This solidifies that the ps3 will ship after 2005.

NVIDIA PlayStation 3 GPU to be completed by end of 2005
>> From GamesIndustry.biz:

Quote:

---

NVIDIA's graphics processing unit (GPU) for PlayStation 3 will be completed by the end of 2005, according to US Internet reports citing comments made by chief executive Jen-Hsun Huang to investment firm Morgan Stanley this week.
Although NVIDIA's provision of a custom GPU for PlayStation 3 is now out in the open, this is the first time the graphics firm has discussed the question of production timing, and Huang's comments seem to tie in with projections that Sony's next-generation console will be ready some time in 2006.
Microsoft's rival Xbox 2 format, expected to be unveiled within the coming months, has been tipped to arrive earlier than that, possibly in time for Christmas 2005. NVIDIA's fierce rival ATI is providing the graphics hardware for Microsoft this time around.

---

Read the whole story on GamesIndustry.biz.

Thank god. Screw new systems in 2005.

oh crap they broke the 5 year rule!

PS3 in 2006 = good.
XBox 2 in 2005 = bad.

I called that one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zerodash

PS3 in 2006 = good.
XBox 2 in 2005 = bad.

---

I still do not believe Xbox 2 will come out 2005. Its not happening. I predict right now Xbox 2 gets on the market only 1-2 months before PS3.

i predict right now that evilmog is wrong!

well considering they said production is at the end of 2005 for the gpu, we can speculate the sytem launching 1st q 2006. which would only give the xbox 2 a couple month head start (assuming it made the oct/nov 2005 date thats been rumored). so its not as bad as it might seem.

Good lord, do I really want ANOTHER round of 199-300 dollar consoles. :yuck:

rumors rumors rumors thats all this 2005 talk is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JMET

Good lord, do I really want ANOTHER round of 199-300 dollar consoles. :yuck:

---

I really want another round of systems that are more technologically advanced and can give me game experiences and graphics impossible on current systems.

I'll just end up having to wait until they go down to $200, and Revolution is at $99 with a Kirby compilation disc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JMET

Good lord, do I really want ANOTHER round of 199-300 dollar consoles. :yuck:

---

I spend that every 6 months to a year just in a videocard for my PC. I'm definitly read for the new XBOX. I don't really care about any timliness rule that Microsoft may be breaking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

I really want another round of systems that are more technologically advanced and can give me game experiences and graphics impossible on current systems.

---

Exactly. Get these things out ASAP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shidoshi

Exactly. Get these things out ASAP.

---

Ill use this positive response to say that I think 2006, especially late 2006, is way too late for PS3 to launch. I seriously doubt we will be seeing a game lineup as good as this year's in 2005. And games like San Andreas and Metal Gear Solid 3 are wonderful titles, but theyre clearly straining the PS2. The system just isnt good enough for today's titles anymore. Once GT4 comes out thats it.

You fools always seem to forget it, or not think about it, but the reason why systems come out every 5 years is technological as well. Five year old 3D technology is ancient. Remember the PSX in 1999? It just looked ugly and stupid and crappy next to 1999 3D technology (that being Dreamcast).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dragonmaster Dyne

well considering they said production is at the end of 2005 for the gpu, we can speculate the sytem launching 1st q 2006. which would only give the xbox 2 a couple month head start

---

It bears keeping in mind that those months will be in the midst of the HOLIDAY SHOPPING SEASON, though. If people want a new console for Xmas (and oh they will), Xbox2 is it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bacon McShig

It bears keeping in mind that those months will be in the midst of the HOLIDAY SHOPPING SEASON, though. If people want a new console for Xmas (and oh they will), Xbox2 is it.

---

Because Sony's hype machine has never kept anyone from purchasing a console that was launched before theirs. Nope, never.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by piku

Because Sony's hype machine has never kept anyone from purchasing a console that was launched before theirs. Nope, never.

---

The Dreamcast failed as much because of Sega's shittiness as because of Sony's hype machine. Sega burned an entire generation of customers with shitty console after shitty console - people who were fans of Genesis undoubtedly bought at least one of the following: Game Gear, 32X, SegaCD, Saturn. All of which failed. All of which sucked. So why would they waste their time again? After all, they probably just bought a PSX once the Saturn failed (and was happy with it).

Compare this situation to Xbox, which actually has a lot of fans and a lot of happy customers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

The Dreamcast failed as much because of Sega's shittiness as because of Sony's hype machine. Sega burned an entire generation of customers with shitty console after shitty console - people who were fans of Genesis undoubtedly bought at least one of the following: Game Gear, 32X, SegaCD, Saturn. All of which failed. All of which sucked. So why would they waste their time again? After all, they probably just bought a PSX once the Saturn failed (and was happy with it).

---

This is why I didn't get a Dreamcast at launch... I had a Genesis, but none of the other systems, and I remembered all of their other systems doing really poorly and leaving the field real fast.

