The New Console Debates

[DarkLink567]

Fire Emblem: SS, neither a port, or a remake. But in some respects it's a sequel but in some way it's not.

Handhelds seem to be the biggest offenders of releasing many, many ports. Many of their games are ports and remakes as you said. GBA recieves ports of SNES games every now and then, while the PSP seems to be getting a lot of PS2 games in handheld form. But maybe just maybe some people out there want a handheld form of their favourite PS2 game. They do it for convenience.

Also with the case of ports on the GBA, there are younger kids who might not have been old enough to experience games such as the early Final Fantasy games on the NES, SNES, whatever. Well in either case, they're just trying to milk out money out of old games.

GB player for DS, that line confused me for a moment because for some reason I couldn't understand what you meant . There could possibly be a DS player for the Rev, although it would be harder to use the remote in place of the stylus because you know where you are going to strike the stylus on the touch screen but you can't do that so well with the remote and tv screen.

 

[Zink]

Yes, it would be hard, but that is just a way they could take advantage of the Rev-DS connectivity.

 

[blaksheap82]

Um, sheep? I would bet that out of any 100 games, at least 30 or more are based on previous, ports, sequels, re-releases... but I see your point. I'm betting the Revolution will have some form of the GBA player for the DS.

I see what you're saying also, but your guesstimate is only thirty percent. At least half of that list fell under that category, and those games are supposed to be the high-profile releases.

Fire Emblem: SS, neither a port, or a remake. But in some respects it's a sequel but in some way it's not.

Handhelds seem to be the biggest offenders of releasing many, many ports. Many of their games are ports and remakes as you said. GBA recieves ports of SNES games every now and then, while the PSP seems to be getting a lot of PS2 games in handheld form. But maybe just maybe some people out there want a handheld form of their favourite PS2 game. They do it for convenience.

Also with the case of ports on the GBA, there are younger kids who might not have been old enough to experience games such as the early Final Fantasy games on the NES, SNES, whatever. Well in either case, they're just trying to milk out money out of old games.

Thank you for pointing out the FE mistake, because I remember thinking while I posted that that since I haven't played any FE, I wouldn't know about that one. I'll edit that one. Back on topic:
Those are all valid points, although myself I never played handheld ports if I'd already played the console version, I don't play through games more than once. It just looks like Nin is still trying to support the GB with a minimum of effort and cost, which I guess is really closely related to what you said. Even the Micro was mainly an aesthetic redo, again with minimal effort and cost.

 

[Deo_Smash]

I have nothing intelligent to say but mainly posting this so the topic remains on the front page as where it needs to be. To learn, argue, and reason the future of gaming is to do it here. Thank you for your time.

 

[Zink]

Wow Deo. That's dedication for you. If all people were like that, we would have... a bigger front page XD.
ANYway blaksheap I agree with you on the Micro topic- when I first heard of it I was like "It's smaller, and... what?"
And I like most of the ports anyway. I would prefer, between a console game and a handheld port, the handheld, excepting large changes.
DarkLink, I am not too confident about a DS player actually happening, I was just kinda tossin out ideas. They mentioned connectivity, so I just thought of this.

 

[Deo_Smash]

Thanks Zink, I feel appriciated. And I really don't get that kind of feeling around here often, if you know what I mean *coughsephiroth27cough* or something that effect.

I think the connectivity would be like the GBA to Gamecube for Crystal Chronicles. Or the DS itself could act like an alternative controller and......wait a minute....there it is! The SNES controller right in front of us the whole time! Its perfect! For those who own a DS could use their DS to play the retro Snes games. Maybe even the N64 games w/modifications. Maybe those rumors using a touch screen interface for the revo controllers may not be as empty as they seemed. Idunno but its was a sudden brain thought so just take it for a grain of salt for the time being. But it does seem to be a pretty cool idea to me.

 

[Cashed]

Don't bump topics.

Please remember this is the console debates as well, not the speculation about DS and Revolution connectivity thread.

 

[blaksheap82]

Well, I'm just following the discussion here anyway, and the fact that the DS and Rev are both Wi-Fi enabled makes connectivity a no brainer, whether it's using the DS for NES and SNES games on the VC, or like the GB and GC, except since it's wireless you don't need to buy any more peripherals. Nin seems to always have something they're working on long term, and there's always the incentive of getting more out of the game if you buy the GB/DS also. It's just simple marketing.

 

[Destiny Smasher]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6144600.html

*cough*

The PS3 begins to look less enticing with every bit of news I hear about it...-_-'
I mean $500 would be way to high to begin with, but if the production costs are 800, 900 dollars? That's crazy. Power is a good thing, but too much means too pricey, and too pricey = no-no.

