Xbox 1.5

[Green Gibbon!]

Someone had to start this. So, Xbox 360. Based on all the pages and pages of discussion that's been going on here the past few days, I would venture to assume that I'm not the only one who is completely underwhelmed.

Totally independent of the fact that I simply don't give two shits about any of the games announced (which is par for the course when discussing new systems), I can't even see any significant evolution. As far as I can tell, these are Xbox 1 games with more dynamic lighting. There's something that failed to ignite.

Maybe it's happening too fast? You don't announce hardware then all of a sudden show your launch lineup (much less on MT fucking V). You show tech demos, and maybe drop hints about certain titles in development, and get people excited, then six or seven months later at the very earliest you might show a couple screenshots of actual games. Y'know, a little bit of foreplay. The Xbox is only 4 years old anyway, and looking at screenshots of Xbox 360 games... I'm no tech head, but all this time I've been under the impression that this is all shit my Xbox 1 could do, only nobody'd bothered to do it yet.

I don't know, is it just me? Or is this really not much of a step forward at all? My biggest concern is that this, I assume, is comparable to what Sony and Nintendo have in store. Hopefully there will be some kind of surprise at E3, but I'm worried that I'll be more indifferent to this new hardware generation than any before. I prefer to think that I'm not just getting old and disinterested.

[Baba O'Reily]

Well, I mean, where do you go from here? The X-Box supposedly can do so much, but nobody's pushed it to the extreme. I won't be satisfied until I see a game that makes my X-Box explode because it's that awesome.

[Light Speed]

When did the PS2 come out? I remember it being the beginning of freshman year, so late 2000? Aren't most console generations about 5 years?

[Protodude]

I agree with you, a few months ago I was wondering just how significant the leap to the next generation of systems would be. Some of the games shown for 360 look pretty good graphically, but most just seem like polished looking X-box games. The only game I'm interested in is DOA4, but even the character models in that still look like the X-box models. And since Team Ninja can usually do really well graphically, I'm starting to worry about 360. Right now I'm holding my breath for Sony and Nintendo hopeing they'll do better.

[Green Gibbon!]

The X-Box supposedly can do so much, but nobody's pushed it to the extreme.

I still think Conker Reloaded looks more impressive than any of this Xbox 360 stuff.

[Protodude]

Hell, the new Zelda for the GC looks better than most 360 stuff.

[Green Gibbon!]

The only game I'm interested in is DOA4, but even the character models in that still look like the X-box models.

I thought DoA4 was Xbox 1? It looks slightly better than DoA3...

[Protodude]

Well if I remember correctly, in an interview with Tomonobu Itagaki in the now-defunct GMR, he stated it was going to be a game for the next X-box, possibly even a launch title. I suppose he could have changed his mind on that and switched production to the original X-box, but I'm willing to bet my balls it's a 360 game. I know I have that issue somewhere, I'll have to dig it up and read it again.

Edit: Ok, maybe it isn't a game for the 360. When GMR asked what DOA4 will do to show how powerful the next X-box would be, he stated "Xbox 2? We haven't officially said anything about DOA4 being on Xbox 2, so please relax." It could still be for 360 though, considering Microsoft added they would cease to support the original X-box once 360 was out.

I would also like to add that GMR made a list for the top games of 2005, and Wanda and the Colossus was number one.

[Green Gibbon!]

I remember when he said that, but just looking at the screenshots I would find it very difficult to believe that it's a 360 game, especially considering, as you mentioned, Tecmo generally have the best looking Xbox 1 games around. Plus, the announcement came along with the Ninja Gaiden director's cut, which is definitely Xbox 1.

Maybe it'll be for both. Perhaps they're playing some kind of game where they release shots of the Xbox 1 version first, right when the 360 hardware is unveiled, then at E3 they'll show the mind-blowing next gen version and be all like, "Oh by the way, this is what the 360 version looks like".

Or so I would very much like to believe.

[Protodude]

By the way, when do you leave for E3? Doesn't it start this Monday or something? Maybe you can get your hands on DOA4 if they have it playable. I'm not expecting anything really great from it, but I bet the boobies will look nice.

You better sneek in a video camera or something.

[Frieza2000]

The only advantage I can see to advancing hardware at all would be increased possessing speed or to accommodate a new kind of game disk that can hold more to allow for more lengthy cinema scenes. We must be getting close to the point where the human eye can no longer distinguish between graphics advances. Really, how much better will 256 bit look than 128? I'm not only indifferent to the new systems, I'm a bit frustrated. I don't know about the PS2, but the GC certainly doesn't feel worn out. And after 4 years, the Xbox still has no games that incline me to even look into emulating it, so I have nothing to say there.