When I got a DC at the time MvC 2 came out, I really enjoyed it, and thought "Man, this is going to be the Sega system that makes it!!".

If Sega were to ever bring out another system in my lifetime, I'll never get it until the end of it's 2 year existence with 5 dollar games.

Quote:

---

If Sega were to ever bring out another system in my lifetime, I'll never get it until the end of it's 2 year existence with 5 dollar games.

---

Yea, so youre just like every other gamer with at least half a brain. Youd have to be fucking insane to spend money on another Sega console now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bacon McShig

It bears keeping in mind that those months will be in the midst of the HOLIDAY SHOPPING SEASON, though. If people want a new console for Xmas (and oh they will), Xbox2 is it.

---

So what exactly will the Xbox 2 offer next fall? The same fabulous first party lineup as the Xbox minus Halo? Maybe Madden? Wow, it sure will be tough to wait for the PS3. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

Ill use this positive response to say that I think 2006, especially late 2006, is way too late for PS3 to launch. I seriously doubt we will be seeing a game lineup as good as this year's in 2005. And games like San Andreas and Metal Gear Solid 3 are wonderful titles, but theyre clearly straining the PS2. The system just isnt good enough for today's titles anymore. Once GT4 comes out thats it.

You fools always seem to forget it, or not think about it, but the reason why systems come out every 5 years is technological as well. Five year old 3D technology is ancient. Remember the PSX in 1999? It just looked ugly and stupid and crappy next to 1999 3D technology (that being Dreamcast).

---

If the PS2 can put out stuff that looks like MGS3 for another year then I don't see the problem with an early 2006 release.

But what do I care, I don't buy systems at launch anyway.

Quote:

---

If the PS2 can put out stuff that looks like MGS3 for another year then I don't see the problem with an early 2006 release.

---

Except it wont. That game cost millions of dollars and a huge chunk of that was making it look that good on an old, ancient system like the PS2. Most games dont have that luxury. Its not going to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

Except it wont. That game cost millions of dollars and a huge chunk of that was making it look that good on an old, ancient system like the PS2. Most games dont have that luxury. Its not going to happen.

---

IBTN

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

So what exactly will the Xbox 2 offer next fall? The same fabulous first party lineup as the Xbox minus Halo? Maybe Madden? Wow, it sure will be tough to wait for the PS3. :rolleyes:

---

Haven't you noticed how just about every newly announced game lately has been for next generation consoles? I've got a feeling the line up is going to end up pretty substantial.

I could really see Halo 3 being a launch title. Look at Halo 2s butchered ending. Then imagine the cutscene graphics but during gameplay. I could see that.


HalfLife 2 = Xbox 2 launch game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bacon McShig

It bears keeping in mind that those months will be in the midst of the HOLIDAY SHOPPING SEASON, though. If people want a new console for Xmas (and oh they will), Xbox2 is it.

---

It also bears keeping in mind that if the PS3 got a Q1 launch, it would likely first hit shelves in Japan, where Holiday Shopping would not apply. Granted, in that scenario Sony would need to use strong sales in Japan on PS3 to build hype for an eventual North American release, still leaving the company having to catch up to MS if Xbox 2 were to indeed be released in Q4 2005. :\

I'm not too thrilled about playing $300 dollars a pop for the new systems, but the thing that really gets me is playing $300 for the system, $30 dollars per controller, $25 per memory card (unless they go with internal HDDs this time), $50 per mediocre launch title, $30 for a 2 year warranty (launch systems suck), and whatever other crap I need to end up getting (miscellaneous cables, etc). I really won't mind another year of PS2 and Xbox1.

I would like to see a Grand Theft Auto game with good graphics though......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Korly

I'm not too thrilled about playing $300 dollars a pop for the new systems, but the thing that really gets me is playing $300 for the system, $30 dollars per controller, $25 per memory card (unless they go with internal HDDs this time), $50 per mediocre launch title, $30 for a 2 year warranty (launch systems suck), and whatever other crap I need to end up getting (miscellaneous cables, etc). I really won't mind another year of PS2 and Xbox1.

---

Piper's gotta get paid sometime. Now or next year, it really does not matter. The $64,000 (or maybe just $640) question is if one has the disipline to sit until the dust settles on the initial launch.

What I think will be interesting is what happens with the generation after this one. I would not be suprised if the next generation ends up being the graphical equiliviant of the 2D jump from the SNES to the PSX/Saturn. Noticably better, but not mind-blowing by any stretch. It will probably be more notable than that, but I doubt the difference will match the jump from the PSX to the Xbox. The problem with that is it will leave that upcoming generation with nowhere to go, barring a paradgim shift in computer graphics equliiviant to the one that took place in moving to 3D worlds.

-Dippy

I think it'd be awesome if Sony and MS play chicken for 10 years and never release another console for fear of being one upped.

Both of them should really just concentrate on better gameplay. If all I have to look forward to are brainless RPGs and shoddy FPSs, fuck gaming.