 

[rezz]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6144600.html

*cough*

The PS3 begins to look less enticing with every bit of news I hear about it...-_-'
I mean $500 would be way to high to begin with, but if the production costs are 800, 900 dollars? That's crazy. Power is a good thing, but too much means too pricey, and too pricey = no-no.

yes it is im rich but even i dont want to pay that....but if thay bring out eney new games for it that i mite have to have...il think about it..i got the 360 cose i RELY RELY RELY love elder scroles 4 and ff 12 thats going to be on thear and im gittin the rev to but i think il leave the ps3 out

 

[Mic_128]

Almost everything that's on the PS is going to be on the 360. Not many, if any at all exclusives for the PS this coming gen.

 

[rezz]

thoe thay do have mgs4 but its going to take more then that to git me to buy it

 

[Cashed]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6144600.html

*cough*

The PS3 begins to look less enticing with every bit of news I hear about it...-_-'
I mean $500 would be way to high to begin with, but if the production costs are 800, 900 dollars? That's crazy. Power is a good thing, but too much means too pricey, and too pricey = no-no.

Each 360 currently costs Microsoft around $800 to produce. That may have dropped by now, I don't know, but Microsoft made all their own stuff for their system this time so the prices of production would lower over time. With the Xbox, they went to nVidia and said "Make us a graphics card, we'll pay for it!" and it still costs Microsoft just as much to buy it from nVidia as it did when the Xbox first came out. This time they worked side by side with ATI and the cost of the Xenos (360 graphics card) will go down over time.

The thing is that Microsoft can afford to lose money. Sony can't so much.

 

[Zink]

$699 per console, that means people won't want to buy them early on too much. Then Sony is taking a $100-$175 loss per unit, EVEN THE ONES THAT DON'T SELL. Count on them overproducing to avoid the lack of units problem of the 360 launch. They have one main customer group now, the late teens to thirties group. A lot of them can't pay $699, or won't just to play a game they could play on the 360 they probably already have. MGS4 won't draw that much. Then all other gamers, like younger kids and mid to low teens, can't afford it anyway. Plus there is the price of games themselves- $60 or maybe even $70 each. And that's not taking into account the varying launch date. Parents and gamers are going to look at the PS3 and see at least a $500 price tag. Then they see the 360 for however much it is now, anyway it's less. They will see that most of the games are shared by these two consoles, and will buy the 360 just for price. Some will go for the Rev's $150 tag and big exclusives list.


I don't see it for Sony.

 

[Deo_Smash]

If Sony and Microsoft are losing so much money through the consoles, whats keeping them from dropping out? Are games really bringing in enough dough to make up for the lose of money through the consoles?

 

[Zink]

I guess they have to be. Microsoft it doesn't matter as much, they have compters to fall back on, but Sony has nothng else except the PSP, which isn't lookin too good nowadays.

OFF TOPIC EDIT: I just noticed that the ad for this page is a Harry Potter ad that spells wizard as "wizzard". LOL.

 

[Cashed]

Microsoft lost around $4 billion with the original Xbox, they're hoping to make it back and then some with the 360. They were willing to lose money at first if they saw a profit in the future, and Gates says they're in videogames for good now.

 

[Chill]

If Sony and Microsoft are losing so much money through the consoles, whats keeping them from dropping out? Are games really bringing in enough dough to make up for the lose of money through the consoles?

For Sony yes. For Microsoft at this point it's more of an investment. They expect to get money back in the long run.

It's hard to say what's going on with the PS3 right now. If those numbers are true and the PS3 sells at a high price I think Sony will have a hard time explaining why the console is so expensive. The message would be easier to get across to "hardcore" gamers than to the general consumer.

If the price is that high Sony could be willing to take a large loss on the PS3 by selling at a price similar to the 360. Other companies could be endorsing Sony for the inclusion of Blu-Ray decreasing their losses. Even now they are probably subsidizing the heck out of Blu-Ray to make cheaper.

On the other hand it may not be that expensive at all. Merril Lynch has the price for the BR drive at $350. Sony has said it will only be $100. With so much speculation there's nothing really concrete right now.

 

[Deo_Smash]

And Nintendo, overall, has actually profited more than the others because...?

 

[Cashed]

Handhelds.

 

[Deo_Smash]

I was expecting a bigger answear than that but I can see that is the truth

And lets not forget that sony also makes telvisions, CD players, and other eltronic accessories.

 

[Zink]

Yes, so they do have alternate sources of money coming in. I guess that's how they can afford to make a $900 console and sell it for a loss.

 

[Deo_Smash]

As for Nintendo, there income is through games. Even though they have anime, cards, board games, and other merchandices, they are all based on their games. Nintendo has to keep up on the games inorder for the rest of their money makers to keep rolling in dough. Thats about right, isn't?

 

[Zink]

Think so... although they probably get money from games being sponsored by companies... and they aren't making money from Wi-fi Connection directly.

