The 360 was released in Japan a few days ago and I don't think I need to tell everyone how it's doing over there, but since I'm posting, it seems I will anyway.
The train wreck that is the 360 Japan Launch continues. Unloved 360s consoles collect dust, and retailers are unable to return those unwanted Xbox 360s to Msoft due to contractual obligations. To cut loses and cover their arses, stores are left with no choice but to offer discounts. The originally 38,800yen (about $350 US) consoles have been lowered to 18,800yen (about $150 US) with Internet Service Provider contracts so that the shop could get some kickback money from the IP. And this is what, four days from launch?
Eds Note: While this style of pricing is common in the US, electronics stores in Japan tend to do this to move inventory they cannot sell.
Thanks Higon!
In other words, Japanese retailers are already slashing prices on the console due to poor sales.
Ayanami wrote:XBOX 360 has a better launch line up than PS2 had at launch. PS2 had the most horrible launch ever. What must have games were on PS2 at launch??
Whatever man.
Don't excuse the 360's terrible launch line-up by comparing it to the PS2 one.
At least most PS2 launch games were original titles.
Ayanami wrote:XBOX 360 has a better launch line up than PS2 had at launch. PS2 had the most horrible launch ever. What must have games were on PS2 at launch??
Whatever man.
Don't excuse the 360's terrible launch line-up by comparing it to the PS2 one.
At least most PS2 launch games were original titles.
and dont forget 100% backwards compatibility. So while you were waiting for new games, you had FF9 to finish, since that game came out to psone like 3 months before launch.
halfnhalf wrote:and dont forget 100% backwards compatibility. So while you were waiting for new games, you had FF9 to finish, since that game came out to psone like 3 months before launch.
Thank you.
lol @ we're backwards compatible but only with 200 titles.
You can't even call that shit backwards compatibility.
Femto wrote:The 360 sucks and it'll put MS out of the gaming race.
If you can't see that you need to take a few steps back and get re-acquainted with the real world.
I am starting to think that if it was any other company except Microsoft, you would not be so harsh on the system. It's freaking launch man, there is still a lot of time in the system's life before you condem it to be a failure. Don't tell me there are no great games coming out for it with Sin and Punishment 2 and Mist Walker titles around the bend.
Ayanami wrote:I am starting to think that if it was any other company except Microsoft, you would not be so harsh on the system. It's freaking launch man, there is still a lot of time in the system's life before you condem it to be a failure. Don't tell me there are no great games coming out for it with Sin and Punishment 2 and Mist Walker titles around the bend.
I have nothing against Microsoft but personal experience with their previous console.
The last X-Box proved how terrible the company was at selling actual hardware instead of software. It's proven not only in sales, but in general quality of the games. There are like 5 really must play games on the X-Box and that's being nice because the only one I can think of Ninja Gaiden. The PS2 has far more games of similar, if not better quality and the Gamecube lies somewhere in the middle, with a solid line-up of AAA titles, but little else in-between. The only thing they handled gracefully was Live, but at only 10% of the X-Box users actually playing online, you start to wonder how important that really is.
So they got Sin and Punishment 2 and a company by some old Square dude. I'm sorry, but that's little to get excited about. The original X-Box had Ninja Gaiden and Rare and that didn't amount to much. And let's not forget the fact that the 360 is coming a full year earlier with inferior hardware than the PS3 and without something like Nintendo's gamble on it. One of the X-Box's main draws was arguably the fact that it had superior graphics over its console counterparts. How the hell are they going to compete two or three years down the road considering that a PC can run a 360 game right now without problems, perhaps even better? How is it going to compete with Nintendo even if their gamble pays off?
Want more? How about the fact that there is absolutely nothing to get excited about in the 360's line-up so far? Nintendo is still up in the air, but from the PS3 we can expect at least most of the stuff that made its way unto the PS2, like RE, MGS, DMC, SquareEnix stuff and low profile games that Japan will absolutely NOT release on the 360 because, as you can see by the sales numbers, it's not a gamble worth taking.
I'm sure there's even more stuff I could touch upon here, but just try and tell me that I make absolutely no sense here.