It's way too early to be arguing about stuff not happening until 2006. Call me when we have information rather than speculation and I'll be as argumentative as any of you.

James

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvilMog007

I could really see Halo 3 being a launch title. Look at Halo 2s butchered ending. Then imagine the cutscene graphics but during gameplay. I could see that.


HalfLife 2 = Xbox 2 launch game.

---

If all the next generation offers is Halo 2's cut scene graphics real time it’s a fucking waste. If there isn't a jump as glaring as the N64 was to the SNES and the Gamecube was to the N64 then they are shitting all over us the customers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Revoltor

Both of them should really just concentrate on better gameplay. If all I have to look forward to are brainless RPGs and shoddy FPSs, fuck gaming.

---

I'm currently playing through Star Ocean 3, and as much as I love Japanese RPGs, good lord so little about them has changed in the last ten years. And then, when JRPGs that do try to do something different come out - BoF5, for example - people ignore them.

The things about 3D games that isn't the same as 2D is that as graphics improve, gameplay improves. River City Ransom on NES may not look nearly as "good" as GBA River City Ransom, but it can play just as good. The same isn't true with 3D games. Thus, the sooner we get better hardware, the sooner we get a jump in the quality of gaming.

I've been playing FF10 (It was 8 bucks) just to see what all the buzz was about. The counter says I've been playing for about 10 hours. At least 8 of those hours invovled my controller sitting on my lap or on the floor.

But yeah Lulu's digital boobs are awesome.

I also picked up FF X for cheap, and I'm in love with it. The cutscene-cutscene-gameplay style is odd though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

So what exactly will the Xbox 2 offer next fall? The same fabulous first party lineup as the Xbox minus Halo? Maybe Madden? Wow, it sure will be tough to wait for the PS3. :rolleyes:

---

Okay, scenario. A kid wants a new system for Xmas. Xbox 2 is the only new system out at that time. Do you see him saying "No, I don't want a present on Christmas, just get me a PS3 a few months afterwards". I don't doubt there will be a number of people who wait, but they won't stop the Xbox 2 from being a huge holiday gift... the people waiting for the PSP sure are making the DS sell badly now, aren't they? :rolleyes: right back at ya.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prome

It also bears keeping in mind that if the PS3 got a Q1 launch, it would likely first hit shelves in Japan, where Holiday Shopping would not apply. Granted, in that scenario Sony would need to use strong sales in Japan on PS3 to build hype for an eventual North American release, still leaving the company having to catch up to MS if Xbox 2 were to indeed be released in Q4 2005. :\

---

Do you live in Japan? I don't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Revoltor

I've been playing FF10 (It was 8 bucks) just to see what all the buzz was about. The counter says I've been playing for about 10 hours. At least 8 of those hours invovled my controller sitting on my lap or on the floor.

But yeah Lulu's digital boobs are awesome.

---

Are you trying to say that the cinema scenes were too long or that you were masturbating to Lulu?

I guess it does even out in the end :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

systems that are more technologically advanced and can give me game experiences and graphics impossible on current systems.

---

You want a PC. You are just too dense to realize that apparently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bacon McShig

Okay, scenario. A kid wants a new system for Xmas. Xbox 2 is the only new system out at that time. Do you see him saying "No, I don't want a present on Christmas, just get me a PS3 a few months afterwards". I don't doubt there will be a number of people who wait, but they won't stop the Xbox 2 from being a huge holiday gift... the people waiting for the PSP sure are making the DS sell badly now, aren't they? right back at ya.

---

The DC was the most successful console launch ever (at the time), and it still was trounced by Sony and the PS2. The fact that the Xbox 2 could launch around Christmas is irrelevant, because Sony can answer whatever moves MS makes soon afterwards. Microsoft may as well name their new system Dreamcast 2.0, because Sony holds all the cards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mamo

The DC was the most successful console launch ever (at the time), and it still was trounced by Sony and the PS2. The fact that the Xbox 2 could launch around Christmas is irrelevant, because Sony can answer whatever moves MS makes soon afterwards. Microsoft may as well name their new system Dreamcast 2.0, because Sony holds all the cards.

---

God freakin' christ!

-DC was coming off a pair of horribly-recieved consoles and had alienated much of the Sega fanbase; Xbox2 will be coming off a successful, well-received system.

-DC was released just before the holidays and did extremely well. PS2 was released just before the holidays the following year and did extremely well. However, now it looks to be Xbox2 will be released just before the holidays, and PS3 will release early in the following year. A large part of a launch numbers is consoles bought as gifts, a console freshly released during the holidays will do much better than it would at a different time of the year.

-DC didn't have near the developer support XB2 will.

-DC -> PS2 was a year difference. XB2 -> PS3 will be a few months; people won't as easily justify replacing their XB2 in that short a timeframe.

-Unless Blu-ray really takes off and HD-DVD is DOA, PS2 does not have the huge appeal of secondary functionality that PS2 had with DVD.

