Microsoft: "It's almost over. Sony is almost finished."

[quote name='zzl365']I don't see why you can't count the 360s already sold... it really isn't fair if you don't. For instance, this year I bought a PS3, but I would have bought a 360, if I didn't already own one. Yes, the ps3 may have better numbers this year....but who really cares, marketshare is what matters, not who sold more consoles in a subset of months.[/QUOTE]


Marketshare is great, but you have to look at trends... if there is any sign that the PS3 is starting to pick up in sales, then MS needs to worry and make some plans to counteract. month after the month the Wii was outselling everyone, and MS had martketshare over Wii, but today, Wii has the most marketshare, which most could have predicted, based on the selling trends. [an easy prediction due to the high sales].
 
[quote name='whoknows']One thing you can't all argue is that chocolate chip cookies are delicious.

I'm enjoying one as I type this.

Tasty[/QUOTE]

...

What if it's not chocolate chips though... what if it's poo chips? What if you're eating poo chip cookies right now. And you already said they were delicious.

:whistle2:o
 
[quote name='Vinny']...

What if it's not chocolate chips though... what if it's poo chips? What if you're eating poo chip cookies right now. And you already said they were delicious.

:whistle2:o[/QUOTE]
If they are poo chips then they are more delicious than I ever could have imagined.
 
[quote name='trq']Yeah, like that SIXAXIS controlin' and Bluray capacity usin' system mover, Lair.



Right. Just like the superior power of the Xbox let it crush the PS2.



Actually it was king the first christmas, when Twisted Metal: Black and Devil May Cry hit, and there was no Microsoft presence to speak of. The GTA phenomena did come later, but Sony had already set their position by then.



Launch games don't come out ten months after the system.




Don't you say Metroid is second gen, below? Pick a position already.



Because Wii graphics have come close to 360/PS3 caliber so far?



Because sims are dull. Because they don't want to pony up $400 ~ $600 dollars. The list is endless.



According to ... you? This information is substantiated by ... what? Casual gamers are "loyal" to the games they enjoy and the money they spend.



Yeah, well, your track record is ironclad so far.



How does the Wii have second generation games while the PS3 is still on launch games, when they launched within days of each other?

Sony isn't going anywhere, and that 30% surge MS is expecting is insanely high, so I don't really have a dog in this race, but jesus christmas, man, where do you get this happy horseshit?[/QUOTE]

nice how you quote everything I said, but you not saying much.
In the future PS3 games are most likely going to look better than anything
360 has had, and will ever have on their system.
PS3 launch games, are coming out 10 months after the system launch that's a fact.. almost every game released was a game that was initially a launch title. [stranglehold is the last game to be released that was initially a launch title]
So yeah, PS3 is still launching, still in its first generation of games, devs still learning the ropes of the system.

Metroid can be considered second generation because the level of graphics displayed from what was available initially on the
system is a pretty good lead. Metroid 3 vs Red Steel. So the point is.. will there be a game on Wii that looks better than MEtroid 3.. hell. I doubt it.
You can criticize what I say all you want, but you can quote it a year later and find that most of it will probably be true.




let me add this...

Wii fans are going to want HD, high quality graphic games... and lets not talk about price, because the xbox 360 is only 30 dollars more than Wii.. there's no issue with price anymore only choice. If someone wants somethign next gen its available for them. PS3 is still out of range though.


The Wii is going after casual gamers, but what's the difference between a casual gamer and a hardcore gamer.. hardcore plays more, spends more, so when I say that a casual gamer is less loyal than a hardcore gamer, don't try to flame [for some thread credit, or something] try and get the understanding of what I'm saying. I'm a hardcore gamer, when its all over, I'll probably own about 200 ps3 games, 10 wii games, and about 20 360 games. Casual gamer, may not purchase more than 10 games for any system this entire next gen. So yeah, Hardcore gamers are going to be more loyal and purchase more products.

xbox couldn't beat the ps2, not because it wasn't good, it didn't have time. However, xbox laid the groundwork for everything that 360 is excelling at presently. The PS3 has plenty of time for its power to show, and for it to gain ground. So the fact that the xbox power didn't make it number one is a silly point because it came to the market much too late. Same situation with the Genesis, it couldn't beat the NES, because it came out too late in the consoles life to ever outsell it.
 
That's stepping overboard a bit there Thomas, Even with the 360 there's still plenty of room for them to get more performance out of the system as developers learn it.

Likewise, the PS3 should have a lot more room to grow as well as it's an even more different architecture that, so far as we can see, is pretty powerful, but programmers need to learn it.