Cost of development is something I've been thinking about. Better graphics cost more. Eventually, small game companies won't be able to keep up with the giants that are making 100-hour-long games with 2 hours of fully animated scenes and animation departments bigger than companies that make cartoon series. So either games stop getting bigger and technically better or companies start disappearing. And consider the development time. Games already take about 2 years to make. Will we wait 5? 10? Can the companies wait that long to see some kind of profit from a game? And what if the game is a failure? All that time and money invested into a game that doesn't sell?

Even ignoring that tangent, I don't think we need a new generation of hardware. I don't think the 256 bit era will be any different than the 128 - not because of the systems, anyway. And if it turns out I'm wrong, then surly 512 will be the point of no distinction. Unless we develop full-immersion VR.

[Locit]

I too would like to see the next generation of gaming boobies.

Also, bits don't matter any more.

Hee hee, "surly".

[Esrever]

I don't see how anyone could NOT be underwhelmed by the Xbox 360. The most significant change is the look of the hardware itself. The actual games look like... well, if someone had shown them to me and said they were running on the original Xbox, I would have believed them.

I guess you could argue that Nintendo was right... maybe we really HAVE reached the point where the graphical advances afforded by newer hardware aren't going to be as dramatic as they used to be. But hey, maybe the advances are just less significant when there are only three years between your console releases instead of five.

I think this was a big mistake for MS to skip those extra two years. It's too soon for the new Xbox. The selling point of the original was that it was the most technically advanced. But the Xbox 360 is probably going to look like crap compared to the PS3, and maybe even the Revolution. Instead of being a year ahead, they're going to be a year behind. Of course, if they're planning to release the Xbox 780 (or whatever) in another three years, maybe that doesn't matter. :P

[Green Gibbon!]

Sobering thoughts, indeed. Do we have a tech head here who can translate the specs? How much more powerful than Xbox 1 is the 360 supposed to be?

By the way, when do you leave for E3? Doesn't it start this Monday or something?

The show is from Wednesday to Friday, but most of the major announcements will probably happen on Monday and Tuesday, before the actual show. I won't be going after all, though.

[VGJustice]

Personally, I always give new consoles about 6 months to a year to get their act together before I even concider getting a new system. That also helps avoid bugs in the system.

I'm looking at you, Sony. >.>

[Dark Crow]

Sobering thoughts, indeed. Do we have a tech head here who can translate the specs? How much more powerful than Xbox 1 is the 360 supposed to be?

The 360 supposedly has a processor clock speed of 3.2GHz over its three symetrical processor cores. A standard XBox only has a clock speed of 733MHz. The 360 is basically more than 4 times powerful to the XBox 1 in that regard.

The 360 has a ATi graphics card with a speed of 500MHz, and apparently be more powerful then ATi's current top graphics card, the X850. The original XBox only has a 233 MHz NVidia card, less than half of the performance speed of the 360.

The 360 can pull 500 million polys per second. Xbox can only do 150 million/sec. 3 times greater, more-or-less. 360 also has a half gig of RAM, an inbuilt Media Center and is Wi-Fi compatible. I'll spare the rest of the boring details, though. You can look them up on your own.

Basically, the 360 is to the XBox what a Mega Drive is to a Master System. The 360 totally blows the original out of the water spec wise, and most low to middle end PC’s as well for that matter. But the fact that the graphics of the first generation games are mediocre doesn't really surprise me, since they are still in beta development. Besides, it usually takes until the second or third generation of games before a consoles hardware is adequately used.

[big_smile]

I think Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo are taking the wrong approach of following the old model and releasing separate platforms. Videogames have traditionally had a more evolutionary nature compared to other mediums, but rising development costs seem to be killing off this distinctive characteristic. Unless someone can devise a new method of experiencing games (which has more substance than previous ‘revolutionary’ attempts such as EyeToy and Nintendo DS), then there really isn’t any room for consoles to evolve. The industry should, therefore, unite and release a single platform. It will lower development costs and provide a larger user base, which will make it slightly less risky for developers to try new ideas.

Eventually, small game companies won't be able to keep up with the giants that are making 100-hour-long games with 2 hours of fully animated scenes and animation departments bigger than companies that make cartoon series.