-I will be completely surprised if the difference in graphics between XB2 and PS3 are noticable without close inspection.

In summation, anyone that spouts that XB2's chances are in any form relatable to the DC is, without a doubt, a friggin' knuckle-dragging troglodyte.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bacon McShig

In summation, anyone that spouts that XB2's chances are in any form relatable to the DC is, without a doubt, a friggin' knuckle-dragging troglodyte.

---

The Dreamcast had an extremely slim chance of establishing a foothold before the PS2 launch. The Xbox 2 has no such chance against the PS3. You're right, I guess they're not relatable after all.

Sony has only increased their dominance since the Xbox arrived.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mamoscott

The Dreamcast had an extremely slim chance of establishing a foothold before the PS2 launch. The Xbox 2 has no such chance against the PS3. I guess the systems aren't relatable after all.

Sony has only increased their dominance since the Xbox arrived.

---

I was thinking about countering this silly, useless speculation, but it would have just been with more speculation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mamo

The Dreamcast had an extremely slim chance of establishing a foothold before the PS2 launch. The Xbox 2 has no such chance against the PS3. You're right, I guess they're not relatable after all.

---

The Xbox was an unproven contender coming in against PS2, and had to take a lot of time to gradually work up consumer and developer confidence. It now has has a solid, bankable name, large publishers committing big name games to it, and a large fanbase going into the next console. I think it has a damn good chance, I'm certainly not saying it's going to mop the floor with PS3 but I can say with utmost confidence that it will be a very tight race.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bacon McShig

The Xbox was an unproven contender coming in against PS2, and had to take a lot of time to gradually work up consumer and developer confidence. It now has has a solid, bankable name, large publishers committing big name games to it, and a large fanbase going into the next console. I think it has a damn good chance, I'm certainly not saying it's going to mop the floor with PS3 but I can say with utmost confidence that it will be a very tight race.

---

None of that makes a difference. Compared to MS, Sony has a more bankable brand name, more support from third parties, better first party games and exclusives, a more diverse game library, and a much larger fanbase going into their next console.

Microsoft has already lost billions of dollars this gen trying to gain some kind of advantage, yet the Xbox has done nothing to slow down the PS2. Sony has only become more dominant, and if MS launches the Xbox 2 earlier than the PS3, they'll lose the only advantage they had this gen (more powerful hardware).

The Xbox 2 is fucked no matter when MS launches it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diffusionx

I was thinking about countering this silly, useless speculation, but it would have just been with more speculation.

---

And I was thinking that the only reason this type of speculation exists is because Microsoft is so pathetically desperate for a new console race to begin. The problem of course is that Sony and Nintendo know how to actually turn a profit in this industry and can afford to wait as long as they'd like with the current gen, while MS continues to get raked over the coals and lose money at an unprecedented rate in a "race" that was a lost cause a long time ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mamoscott

None of that makes a difference. Compared to MS, Sony has a more bankable brand name, more support from third parties, better first party games and exclusives, a more diverse game library, and a much larger fanbase going into their next console.

Microsoft has already lost billions of dollars this gen trying to gain some kind of advantage, yet the Xbox has done nothing to slow down the PS2. Sony has only become more dominant, and if MS launches the Xbox 2 earlier than the PS3, they'll lose the only advantage they had this gen (more powerful hardware).

The Xbox 2 is fucked no matter when MS launches it.



And I was thinking that the only reason this type of speculation exists is because Microsoft is so pathetically desperate for a new console race to begin. The problem of course is that Sony and Nintendo know how to actually turn a profit in this industry and can afford to wait as long as they'd like with the current gen, while MS continues to get raked over the coals and lose money at an unprecedented rate in a "race" that was a lost cause a long time ago.

---

LOL!

Quote:

---

I will be completely surprised if the difference in graphics between XB2 and PS3 are noticable without close inspection.

---

Don't sell short Sony's abilities to make really stupid decisions. This is the company that not only decided that the PS2 didn't need texturing capabilities as strong as the Dreamcast but actually got away with it, too.

Having said that, it's still all speculation and probably not worth fretting over right now.

James

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mamoscott

None of that makes a difference. Compared to MS, Sony has a more bankable brand name, more support from third parties, better first party games and exclusives, a more diverse game library, and a much larger fanbase going into their next console.

Microsoft has already lost billions of dollars this gen trying to gain some kind of advantage, yet the Xbox has done nothing to slow down the PS2. Sony has only become more dominant, and if MS launches the Xbox 2 earlier than the PS3, they'll lose the only advantage they had this gen (more powerful hardware).

The Xbox 2 is fucked no matter when MS launches it.



And I was thinking that the only reason this type of speculation exists is because Microsoft is so pathetically desperate for a new console race to begin. The problem of course is that Sony and Nintendo know how to actually turn a profit in this industry and can afford to wait as long as they'd like with the current gen, while MS continues to get raked over the coals and lose money at an unprecedented rate in a "race" that was a lost cause a long time ago.