Stop trying to pidgeon-hole into some sort of fanboy arena because I'm anything but that.
My opinions are based on logical thought and not some fucking fanboy rant.
Femto wrote:The last X-Box proved how terrible the company was at selling actual hardware instead of software. It's proven not only in sales, but in general quality of the games.
How is the general quality of games faulty of the hardware? Isn't that a problem with the game developers? Don't give me any crap like this is some how MS's fault because they have been open armed to every developer that want's to make games for them. Which Sony has not.
And once again, the PC could run games on the PS2 with out a hitch when that came out. Hell the Dreamcast had better looking games than PS2 when it was at launch. I don't see the big difference that makes the XBox 360 doomed to fail and Sony untouchable. Besides no system is going to show what it can truely push at launch. You get the best looking games toward's a system's death, that is how it is.
I can understand you not buying the damn thing. Whatever, but why must you forsake it from being on the console market. You can't give the damn thing a chance and some time?
It's funny how you completely ignored the rest of my post.
I don't think funny is the word I'm looking for actually.
And yes, unless you happen to live under a rock, you'll realize hardware does have an effect on software. X-Box hardware didn't do well in Japan so japanese developers don't make games like your beloved Ico or Rez or Shadow of the Colossus on it because it's not worth the risk. Hardware matters because a crappy controller can ruin a great game. Hardware matters because of 3rd party support. Hardware matters because the best selling console is where most developers will go because that's where there's more chance for profit.
I may need to rephrase that sentence you quoted, but you know damn well what I'm trying to say. The 360 will be a failure for the same reason the X-Box was. I don't know why it happened or whether it's Microsoft at fault or not, but the facts are facts and the 360 is proving that it's not improving on the X-Box in any way.
Yeah, a console's power might not even be fully tapped by the time its taken off the shelves (like you even need to tell me that) but MGS4 already looks better than anything the 360 has. Doesn't it stand to reason that, by the time the PS3 is exhausted, the games on it will still look better than those on the 360? The PS3 will indubitably be the most powerful console in this generation, you're a dumbass if you fail to see that.
But whatever, graphics don't really matter and I've stated why the 360 is going down the same road as the X-Box in many other points, only Microsoft arguably made worse decisions this time around.
Sony untouchable? I dare you to quote me saying something even close to that. Sony knows their game better than MS, that's what it all comes down to. That's why they went with optical media on their first console and took the market right off Nintendo's hands. Again, Nintendo is still up in the air and I'm still having trouble deciding whether they are true geniuses or romantic fools.
This is all speculation of course, only time will tell.
Again, tell me this doesn't make any sense.
And don't try to look for something that sounds fanboyish and base a whole post off that, unless you want me to repeat yet again what my stance on fanboyism is.
Femto wrote:
. There are like 5 really must play games on the X-Box and that's being nice because the only one I can think of Ninja Gaiden. The PS2 has far more games of similar, if not better quality and the Gamecube lies somewhere in the middle, with a solid line-up of AAA titles, but little else in-between.
Like Ayanami said, that's an issue with game developers. Sony and Nintendo by this point has support from a lot of companies, and here comes Microsoft, the new player in the game, and SHOCKINGLY not a whole lot of people are going to make games at first for a company that albeit a computer monopoly, has zero gaming experience. At least MS was willing to take in just about any company who was intersted, not like high and mighty Sony, refusing SNK to port Metal Slug 3, until they realized they could make money off what they originally thought to be a dieing series, and grabbed the rights for 4 and 5.
Femto wrote: How the hell are they going to compete two or three years down the road considering that a PC can run a 360 game right now without problems, perhaps even better? How is it going to compete with Nintendo even if their gamble pays off?
The same way Sony and the PS2 competed with GC & Xbox, since PS2 was the first out for it's generation and was followed up by 2 systems with superior hardware?
Femto wrote:Want more? How about the fact that there is absolutely nothing to get excited about in the 360's line-up so far?