Perhaps such conditions will result in a large-scale return of 2D games. Unable to sustain the costs required for next-gen 3D games, smaller developers (or larger companies looking for a quick return) simply won’t bother competing and instead release new games with cheaper-to-develop 2D graphics.

The success of classic compilations such as Sonic Mega Collection + shows that home console 2D games are viable market and releasing new retro-style games would be the next step. Ironically, the lower costs in producing such games might allow these 'old' games to be more experimental and creative. ^_^

[Gaz]

Bit late joining in but yeah I saw the MTV launch party and was completely underwhelmed. Thing is Perfect Dark was one of my favorite games on the N64 so the announcement of Perfect Dark Zero should have excited me a little but I just didn't give a shit. Like most Xbox 360 games it just looked bland and underwhelming. I think Microsoft are just rushing things too fast to try and get the 360 out before PS3 and Revolution(or whatever Nintendo calls it).

[Crazy Penguin]

To be honest no console has impressed me since Dreamcast. The technical demos were enough to show how big of a step up the console was, and Sonic Adventure, a "first generation" game blew me away.

Everything since then has just been small steps, which doesn't bother me seeing as they're all part of the same "wave" or "generation" of consoles as the Dreamcast. But if Xbox 360 truely is the beginning of a new "generation" then colour me thoroughly unimpressed.

[Ancient]

This is why I'm only interested in the revolution

Looking at 360 pics does nothing for me when i've just been emailed screens of Age of Empires III

The revolution however, claims to do something new... Something that Square-Enix claims is the best thing since sliced bread

Not much to go on... Which is a good thing, I mean... What the hell well MS show us at E3 now?

The show is Nintendo's/Sony's for the taking

[Kishi]

That would be true except the MTV thing lasted half an hour and apparently focused more on the celebrities playing the games than the games themselves. So, they must still have plenty to show.

[Neo Yi]

Frankly, I don't care much at the moment. The XBox never really interested me and I doubt XBox 360 will either.
~Neo

[Ngangbius]

Unless someone can devise a new method of experiencing games (which has more substance than previous ‘revolutionary’ attempts such as EyeToy and Nintendo DS), then there really isn’t any room for consoles to evolve.

You mean like this gizmo here? ;)

The industry should, therefore, unite and release a single platform. It will lower development costs and provide a larger user base, which will make it slightly less risky for developers to try new ideas.

Yeah, and it will allow companies to raise the prices of their games because they know they can get away with it in certain franchises. And then we factor in the cost of the console in which they can release it at any price they want to if they are the only game in town. Not to mention, progression of the machine(and I'm not just talking about in the graphics department) will be slow. I mean how many years did it take Nintendo to release a true upgrade for the Gameboy? And even then, it looks pretty sad when you compare it to the PSP.

Perhaps such conditions will result in a large-scale return of 2D games. Unable to sustain the costs required for next-gen 3D games, smaller developers (or larger companies looking for a quick return) simply won’t bother competing and instead release new games with cheaper-to-develop 2D graphics.

Well, it's working for Nippon Ichi. However, I have a feeling many of these 'middle-tier' and slightly larger than 'middle-tier' will be bought out by larger companies. I mean it already happened with Sega, Namco, Hudson, Square, and god knows how many companies that were asorbed into EA. I have a feeling that Capcom will be the next company to be bought out by a huge one..

[big_smile]

Yeah, and it will allow companies to raise the prices of their games because they know they can get away with it in certain franchises.

A single format won’t reduce competition between companies, which will prevent prices from reaching an extortionary level.

And then we factor in the cost of the console in which they can release it at any price they want to if they are the only game in town.

Not really. A single format would have to be within the $299 price limit to appeal to consumers and it would still be cheaper than buying all three platforms separately.

DVD is the only format available for watching movies (if we consider videotapes as being obsolete), yet DVD players are relatively cheap, for, while there is only one format, multiple companies produce this format which in turn generates competition and lowers prices.

Not to mention, progression of the machine(and I'm not just talking about in the graphics department) will be slow. I mean how many years did it take Nintendo to release a true upgrade for the Gameboy? And even then, it looks pretty sad when you compare it to the PSP.

But for home consoles, slow progression is a good thing, as there is currently little room for evolution (unless, as I said earlier, a new non-gimmicky method of experiencing games is introduced). The portable market offers an inadequate comparison as it has plenty of scope for development. ^_^

[Baba O'Reily]

I would also like to add that GMR made a list for the top games of 2005, and Wanda and the Colossus was number one.

Ah, GMR, how I lament thee.