---

All you are doing is thinking and it is not WORKING, so stop, PLEASE. :lol:

Xbox 2 is fucked at launch?

Well at you least you spew shit out of your ass somewhat elegantly.

Mamoscott you are saving me alot of typing :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bacon McShig

The Xbox was an unproven contender coming in against PS2, and had to take a lot of time to gradually work up consumer and developer confidence. It now has has a solid, bankable name, large publishers committing big name games to it, and a large fanbase going into the next console. I think it has a damn good chance, I'm certainly not saying it's going to mop the floor with PS3 but I can say with utmost confidence that it will be a very tight race.

---

Yes it has a brand name now and some "large publishers committing big name games to it" but the fact remains that anything not named Halo simply doesnt sell. It literally does have to launch with Halo 3 to have a chance, and seeing as Halo 2 just came out and the Xbox 2 should be out next Christmas I really don't see how that is possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OmniGear

Xbox 2 is fucked at launch?

---

Fucked at launch? Please, I would never say something that stupid.

The date that Microsoft's next console officially hits store shelves is entirely irrelevant, save for deciding the method Sony will utilize to demolish the Xbox 2 with the PS3. The Xbox 2 is already fucked right at this very moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by piku

Mamoscott you are saving me alot of typing :)


Yes it has a brand name now and some "large publishers committing big name games to it" but the fact remains that anything not named Halo simply doesnt sell. It literally does have to launch with Halo 3 to have a chance, and seeing as Halo 2 just came out and the Xbox 2 should be out next Christmas I really don't see how that is possible.

---

Anything not named Halo simply doesn't sell :confused:, you need to check your sources, ESPN 2K5 football, Rainbow Six Black Arrow, and Star Wars Battlefront are all top ten sellers for the last couple of months. Game of the Year last year was KOTOR and it sold very well and it was an Xbox exclusive. How can you say if anything not called Halo doesn't sell? :doubt:

Come on now, Xbox started last gen with everything against it; the exclusives aside from Halo and, to a lesser degree, PGR and DOA3 were largely crappy token offerings (Mad Dash Racing, Kabuki Warriors, Cel Damage), many ports for it were either done months behind the PS2 release or not at all, the size of the system and the controller made it the butt of every joke; everyone was rooting for MS to fail. They climbed their way up from all that to get a sizable market share and the respect of pretty much everyone, if they can get 20% market share starting a year behind and with all that standing in their way, they're gonna do a hell of a lot better with neither of those setbacks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by piku

Yes it has a brand name now and some "large publishers committing big name games to it" but the fact remains that anything not named Halo simply doesnt sell. It literally does have to launch with Halo 3 to have a chance, and seeing as Halo 2 just came out and the Xbox 2 should be out next Christmas I really don't see how that is possible.

---

Hm, let's see what PS3 is going to offer for their launch before we start saying Xbox is worthless without Halo, shall we? If they repeat their shoddy PS2 performance, a Halo is hardly necessary. Having the first Madden with next-gen graphics would more than do the trick, and oh look, they'll probably get just that. Also, your accusation that "anything not named Halo simply doesnt sell" is flat-out wrong. Many multiplatform games sell almost as many units on Xbox as they do on PS2, some even outsell the PS2 counterpart. When you factor in that how many times more PS2s out there than there are Xboxes, that's very impressive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mamo

The date that Microsoft's next console officially hits store shelves is entirely irrelevant, save for deciding the method Sony will utilize to demolish the Xbox 2 with the PS3. The Xbox 2 is already fucked right at this very moment.

---

Okay, you're nuts. They're already losing a good bit of money on every PSP made, you think they're going to supercharge the PS3 to lose a bunch on those, too? Sony doesn't have to prove their viability in the console market by making a powerhouse at the sacrifice of profits, like MS did with Xbox. They're the market leader by a large margin, and thusly they will likely opt to put a low-production-cost console that meets Xbox 2's power or, at best, goes a teeny-tiny bit further, and assume that the PS-brand name will coast them the rest of the way. Your idea that a company, any company, that is solidly in first place will fight a far second-place with the same dogged determination and risky ventures that the second place company employs is patently absurd. It's fat and happy vs. lean and hungry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BRAD73

Anything not named Halo simply doesn't sell :confused:, you need to check your sources, ESPN 2K5 football, Rainbow Six Black Arrow, and Star Wars Battlefront are all top ten sellers for the last couple of months. Game of the Year last year was KOTOR and it sold very well and it was an Xbox exclusive. How can you say if anything not called Halo doesn't sell? :doubt:

---

There have been a total of five Xbox games that have sold over a million copies.

Halo
Halo 2
GTA 3/Vice City double pack
Spinter Cell
Project Gotham 2


edit: Oh and Splinter Cell tops the other three titles besides Halo with a staggering total of 1.5 million copies. As comparison there have been five Activision titles alone which have sold more than a million copies on the Playstation 2.