 

[Deo_Smash]

How is Nintendo making money off of wi-fi? And speaking of money: Googling News on Nintendo Revolution, I learned that it is cheaper to make games for the Revo than for the PSP. This sounds promising for independent developers to make games without costing an arm and a leg.

 

[Zink]

I guess they are making money with increased sales of Connection-enabled games, and there are stations where you can dowload demos and trailers and stuff. If it's really that cheap to make a Rev game... how much do PSP games cost? I think the problem with those were the UMD media disks. Maybe we'll see $40 games in the future... I can see it now... VOTE NINTENDO- VOTE FOR YOUR WALLET.

 

[Deo_Smash]

VOTE FOR NINTENDO- VOTE FOR YOUR WALLET

From Nintendo Revolution.CA: "Reports comming out indicate that an SDK for the Revolution would cost $2000, which is cheaper than the Sony PSP kit, never mind PS3 or Xbox360!"

I'm going to colleage for Video Game design and if making games for PS3 or Xbox 360 cost more than $2000, I'm definatly going the Revo way. I like visuals but I like playing with them than looking at them. Making games for the Revo would be fun! I get ideas all the time and now I don't have to sell my soul to the devil to pay for them! YAY!

 

[Chill]

You need more devkits for a console game than a handheld game. Zink, we already have $40 games, most companies just don't release their games for $40.

If your planning on going to college for game design you should know that the money for devkits doesn't come out of your pocket. The company your working for pays for them.

EDIT: Checked.

 

[Deo_Smash]

Got cha. I'll remember that. I definitly want to make games for Nintendo systems, there just too much to play with. Plus, Nintendos systems are a good way to expand ones creativity. One of my crazy ideas for the Rev is a cooking game. Not just any cooking, Kung Fu Cooking! Hi-ya! Hahaha! Its crazy but it would work well for the revo. If you don't understand then don't worry about. And no, i'm not on drugs. I'm crazy enough without alien-substances in my body. Then again, who knows what I would come up with if I was?

 

[Paranoid_Android]

I feel that with the exception of the first party games, the GameCube was mostly a failure to capture the third party market. That said, my oppinions on the Revolution and next-gen gaming in general are more realistic than the fanboy approach I took to purchasing my 'Cube.

The fact is, you can pack that box with as much expensive hardware as you want, and well before the next generation rolls around, my computer will have advanced far beyond the 2005/06 technology. You can't exactly upgrade an X-Box like you can a PC.
The Nintendo "Revolution" may not be the most powerful - infact, it's supposedly the weakest of the three - but it will have far more impact on gaming than seeing how many polygons you can stuff the screen with every 5 years. A prime example is the Revolution's Controller. Although it may look troublesome and strange, it is also new and exciting. It is something we haven't seen since Duck Hunt, only thousands of times better with effects reaching across all genres rather than just the one game. If Nintendo pulls it off correctly, with calibrations and user control all over the place to keep it accurate and effective, it will be the most immersive gaming experience you can experience. You will swing Link's Sword and fire Samus' arm cannon, not just shove a little joystick around and tap buttons like we've been doing for years.
The single most important thing for all gaming consoles are the games. The biggest concern any of us should have about a console's success is what the developer's themselves think about it. The X-Box 360 is probably the easiest to develope for, because it has conventional processors, as opposed to the many-faceted CPU of the PS3, and it has no unconventional controls like the Revolution will have. Will developing companies such as Activision flock to your companies side, or will they sell to a different crowd causing the same suffering that the GameCube recieved? I personally think that a schism between Genres will occur, and that FPS and RPG companies will take a huge liking to the Revolution Controller, while fighting game developers will stay with the conventional controllers.

In the end, we'll just have to watch, but my money is on the Revolution. If not for it's graphics and games, for it's originality and Nintendo's gutsy move.

 

[Deo_Smash]

Oy to that....

 

[blaksheap82]

VOTE FOR NINTENDO-VOTE FOR YOUR WALLET!
Heh, I think I'll put that in my sig, just to tick off Cashed, no just kidding, Cashed, there's nothing wrong with the 360 in itself.

I feel that with the exception of the first party games, the GameCube was mostly a failure to capture the third party market. That said, my oppinions on the Revolution and next-gen gaming in general are more realistic than the fanboy approach I took to purchasing my 'Cube.