TRQ is really uninformed though. If he'd been paying attention, he'd know that the PS3 is making a lot of moves, but none that'll pay off this year besides its 2007 titles.
 
[quote name='evilmax17']Are MGS4 and FFXIII enough to completely and permanently change these established sales trends, and buck a precedent that has already been set by nearly 40 years of videogame history?[/quote]
I think so. I'd drop 500 bones in an instant for Final Fantasy XIII (and even resort to selling my Xbox 360 if I needed the extra funds temporarily). Square Enix's software has as much influence pushing consoles as Nintendo. Final Fantasy VII was probably the watershed moment that catapaulted the PlayStation as a legitimate contender and the release of MGS2 and FFX (also GTAIII) in Q4 2001 is what kick-started the PS2's domination.
 
[quote name='Vanigan']That's stepping overboard a bit there Thomas, Even with the 360 there's still plenty of room for them to get more performance out of the system as developers learn it.

Likewise, the PS3 should have a lot more room to grow as well as it's an even more different architecture that, so far as we can see, is pretty powerful, but programmers need to learn it.

TRQ is really uninformed though. If he'd been paying attention, he'd know that the PS3 is making a lot of moves, but none that'll pay off this year besides its 2007 titles.[/QUOTE]



yeah you right.. I was overboard, I was like fuck TRQ... PS3 is gonna fuckin kill 360. I have to watch myself, cause I can be a Sony fanboy at times, cause I do like sony best...to make amends, I'll by HALO 3 this week. I like all systems, and I'm going to enjoy all 3 consoles...


but PS3 to justify all the moves they made with cell, blu ray, then they need to put some products out that actually cant' be done on 360. Cause right now 360 has matched them blow for blow, and GT 5 as good as it looks won't be considered better than Forza unless it has damage. Heavenly Sword - launch title, has cut scenes just as nice as Mass Effect (second generation 360 title) HS could use a little more polish, but lets give it some credit.
 
Thomas, don't ever compare yourself to TRQ. He uses well thought out argument. You flail on your keyboard like there's bugs on it you are trying to squash.
 
Why is it impossible to think that there are a group of people who will be completely content with non-HD gaming for another 5-10 years? Maybe for 20 years? Maybe forever? Who knows. We've had non HD gaming for almost 40 years, and that's supposed to change over in a generation?

Maybe those people would rather spend $1200 on something other than a PS3/HDTV. Maybe they just like Chocolate Chip Cookies THAT MUCH.


And thomas: Metroid was shown before launch. I guess that makes it a "launch game" too. Bullshit wording, if it came out day one, it's a launch title, simple as that. No arguing over the definitions, no arguing over dates, it's a yes or no answer.

I ask again, what is wrong with being 3rd? Last gen showed that three systems can survive. Someone has to be 3rd. This gen it's looking like Sony.
 
[quote name='Strell']Thomas, don't ever compare yourself to TRQ. He uses well thought out argument. You flail on your keyboard like there's bugs on it you are trying to squash.[/QUOTE]


damn Strell sounds like you're dating TRQ... I guess he's a real man huh?! now STFU Strella...
 
[quote name='Silent Assassin120']HD gaming FTW.... FTW....[/QUOTE]
Oh hell yes. I used to say that it's overrated, and then I got an HDTV and could never go back. Anyone that says they don't want it is insane.
 
2 out of the 3 manufacturers are HD this gen. Why are you complaining? Why is it a problem for one console to cater to those who don't want/can't afford HD?
 
[quote name='whoknows']Oh hell yes. I used to say that it's overrated, and then I got an HDTV and could never go back. Anyone that says they don't want it is insane.[/quote]It's nice, but I was much more satisifed with Prime 3 even with tis lowly 480p visuals, than Bioshock which I think as the most beautiful graphical effects in the entire industry at the moment (though the few snippets of the retail build of Halo 3 look to be very pretty as well).

HD games are a nice luxury, and playing solid Wii games I can catch myself thinking "I wonder what this would look like with the PS3/360's power..." but careful planning can make those games look just fine.

Part of me wonders if our lust for HD visuals are directly tied to our loss of imaginations and that we need everything spelled out in pixel-perfect images. Back in the day Mario had 16 colors, and we liked it!

/crotchety gamer
 
At least bioshock makes good use of the system's power to create vivid detail that fleshes out a mood and history of your environment. It's also got pretty good artistic vision, even if it stole pretty liberally from the fallout series in the noir/vintage stuff.

Now, stuff like stranglehold, lair, and many others just look drab. And a lot of the graphics are just there to sell the game, you can tell.
 
