Queasy
Moderator<br>Console Gaming
- Aug 24, 2001
- 31,796
- 2
- 0
Nobody really knows what this means yet. Does that mean they'll support Halo and KOTOR but ignore Bruce Lee and Kabuki Warriors? Or is this just their way of saying they are going to try to support all games but a couple probably won't make it just like some obscure PS1 games couldn't be played on the PS2?
Resident Evil 4 on Gamecube has better graphics than any console game I've played, regardless of system.
Games that come out on all 3 systems tend to go in terms of graphics quality Gamecube or Xbox at top, then PS2 a little behind. All 3 can do roughly the same thing, just depends on how the developers use the system.
But to say "gamecube sucked" is simply inaccurate or ignorant of what the Gamecube can do.
Microsoft said from the start that the first Xbox wasn't going to make a profit for MS. They said their goal was serious market penetration and they had a huge mound of money sitting in the bank for just that.
They have been extremely successful as far as reaching that goal is concerned. They went from being a nobody in the console market to a major player. When the Xbox first came out I heard people saying they'd never get one because it was from MS and it wasn't going to go anywhere anyway. After people saw that it was a quality system and that Microsoft was here to stay, they began to take it seriously.
I expect the Xbox2 to be a tremendous success for them.
This could be bad...bloggers are reporting Nintendo overbooked the event and the fire marshal is getting pissed. LOL.
I thought the Dreamcast turned out to be a better performer than expected. I remember when it came out, the specs for the PS2 dwarfed the specs for the DC. But play Soul Caliber and tell me that the DC is weak.
I think Nintendo might actually be making a smart move by going with a less powerful system. While Sony and MS are probably going to price their systems at $300-400, Nintendo could reach the budget-conscious market with a $200 console (just guessing at a price).
Plus, the majority of consumers don't have HDTVs and won't for a few years. Heck, people are still buying RF adapters to connect their XBoxes and PS2's to their crummy TVs. A lot of that processing power to game in HD is just wasted for a lot of consumers.
Plus, the majority of consumers don't have HDTVs and won't for a few years. Heck, people are still buying RF adapters to connect their XBoxes and PS2's to their crummy TVs. A lot of that processing power to game in HD is just wasted for a lot of consumers.
Queasy
Moderator<br>Console Gaming
- Aug 24, 2001
- 31,796
- 2
- 0
Of course, this is the same angle Nintendo seems to be going for with the GC. They aggressively reduced the price a while back (a couple times, I think), and they are supposedly removing the component output on the next hardware revision.
But that leaves diehard Nintendo fans like me with a problem: How can I support a company who doesn't support my gaming habits? I like HD. And I really, really want to see Nintendo hit one out of the park the next time around.
In all honesty, I don't think Nintendo cares. You're a small part of the pie (hey, I'm right there with you man). They're gonna go for the biggest market share they can; they can't and won't please everyone.
Is Nintendo finally wising up and using non-proprietary CD/DVD media?
I think that is partially why GC didn't end up doing as good as it did.
Parents see that the competition consoles can double as a DVD player and can skip on buying a dedicated DVD player for the kids' room and bought a PS2/XBOX instead.
The Mario franchise is not doing so well either.
Mario Sunshine, Luigi's Mansion were flops. Absolutely nothing like the classics (Mario64).
Kart was decent... too many Mario Party's.
Was Mario Tennis and Golf ever released?
And for those who say graphics don't mean anything, you're totally off base.
Graphics is one of the main determining factors on well a console does, right up there with games/gameply IMO.
Gameplay is important as well, but why do we always look forward to the next console?
Because we hope the graphics will be even more realistic and stunning.
I think that is partially why GC didn't end up doing as good as it did.
Parents see that the competition consoles can double as a DVD player and can skip on buying a dedicated DVD player for the kids' room and bought a PS2/XBOX instead.
The Mario franchise is not doing so well either.
Mario Sunshine, Luigi's Mansion were flops. Absolutely nothing like the classics (Mario64).
Kart was decent... too many Mario Party's.
Was Mario Tennis and Golf ever released?
And for those who say graphics don't mean anything, you're totally off base.
Graphics is one of the main determining factors on well a console does, right up there with games/gameply IMO.
Gameplay is important as well, but why do we always look forward to the next console?
Because we hope the graphics will be even more realistic and stunning.
You guys DO know that there is a next button on the ign page? they havea much bigger pic than that crappy thumbnail...
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
Facebook
Twitter