The fact is, you can pack that box with as much expensive hardware as you want, and well before the next generation rolls around, my computer will have advanced far beyond the 2005/06 technology. You can't exactly upgrade an X-Box like you can a PC.
The Nintendo "Revolution" may not be the most powerful - infact, it's supposedly the weakest of the three - but it will have far more impact on gaming than seeing how many polygons you can stuff the screen with every 5 years. A prime example is the Revolution's Controller. Although it may look troublesome and strange, it is also new and exciting. It is something we haven't seen since Duck Hunt, only thousands of times better with effects reaching across all genres rather than just the one game. If Nintendo pulls it off correctly, with calibrations and user control all over the place to keep it accurate and effective, it will be the most immersive gaming experience you can experience. You will swing Link's Sword and fire Samus' arm cannon, not just shove a little joystick around and tap buttons like we've been doing for years.
The single most important thing for all gaming consoles are the games. The biggest concern any of us should have about a console's success is what the developer's themselves think about it. The X-Box 360 is probably the easiest to develope for, because it has conventional processors, as opposed to the many-faceted CPU of the PS3, and it has no unconventional controls like the Revolution will have. Will developing companies such as Activision flock to your companies side, or will they sell to a different crowd causing the same suffering that the GameCube recieved? I personally think that a schism between Genres will occur, and that FPS and RPG companies will take a huge liking to the Revolution Controller, while fighting game developers will stay with the conventional controllers.

In the end, we'll just have to watch, but my money is on the Revolution. If not for it's graphics and games, for it's originality and Nintendo's gutsy move.

Actually, the general concensus is that the Rev is more powerful than the PS3, though in terms of what I'm not totally sure, I don't keep track of the numbers as much as the games coming out for each system. The Rev is about three times as powerful than the Cube, and that's still more powerful than the PS3's thirty times as powerful as the PS2. And btw, the Rev will have a shell that fits over the Remote for the use of currently standard controls, which Nin has said they won't be shy about using for first party games.

 

[Cashed]

Actually, the general concensus is that the Rev is more powerful than the PS3, though in terms of what I'm not totally sure, I don't keep track of the numbers as much as the games coming out for each system. The Rev is about three times as powerful than the Cube, and that's still more powerful than the PS3's thirty times as powerful as the PS2.

To be blunt, no.

 

[Crimson King]

Well, what is your supporting information that the PS3 will cost more than the 360? Nothing. What is your evidence that the Rev is more powerful than the PS3 and 360? None. Fact is these debates are on speculation from personal bias.

 

[Paranoid_Android]

Well, what is your supporting information that the PS3 will cost more than the 360? Nothing. What is your evidence that the Rev is more powerful than the PS3 and 360? None. Fact is these debates are on speculation from personal bias.

And magazine articles providing released information from the companies.That and... er... tons of speculation.

 

[Crimson King]

That's why Microsoft's higher ups said the PS3 would cost upwards of $500 and Sony denied that claim as just to get news stirring.

Fact is even if that is true and somehow the Rev is still more powerful, so what. Last gen the PS2 was the least powerful by most claims and it still sold more than the GCN and XBox combined. As consoles get more powerful, it will be harder for the consoles to be that different in terms of power.

 

[Zink]

If you compared the three next-gen systems, it would be hard to tell the difference between their graphics- maybe one has 16.5 more sweat droplets on a football player, and another shows that Tiger Woods's shirt needs ironing, but look at Metriod Prime 2 and Crystal Chronicles- those graphics were amazing, near perfect, and that's just on the Cube. We don't need to have better graphics now- sure it's good, but let's focus on gameplay now.

 

[Deo_Smash]

What the sports games show is detail, which can be very disterbing (butt sweat? Eeew). Thats just showing more, not nesscary looking better. Don't get me wrong, there are very good graphics on the Xbox and PS2 that don't show every detail. Also, graphics is all in the eye of the beholder. Theres colorful graphics like Mario games and Wind Waker. Theres the dramitic look in Shadow of the Collosaus, Resident Evil, and RPGs that just use prerender graphics, pictures with no 3d effect what so ever. Then theres detailed with sports games like NBA 2k6 that shows every drop of sweat rolling of the players body. I perfer colored visuals over the rest because it gives every thing the appearence of haveing more life. Compare Halo and Metriod Prime, Halo has more of a serious, dramatic, war feel just by looking at it. Where as Metriod Prime gives off the illusion of being in a real forest that seems almost breathing. Niether is graphicly better over the other but when you compare the system they are on, it really hard to say which can do better. Its truly all in the game, not in the system.

 

[Mud Buddha]

If you compared the three next-gen systems, it would be hard to tell the difference between their graphics- maybe one has 16.5 more sweat droplets on a football player, and another shows that Tiger Woods's shirt needs ironing, but look at Metriod Prime 2 and Crystal Chronicles- those graphics were amazing, near perfect, and that's just on the Cube. We don't need to have better graphics now- sure it's good, but let's focus on gameplay now.

Agreed. I will laugh at the man who says he can tell the difference in speeds of an X-box 360 and a PS3.

 

[Paranoid_Android]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PS3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Revolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360


We won't know until we get some real, non-fakey-second-person-view-cinimatic screenshots from all three games on the same types of TV's. But you can guess that they're close from the supposed specs.