Please, PS2 had a horrible launch and seemed to do just fine. Besides, I've played COD2 on my roomate's 360 and I somewhat enjoy it. I alos wouldn't be opposed to tossing in halvies for Gun if he wanted it. That's all based on personal opinion.
Femto wrote:Nintendo is still up in the air, but from the PS3 we can expect at least most of the stuff that made its way unto the PS2, like RE, MGS, DMC, SquareEnix stuff
OK, MGS looks sweet, and given RE4, 5 could be great but DMC is starting to bore me. Oh, and SquareEnix? After seeing what they did to the Final Fantasy series, I am losing faith in them. I look forward to see what MystWalker can do, Lord knows I like anything that team did more than any of the stuff the newer SE has.[/quote]
You have been bashing the 360 every step of the way on the forums. But absolutley no criticism except for the controller on the PS3. This is why I sort of marked you for biased ripping. I am sorry.
Any who, as for the hardware effects on the games yadda yadda. Yeah, I get that whole bit. I was just implying that it is not MS fault that the current developers are not bringing there A game.
I agree with a lot of the stuff you said. Just a few things here and there threw me off.
Like you said, time will tell. I just think that every system deserves a chance, that is all.
Tempest: - As I said, good games won't come because the hardware is not being supported by 3rd parties. What are we disagreeing on here?
- The PS2 was riding on the success of the PS1 and now the PS3 is riding on the success that is the PS2. The 360 is riding on the failure that was the original X-Box, only that the graphics will not be the best in this generation. Sony didn't win this console war because of graphics, everybody know that. But take the reasons why they did win and add a nice layer of graphics on top of that and you'll see what I'm getting at. It makes sense doesn't it? Sony's huge 3rd party support + best graphics of all three consoles = definite winner.
- COD is available for the PC and Gun is available for other consoles I think, not to mention that the game sucks. That's all you have? There's that upcoming Capcom game and what then?
Ayanami: Time will tell, but everything points to the 360 not making it very far. I could obviously be wrong though, but I doubt it this time. A lack of strong japanese support will hurt the console just like it did with the original X-Box. Another reason why it's hard to criticize the PS3 is because we still don't have much solid info on it. The 360 is out already and we've seen how that's played out.
As I've said, Nintendo is still up in the air. I've kinda changed my mind on the Revolution a bit and I'm not afraid to say that the suggested price points was one of the reasons. I've thought about some of the choices they're making and they make shitloads of sense.
Lower development costs to encourage developers? Check.
Cheap as hell? Check.
Potentially revolutionary FPS controls for US market? Check.
I could go on, but it seems like they really thought about this one. I'm pretty sure it'll take Japan by storm, but I'm not sure about how it'll do in the US and Europe. Failing in any of these places might kill potential 3rd party support and I've already talked about that. And I still don't know if the Revolution controller will just end up being another DS type nonsense.
I'm dying to see some of the Revolution's games actually, I want to see how they play.
Gaming is very different now a days. It is much more dog eat dog now. Boy did I enjoy the good old days of gaming.
Like you said, it is hard to win the console war with out support from all regions. It is what made the Saturn fail, had awesome support in Japan, but had nothing here in the states. I still think it is early to call a winner to the console war. But Sony most definitely has the upper hand as of now.
Plus I guess I am the only one that is not excited at all about PS3 besides Gradius VI. God, when are they going to have some screens of that bad boy.
Femto wrote:
- The PS2 was riding on the success of the PS1 and now the PS3 is riding on the success that is the PS2. The 360 is riding on the failure that was the original X-Box, only that the graphics will not be the best in this generation. Sony didn't win this console war because of graphics, everybody know that. But take the reasons why they did win and add a nice layer of graphics on top of that and you'll see what I'm getting at. It makes sense doesn't it? Sony's huge 3rd party support + best graphics of all three consoles = definite winner.
Ah yes, the unstoppable collosus that is Sony (I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, that's my own opinion). It just seems unfair to me that the 360 should be considered a failure because MS couldn't get a lot of 3rd party developers for the X-Box, which is just because they came in late in the game. By no means am I even an X-Box fan, I actually am a bigger fan of PlayStation is anything. It just irks me that Sony could throw their weight around while still having a graphically lacking machine, and come out smelling like roses. It defies logic. I almost want Sony to lose the console war in some way to remind them that they are not infallible and need to actually try and compete with other companies.