I do have to feel somewhat bad for people who require such high fidelity visuals in order for games to be playable for them.

As every generation comes to a close, the games that they enjoyed for the past half decade suddenly become unplayable.

Someday, and it will happen, someone will look back and wonder how Gears of War was ever playable.

Partially relevant, a neogaf post and one of the most profoundly disturbing viewpoints on gaming I have ever heard:

the next Xbox and next Playstation need to be much, much more powerful than X360/PS3. Highend PCs of 2006-2007 are already a lot more powerful. The WiiHD could get away with being modestly more powerful than X360/PS3.

all of the current consoles are underpowered in my book anyway, not just the Wii.

MS and Sony both focused more on CPU power than GPU power. the Xenos and RSX are barely powerful enough to produce much of a leap in actual graphics detail / complexity, quality, etc beyond the HD resolutions they provide. yeah they're a step up from last gen but not as much as I wanted. in 2001-2004 i imagined that the 2nd Xbox and 3rd Playstation would provide graphics that we see from GeForce 8800 or R600. I think the majority expected more graphically from the current crop of consoles.

it seems that while MS and Sony delivered multi-core multi threaded CPUs and HD graphics and fairly advanced shader capability, they didnt go for brute power in their GPUs relative to last-gen. brute power is still a good thing.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='daroga']It's nice, but I was much more satisifed with Prime 3 even with tis lowly 480p visuals, than Bioshock which I think as the most beautiful graphical effects in the entire industry at the moment (though the few snippets of the retail build of Halo 3 look to be very pretty as well).

HD games are a nice luxury, and playing solid Wii games I can catch myself thinking "I wonder what this would look like with the PS3/360's power..." but careful planning can make those games look just fine.

Part of me wonders if our lust for HD visuals are directly tied to our loss of imaginations and that we need everything spelled out in pixel-perfect images. Back in the day Mario had 16 colors, and we liked it!


People want things in HD because they have HDTVs. If the Wii could in the future include a scaler [even as a periphreal - cable and box] just to boost it to 720p, that would be fine.



/crotchety gamer[/QUOTE]


Take a game like White Knight Story, first thing people say is oh the draw distance makes the game looks like it goes on forever [talking about the environments] the detail in the environment, and the seen in the distance imo facilitates imagination. Take a game like Skate... the control scheme itself makes players have to be imaginative in terms of how they use the environment to pull off tricks. So I'm just saying that HD which adds detail to everthing, and our lust for it doesn't necessarily mean that there's a loss of imagination.

It all goes with that "Games as artwork" thinking.. with any piece of art you want to be able to see as many details as possible on whatever type of art one is dealing with. HD makes that artwork found in games more vivid.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']As every generation comes to a close, the games that they enjoyed for the past half decade suddenly become unplayable.[/quote]
Nah. While I love HD visuals, I go back and play games like Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy 4 regularly. Not to mention I'm still playing a large selection of PS2 games. In fact I recently played through the PS1 version of Resident Evil 2.

Just because I want, and now prefer, HD doesn't mean I find all past games unplayable.
 
The position I'm describing is fringe. But its definitely out there. For instance, the entire cast and probably most of the fanbase of Epileptic Gaming.
 
[quote name='Rei no Otaku']Just because I want, and now prefer, HD doesn't
mean I find all past games unplayable.[/QUOTE]

Shh. It's a dichotomy, and you're doing nothing to help that. After all, if there's one absolute truism, it's that all gamers can be pigeonholed into cookie-cutter preference categories that should take no more than a sentence or two to describe with 100% accuracy.

There's on other truism related to this thread: it's that historical precedents for the games industry, that go back all of 30 years :)lol:), are unassailable, except when they're not. After all, historical precedent should have shown us that Nintendo would handily lead this generation, given how amazingly well the N64 and GC performed relative to their competition.
 
[quote name='Rei no Otaku']Nah. While I love HD visuals, I go back and play games like Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy 4 regularly. Not to mention I'm still playing a large selection of PS2 games. In fact I recently played through the PS1 version of Resident Evil 2.

Just because I want, and now prefer, HD doesn't mean I find all past games unplayable.[/QUOTE]



all those old school games, even though they're not in HD are still beautiful games, because they were just plainly well done. A good game is a good game forever. Miyamoto was definitely right when he said that. [ or rather the convese of that - bad game is bad forever].
 
[quote name='Strell']RICE CRISPIES FTW.