Bickering about Xbox 2 vs PS3 is fucking HILARIOUS! Anyone at this point that claims one is better than the other needs to sit down and shut the fuck up.

My god....I almost feel like I am on the bus to middle school again and the two geeks in front of me are arguing SNES VS Genesis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by piku

There have been a total of five Xbox games that have sold over a million copies.

Halo
Halo 2
GTA 3/Vice City double pack
Spinter Cell
Project Gotham 2


edit: Oh and Splinter Cell tops the other three titles besides Halo with a staggering total of 1.5 million copies. As comparison there have been five Activision titles alone which have sold more than a million copies on the Playstation 2.

---

I didn't even say they sold over a million copies, I just simply stated that they did well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvilMog007

Bickering about Xbox 2 vs PS3 is fucking HILARIOUS! Anyone at this point that claims one is better than the other needs to sit down and shut the fuck up.

---

Exactly. As of right now any arguments about it is straight up speculation, and its borderline ideological. If you like the Xbox there's plenty of speculative proof to back you up, and if you dont, likewise.

So STFU Mamoscott.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvilMog007

Bickering about Xbox 2 vs PS3 is fucking HILARIOUS! Anyone at this point that claims one is better than the other needs to sit down and shut the fuck up.

---

I know, all of these fucking speculations on who is going to be better than who is just pointless. We'll have no idea till we actually play both systems for a while. We'll never even see their peak potentials till probably a year or more later anyway.

Xbox 2 vs. PS3 arguments are pointless, VIVA LA REVOLUTION!

You know that all 3 next gen systems games will look exactly the same no matter what the specifications they have. Do Xbox, GameCube and PS2 look that much different now?.......well most games anyways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvilMog007

You know that all 3 next gen systems games will look exactly the same no matter what the specifications they have. Do Xbox, GameCube and PS2 look that much different now?.......well most games anyways.

---

Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvilMog007

Bickering about Xbox 2 vs PS3 is fucking HILARIOUS! Anyone at this point that claims one is better than the other needs to sit down and shut the fuck up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brad73

I know, all of these fucking speculations on who is going to be better than who is just pointless. We'll have no idea till we actually play both systems for a while. We'll never even see their peak potentials till probably a year or more later anyway.

---

Too bad I never claimed that any one system was better than another, just that Sony would retain its dominance in the market with the PS3. Sony has already proven that you don't need the most powerful system each gen to win anyway, and whichever next-gen system you believe will be "better" is entirely irrelevant.

The only things Microsoft has proven this gen is that they have the ability to spend billions of dollars in exchange for no appreciable gain on the market leader and that online play is still an insignificant selling point to the average console buyer. Clearly a rousing success story there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvilMog007

You know that all 3 next gen systems games will look exactly the same no matter what the specifications they have. Do Xbox, GameCube and PS2 look that much different now?.......well most games anyways.

---

LOL!

For the most part, it's not bad at all the launch of most of the next gen systems won't be till 2006. When the PS2 finally came around to taking the PS1's place, the system had just about been milked all it could. The last truly major release for the original PSX that I can remember was Final Fantasy IX the same fall the PS2 was released domestically. It was all pretty much downhill from there.

Meanwhile PS2 is still getting Final Fantasy XII and Kingdom Hearts 2 from SquareEnix alone in 2005. It's definitely on it's last legs and the apex of great games for the system was definitely 2002-2004, but one more decent year yet remains for the PS2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvilMog007

You know that all 3 next gen systems games will look exactly the same no matter what the specifications they have. Do Xbox, GameCube and PS2 look that much different now?.......well most games anyways.

---

The PS2 really is holding stuff back, though, there really is no reason why just about everything out there can't look as good as DoA Ultimate and Ninja Gaiden do. That's why whenever a game gets released on all three consoles more often than not the PS2 rev ends up being the worst across the board.

Playing games like Viewtiful Joe side-by-side on PS2 versus how great it looks on the GC is a good example, to see how a formerly GC-exlusive and programmed-for game had to be downgraded just to run effectively on the system. I shudder to think how bad RE4 will come off on PS2 later next year compared to how insanely gorgeous the GC rev is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvilMog007

You know that all 3 next gen systems games will look exactly the same no matter what the specifications they have. Do Xbox, GameCube and PS2 look that much different now?.......well most games anyways.

---

So you buy all the multiplatform games on a random system and not the Xbox exclusively, because they all look the same, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jemery

Xbox 2 vs. PS3 arguments are pointless, VIVA LA REVOLUTION!

---

It's a good thing that's not what this is, then. We're debating where each company is poised strategically, not which will have the better system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mamo

The only things Microsoft has proven this gen is that they have the ability to spend billions of dollars in exchange for no appreciable gain on the market leader and that online play is still an insignificant selling point to the average console buyer. Clearly a rousing success story there.