Even though I personally think the X-Box was a failure in the games department, I'm more than aware that people have differents tastes and might be into Halo and all that jazz, as questionable as that may be.
When I talk of the original X-Box as a failure, I'm mostly talking financially. They were still losing money per console all the way to the release of the 360 and the X-Box just completely bombed in Japan. That's why they rushed the 360 after all.
I don't know. I really don't see a bright future for Microsoft in the gaming business.
Femto wrote:
When I talk of the original X-Box as a failure, I'm mostly talking financially. They were still losing money per console all the way to the release of the 360 and the X-Box just completely bombed in Japan. That's why they rushed the 360 after all.
True dat. I was a little baffeld when I heard about the whole losign money on each X-Box thing. I guess they really over estimated it's popularity. And while they may not seem to have a chance, MS will most likely throw money at it till they can get a get a good foothold to climb up on the gaming ladder.
In reality, the only thing I need Microsoft to do is to light some kind of fire under Sony's ass and make them work for the number one spot rather than just working on hype and 3rd party bullying tactics. I should hope Nintendo could help in this but then again I usually expect too much of people, including MS.
Man, I just want to see some more info on Sin and Punishment 2. Some more has been shown on the Mistwalker games, but not much more.
Has any one here play Sin and Punishment on the N64? Or am I the only one? I want to get a 360 if I can just for these games and few other guilty pleasures, but as ya do. I know that NGBC is coming out for 360, does any one know if SNKP has decided on any thing else for the system?
You sound like a fanboy to me, Femto. Hailing a system that you haven't even played or actually seen in action. And condemning one that you might have only played a launch game demo on. Seems awfully biased. I am excited for all the new systems and I plan on buying all of them, eventually.
The original Xbox was a failure? Sure, it didnt sell as many systems as the PS2. And it didnt have a ton of third-party support, but thats not MS fault. If you were a third party company, would you release your mediocre game on a system thats sold millions or tens of millions? So the PS2 has thousands and thousands of games, but most are rusty pennies. Both systems have about the same amount of great games. Who cares though? We could argue all day about whether Ninja Gaiden is better than MG3 or not, but its pointless because its all a matter of opinion. Yeah, the controller was huge and people with carni hands hated it, but they fixed that with the controller s (not going to say anything about PS3's bat-erang controller since I havent tried it out yet). They took a chance and stepped into the gaming market as newbs, released a more powerful system, made a great online setup(which the PS3 doesnt even have) and took all the third party help they could get. They didnt fail like the 3DO, Phantom, Neo-Geo, CD-i, Jaguar, and many others. Sounds a lot like another system I know(PSX).
I dont think its fair to judge a system by its Japanese launch. I once saw an old Japanese man yell at a Japanese kid for drinking Pepsi because ti was an American product. He told him to drink pocari sweat or some other Japanese product. besides, the American and European gaming markets have increased a lot in the past years and maintaining a strong hold on the Japanese market is not as critical as it used to be.
Yeah, the PS3 is the more powerful system. Trying to say it's not is like trying to say that the Xbox isn't more powerful than the PS2. But we are getting to the point in the next generation of games where getting games to look any better or more realistic would take thousands of man hours.
Take that Final Fantasy VII demo that was shown at E3. Absolutely mind blowing, right? And that was running in "Real-Time". But will games actually look like that? They could. They definately could. But there's a hitch. When asked about the demo in the Final Fantasy Compilation issue of EGM, the creater of the demo (his name escapes me right now, but he is currently working on Kingdom Hearts 2) said that he would love to remake FFVII in that level of detail... but to do it he would have to hire 300 more employees and it would take some 5 years to complete!
So, yes, the PS3 is more powerful... maybe even to a frightening level. But chances are that no developer has the time or money to create such magnificent visuals. If it would take Squaresoft 5 years to create a game at that level of detail, how long do you think it would take for a smaller, less financially well off company to create something like that?