O'DOYLE RULES.[/QUOTE]

fuck Crispies, and Cookies. Sugar as a whole can go to hell.:bomb:

[quote name='Rei no Otaku']Nah. While I love HD visuals, I go back and play games like Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy 4 regularly. Not to mention I'm still playing a large selection of PS2 games. In fact I recently played through the PS1 version of Resident Evil 2.

Just because I want, and now prefer, HD doesn't mean I find all past games unplayable.[/QUOTE]

Same here. I enjoy playing (now) vintage PS1, Gen & SNES games far more than other games.

Nothing makes you appreciate a newer game's beauty like playing through ugly-ass pixel-ated messes (that are still fun, mind you).

[quote name='Strell']Thomas, don't ever compare yourself to TRQ. He uses well thought out argument. You flail on your keyboard like there's bugs on it you are trying to squash.[/QUOTE]

QFT (again). This Thomas guy seems to be 50/50 right/wrong when it comes to his facts, effectively killing any arguement he might have. It doesn't help that he's also very Pro-Sony.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']I do have to feel somewhat bad for people who require such high fidelity visuals in order for games to be playable for them.

As every generation comes to a close, the games that they enjoyed for the past half decade suddenly become unplayable.

Someday, and it will happen, someone will look back and wonder how Gears of War was ever playable.

Partially relevant, a neogaf post and one of the most profoundly disturbing viewpoints on gaming I have ever heard:[/QUOTE]



I don't think anyone will look back and wonder how Gears was playable. It'll always look good. People might cringe at how fake it looks or how the 360 was too underpowered to have photorealism in a game like Gears, but it's not going to be the difference between, say, the PS1 and PS2. 3D PS1 games are an eyesore all around. Still, it wouldn't be a stretch to go back and visit the FF games or anything that plays well.


As for the gaf post about console horsepower, he kinda has a point. High end PCs are wiping the floor with consoles and high end monitors can display resolutions better than 1080p. Many of the games run much better and with more customization. After discovering this, I've completely lost interest in console horsepower...

I know your point is to show how this poster is focused on graphics and not games. but it is possible to care about both.

I love my high quality HD gaming, but if I had to give up everything and play only one game, it would probably be 3rd Strike. But I hope that isn't too advanced for you, since they used cleaner sprites and amazing animation :lol:
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']The position I'm describing is fringe. But its definitely out there. For instance, the entire cast and probably most of the fanbase of Epileptic Gaming.[/quote]If it's fringe then who freakin' cares?
There are people who would rather play Nascar 98 over Xenogears.
Fringe yes, but they're out there.

Just about all of us here can enjoy all games.
Natrually, we want games to look better and better, and still be as fun as games of yore.

Strell just got his HDTV.
I know he isn't going back to playing Prime 3 on a square screen.
 
[quote name='Vanigan']TRQ is really uninformed though. If he'd been paying attention, he'd know that the PS3 is making a lot of moves, but none that'll pay off this year besides its 2007 titles.[/QUOTE]

I primarily concerned myself with neutralizing Thomas96's illogical and gibbon-like e-poop flinging. If I asserted anything particularly outrageous or uninformed, I'd love to know. With evidence to support the contrary position, of course.
 
[quote name='-Never4ever-']fuck Crispies, and Cookies. Sugar as a whole can go to hell.:bomb: [/QUOTE]
fuck COOKIES?!?!

You sir have just deeply offended me.

I challenge you to a duel
 
[quote name='jer7583']Why is it impossible to think that there are a group of people who will be completely content with non-HD gaming for another 5-10 years? Maybe for 20 years? Maybe forever? Who knows. We've had non HD gaming for almost 40 years, and that's supposed to change over in a generation?

Maybe those people would rather spend $1200 on something other than a PS3/HDTV. Maybe they just like Chocolate Chip Cookies THAT MUCH.


[/quote]

As I was reading through I remember seeing this article on money.cnn.com

http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/24/news/companies/bestbuy_hdtveducation/index.htm?postversion=2007092414

Best Buy: Consumers baffled by HDTV

No.1 electronics seller says 90% of consumers in survey are confused about high-definition televisions, while 50% underestimate cost of buying, installing them.
Click to expand...

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- As Best Buy gears up for its important high-definition TV sales months, a new survey from the No. 1 electronics retailer reveals that almost 90 percent of Americans still don't understand HDTVs - and close to 50 percent underestimate the cost of buying one.
Click to expand...


 
Best Buy: Consumers baffled by HDTV

No.1 electronics seller says 90% of consumers in survey are confused about high-definition televisions, while 50% underestimate cost of buying, installing them.
Click to expand...



