eighth SPE reserved for redundancy--whatever that means. The Xbox 360, in comparison, has a multicore PowerPC processor that has three dual-threaded cores that can handle six total threads at a time. You might be able to call the Cell's SPEs overgrown math units, but we think Sony's Cell processor wins from a brute power perspective.