This could lead to a few problems with the PS3. Most likely, because of the costs of developing a next gen title, most games will probably go multi-platform, especially since microsoft has been signing contracts with Japanese developers (because EA and other American developers typically release for all systems anyway) to make games for the xbox 360. So why go to the extra trouble to really take advantage of what the PS3 can handle when you are already creating incredible graphics on the 360... especially when the PS3 is rumored to be a pain in the ass to develop for (as John Carmack has been quoted saying... who you might know as the creater of both doom and quake). Unlike MS, which is a software company and made the xbox very easy to work with, Sony is a hardware company, developers claimed it was difficult to work with the PS2 as well.
So the PS3's graphic power will only be realized by the few and the proud... Or, if it's true graphic power is realized the games will either be in development for half a decade or be 4 hours long.
Oh, but the problems with the PS3 and Sony's entire philosophy are numerous so we must move on.
Online.
Online. Online. Online.
Sony has nothing.
You may say that online is not a big deal, but look at PC gaming, which has always been in the forefront of gaming. Almost all PC games are online multiplayer. People are still play Counterstrike and Starcraft, sure they are great games, but do you honestly think they would still be playing them if they had no one to play with?
What Microsoft has created with Xbox Live has taken nearly 5 years. The first couple years were spent setting up the largest network under Microsofts control (even bigger than the .net network that runs hotmail and everything else microsoft owns online). The next few years was spent tuning it and finding out what people wanted from Live. And now, with the 360, we have a completely engrossing experience online. Online multiplayer. Voice chat with anyone while doing anything with the basic Free Live membership. A gamercard that acts like an RPG character that you can "level up" by accomplishing more in all of your games. Downloadable content, some free, some you pay for (fees will be small, but will help encourage developers to actually make the content). Downloadable game demos and trailers.
Sony can't match that. Any attempt to match that will seem feeble. Sony is already in financial trouble and the PS3 stands to put them further in debt. Market analysists have stated that if the PS3 sells for around 400 or 500 dollars a pop and it does relatively well, sony still stands to loose BILLIONS of dollars that fiscal year. They don't have the money to set up a network that could handle 2 million+ gamers around the world. MS is still losing money on xboxes? With all the power in the PS3, do you honestly think Sony will make anything off the PS3? Ever? Doubtful. A stand-alone Blu-Ray player wont be under a hundred bucks for at least three years.
Also, Its funny that you mentioned Rez in a previous post, because Rez's Creator, Tetsuya Mizuguchi, (also known for Space Channel 5 and LUMINES) is making Ninety Nine Nights for the 360.
I think I got side-tracked quite a bit. The point is, both systems kick ass(unless you prefer online multiplayer), so it will come down to the games to determine which system will rein supreme, but games are a matter of preference. And I dont think we can go by which games sell the best because, as we all know, people are dumbshits and will by the same Tony Hawk or Madden game year after year. So, if you are a real gamer, you can appreciate all the systems and the few great games on each. And someday, you will probably own all of the systems. Until then, you will pick which one suits you best, not because of system or its predeccesor, but because of the games. If you cant do that, you are either a fanboy, or your panties are in a twist cause your mom refused to buy you a 360 for christmas.
People have been arguing about which system is better since SNES and Genesis. Its old. Grow up, Femto.
"We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then
blames them for his own mistakes." - Gene Roddenberry
Gaiseric wrote:They didnt fail like the 3DO, Phantom, Neo-Geo, CD-i, Jaguar, and many others.
I stopped reading right there.
If you think the console with the longest life cycle ever is a failure you obviously don't know what you're talking about.
Still, up to what I read, you were talking about stuff that I had already mentioned and explained in previous posts. Were your reading capabilities hindered by blind fanboyism? Perhaps, but personal taste aside, daring to say that the X-Box has about the same amount of great games then the PS2 is complete and utter non-sense.
Your last line did catch my eye however. I think it's amusing that you tell me to grow up for arguing about consoles when you are doing the exact same thing, extensively too I might add.