---

No appreciable gain? In Japan, maybe, but that's not the case here. On the developer side, that's totally wrong, read the first paragraph of this post again, they've come a long way; if devs are putting trust in games to do well on Xbox while it's however many million units behind the competition, they'll put much more trust in Xbox 2 with it starting from scratch again alongside (or before) the PS3. And on the sales side, you obviously haven't looked at this year's console sales, Xbox has outsold PS2 every month but one or two.

Even if they don't have an Xbox, most people recognize the Xbox name; yes, not quite as many as PS, but it's not far behind. A lot of people only have PS2 because they buy one console a generation, and they bought a PS2 in the 3 years when Xbox was either not on the market yet or still making a name for itself. That's not the situation anymore, despite the overall sales numbers, they're almost on equal footing as far as mindshare and recognizability are concerned. You pass that off as insignifigant?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bacon McShig

No appreciable gain? In Japan, maybe, but that's not the case here. On the developer side, that's totally wrong, read the first paragraph of this post again, they've come a long way; if devs are putting trust in games to do well on Xbox while it's however many million units behind the competition, they'll put much more trust in Xbox 2 with it starting from scratch again alongside (or before) the PS3.

---

What does that have to do with trust? All that tells me is that publishers love releasing cheap and dirty Xbox ports of games originally designed for the PS2 to earn a few extra dollars. Coincidentally, two of the five top selling Xbox games piku listed are also available on the PS2, and three of those five games have superior versions available for the PC.

Quote:

---

And on the sales side, you obviously haven't looked at this year's console sales, Xbox has outsold PS2 every month but one or two.

---

Xbox console sales have no where to go but up, and everyone already has a PS2. In a race, you aren't catching up to your opponent when he has already crossed the finish line and started to slow down for his victory lap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bacon McShig

Even if they don't have an Xbox, most people recognize the Xbox name; yes, not quite as many as PS, but it's not far behind. A lot of people only have PS2 because they buy one console a generation, and they bought a PS2 in the 3 years when Xbox was either not on the market yet or still making a name for itself. That's not the situation anymore, despite the overall sales numbers, they're almost on equal footing as far as mindshare and recognizability are concerned. You pass that off as insignifigant?

---

More people have a PS2, because it has the games they want (including just about every worthwhile game released on the Xbox), not simply because it came out first. If you're only going to buy one console per generation, you'd be insane to not go with Sony's system - in this generation or the next.

Sony has everything MS has (with the exception of Bungie) and much more.

Quote:

---

If you're only going to buy one console per generation, you'd be insane to not go with Sony's system - in this generation or the next.

---

Thanks for sorting things out, Captain Future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mamoscott

If you're only going to buy one console per generation, you'd be insane to not go with Sony's system - in this generation or the next.

Sony has everything MS has (with the exception of Bungie) and much more.

---

He's absolutely right. Contrary to this board's skewed view of the world, the Xbox lineup is closer to the GameCube's than to the PS2's. There is nothing that has happened thus far to make me think that the next round will be different, especially when it is quite likely that Sony will actually have better hardware this time.

3 pages in -- almost time to start naming (and then dissing) Xbox exclusives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince Planet

3 pages in -- almost time to start naming (and then dissing) Xbox exclusives.

---

Pre-emptive who cares what they are the only two Xbox exclusives that have sold respectably are Halo and Project Gotham 2, both Microsoft published titles, so why would a developer bother releasing a game exclusively on the Xbox if it isn't going to sell? Sounds like the Gamecube doesn’t it.

This is just irritating me, even though it matters none: PGR2 did not sell all that great (although it has unbelievable staying power; was the #2 selling Xbox game in November behind some silly FPS game). It is the original PGR that pushed over a million units (well deservingly too, they are both some of the best racers of this generation, or any generation really).

There's no real point to have an exclusive on any system unless the money Sony/Microsoft/some other shitty platform owner throws at you more than makes up the money you lose from not publishing on those other platforms. Granted, it would take less money from Sony to make that happen than Microsoft... but the industry is in a fairly sad state overall. (As an aside, I will never understand why Microsoft never tried to outbid Sony for the GTA rights back in the day -- fucking dumb move if you ask me.)

-Dippy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dipstick

There's no real point to have an exclusive on any system unless the money Sony/Microsoft/some other shitty platform owner throws at you more than makes up the money you lose from not publishing on those other platforms. Granted, it would take less money from Sony to make that happen than Microsoft... but the industry is in a fairly sad state overall. (As an aside, I will never understand why Microsoft never tried to outbid Sony for the GTA rights back in the day -- fucking dumb move if you ask me.)

---

Of course the industry is in a sad state. "Gamers" control nothing, have no influence in anything. It doesn't matter what console has the "good" games, it’s all about sales now, and you know what games sell? The ones targeted to non-gamers, the EA crowd. That is why they as a company is such a force right now. They’re holding all the cards. The Dreamcast showed that all the "gamers" in the world can no longer save a system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by piku

Of course the industry is in a sad state. "Gamers" control nothing, have no influence in anything. It doesn't matter what console has the "good" games, it’s all about sales now, and you know what games sell? The ones targeted to non-gamers, the EA crowd. That is why they as a company is such a force right now. They’re holding all the cards. The Dreamcast showed that all the "gamers" in the world can no longer save a system.

---

My earlier comment was a joke on the inevitable degeneration of these kinds of threads. But regarding your post above:

Gamers have the same control as any other consumers do -- they speak with their wallets which unquestionably affects the decisions made by developers and publishers, even if it may not produce the effect that you specifically happen to desire.

If you mean that "hardcore" gamers don't have much control, that's true for any industry. What the hardest-core niche wants is usually something the rest of the planet (a) doesn't care about; (b) won't spend the extra money on; or (c) doens't even know about. Even then, I believe we are actually fortunate since videogames are the kind of commodity that will allow for considerable variety, including plenty of niche products. Bear in mind that it aslo works both ways: large, powerful developers are often the catalyst to getting niche games, or games from smaller developers, to the consumers -- Steel Battalion and Riddick come to mind, and I'm sure there are plenty of examples on other platforms.

Your Dreamcast comment is presumably heartfelt, but rests on what I suspect is a faulty premise -- the notion that all of the so-called "real gamers" invested their hearts, souls, and (most importantly) bank accounts on Sega's system and software. They didn't. And, of course, Sony didn't help much either.

Aside: some posters' comments about MS being essentially inconsequential to Sony are laughable.

Further aside: I don't care when PS3 launches. I actually enjoy playing videogames, and I'm sure I'll buy both MS's and Sony's consoles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by piku

Of course the industry is in a sad state. "Gamers" control nothing, have no influence in anything. It doesn't matter what console has the "good" games, it’s all about sales now, and you know what games sell? The ones targeted to non-gamers, the EA crowd. That is why they as a company is such a force right now. They’re holding all the cards. The Dreamcast showed that all the "gamers" in the world can no longer save a system.

---

Dog wags the tail, not the other way around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince Planet

If you mean that "hardcore" gamers don't have much control, that's true for any industry. What the hardest-core niche wants is usually something the rest of the planet (a) doesn't care about; (b) won't spend the extra money on; or (c) doens't even know about. Even then, I believe we are actually fortunate since videogames are the kind of commodity that will allow for considerable variety, including plenty of niche products. Bear in mind that it aslo works both ways: large, powerful developers are often the catalyst to getting niche games, or games from smaller developers, to the consumers -- Steel Battalion and Riddick come to mind, and I'm sure there are plenty of examples on other platforms.

---

No I don't even neccesarily mean "hardcore" gamers - I'm not talking about the kind of people who count frames in a fighting game. Look back in the SNES/Genesis era, generally someone was just as likely to buy an RPG as they would a fighter, or beat em up. Now you have a large mass of people who simply buy whatever EA puts out and the small minority who will actually give an RPG a chance.

Though I agree that the large profits from the masses allow niche titles to be produced though, but I was saying that these titles were once not so niche.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prince Planet

Your Dreamcast comment is presumably heartfelt, but rests on what I suspect is a faulty premise -- the notion that all of the so-called "real gamers" invested their hearts, souls, and (most importantly) bank accounts on Sega's system and software. They didn't. And, of course, Sony didn't help much either.

---

I was saying that the Dreamcast was the last system where the majority of people who bought it bought it for titles like Skies of Arcadia or Jet Grind Radio, not for Madden.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by piku

I was saying that the Dreamcast was the last system where the majority of people who bought it bought it for titles like Skies of Arcadia or Jet Grind Radio, not for Madden.

---

And look where that is today...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by piku

No I don't even neccesarily mean "hardcore" gamers - I'm not talking about the kind of people who count frames in a fighting game. Look back in the SNES/Genesis era, generally someone was just as likely to buy an RPG as they would a fighter, or beat em up. Now you have a large mass of people who simply buy whatever EA puts out and the small minority who will actually give an RPG a chance.

---

Huh? RPGs are more mainstream now than they were in the 16-bit era. People buy whatever's popular in each each era. Back then it was Street Fighter 2/Mortal Kombat. Today it's EA Sports.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

So you buy all the multiplatform games on a random system and not the Xbox exclusively, because they all look the same, right?

---

yeah I realize that, ass. But they really dont look ALL that different. Ohhh maybe the Xbox version has higher resolution or something. They really are close to the same in most cases. Plus I almost never buy multiplatform games on my cube because the controller is crap. I mean if the diffrence in graphics was like Xbox vs Dreamcast in the next gen it would matter. But since there WONT be that much difference its all going to come down to who has better exclusives. And that all depends on who you talk to.

I predict now Xbox2 vs Ps3 vs Cube 2 will be the same graphics wise. Developers will RARELY make multiplatform games that look dramatically different in the next gen just as they do now. Thats why we get so many PS2s average looking graphics on Xbox when technically Xbox hardware SPANKS PS2s'.