Wow, I'm surprised BB would be so candid about their business plan.

There are super-easy ways of informing people about HDTVs, it's not difficult to lay out in clear, understandable language with appropriate definitions in a small pamphlet.

People don't understand because they're in there, in the store, with their mind partially on their money and partially on the TV and partially on what the employee is explaining, while trying to stay aware enough to not get ripped. There's no way they could figure it all out in store, on the spot.
 
Yeah, I'm definitely one of the consumers "confused" about HD, mostly in the tech specs area so I can understand what I need to get, look out for, etc.

That's why I have been waiting before trying to go HD.
 
That's why there should only be so this pesky "choice" thing can be eliminated and can tell everyone what to buy.
 
[quote name='gunm']That's why there should only be so this pesky "choice" thing can be eliminated and can tell everyone what to buy.[/quote]We're not talking about the movie format war.

Just HD terms in general confusing consumers.
I can understand where they're coming from. TVs are a lot more complicated now.
 
seems msft has forgotten about the millions of people who suffer first person sickness and cant play halo. in the end sony will still be around and msft will be another sega
 
[quote name='slidecage']seems msft has forgotten about the millions of people who suffer first person sickness and cant play halo. in the end sony will still be around and msft will be another sega[/QUOTE]Yeah, I get motion sickness too when playing many FPS, which is why I don't play many.
 
[quote name='slidecage']seems msft has forgotten about the millions of people who suffer first person sickness and cant play halo. in the end sony will still be around and msft will be another sega[/quote]


Sega didn't have anything but their franchises, and they raped all of those to death. Microsoft has tons of money to spend on trying to obtain the market. Will they ever do it? Probably not, but their journey will bring the fans great games and such.
 
[quote name='Punk_Raven']Sega didn't have anything but their franchises, and they raped all of those to death. Microsoft has tons of money to spend on trying to obtain the market. Will they ever do it? Probably not, but their journey will bring the fans great games and such.[/QUOTE]


I wish Sega would rape some more Streets of Rage and Golden axe games.
 
[quote name='dallow']We're not talking about the movie format war.

Just HD terms in general confusing consumers.
I can understand where they're coming from. TVs are a lot more complicated now.[/quote]

If there was one HD format, that would go a long way to reducing consumer confusion, but yes, it's just one piece of a very large puzzle. Still my understanding was that the main confusion is the source of HD, not necessarily HD itself.

Edit: and sorry I responded OT/out-of-context.
 
[quote name='Punk_Raven']Sega didn't have anything but their franchises, and they raped all of those to death. Microsoft has tons of money to spend on trying to obtain the market. Will they ever do it? Probably not, but their journey will bring the fans great games and such.[/quote]

The rape is only really applicable to the whoring out of Sonic. Every Sega fan can name a few franchises that they wish Sega had lustfully turned an eye to more often. On Dreamcast and Saturn they pumped out so many new franchises while ignoring so many old ones.
 
[quote name='Strell']RICE CRISPIES FTW.

O'DOYLE RULES.[/quote]
nuuu uhh! StarCrunch baby! O'Doyle, I got a feeling your whole family is going down. Just not right now. :lol:
[quote name='Thomas96']... PS3 launch games, are coming out 10 months after the system launch that's a fact.. almost every game released was a game that was initially a launch title. [stranglehold is the last game to be released that was initially a launch title]
So yeah, PS3 is still launching, still in its first generation of games, devs still learning the ropes of the system. ... [/quote] If the system has been out for sale first and then the game second, it does not qualify as a 'launch' title. You don't launch a rocket by throwing it in the air and then fill it up with fuel and ignite it do you? Same can be said for launch games, they come out the same day as the system does hence the word 'launch'.
[quote name='Strell']Thomas, don't ever compare yourself to TRQ. He uses well thought out argument. You flail on your keyboard like there's bugs on it you are trying to squash.[/quote] ROFLCOPTER
[quote name='slidecage']seems msft has forgotten about the millions of people who suffer first person sickness and cant play halo. in the end sony will still be around and msft will be another sega[/quote] No. Just no. That's why there are other genres; specifcally 3rd person shooters like Stranglehold and HitMan.:roll:
If MS was like Sega, they would be near bankrupt, pull the system plug before it was time, not bring out Shenmue 2 to the states & be developing games for Wii/Ps3. Doesn't seem to be happening at this point.;)

All that being said, I think there is enough room for all three. Nintendo is going after a demographic that was nearly unattainable prior generations. Sony and MS are fighting it out for the existing base of established gamers. So I think that since Nintendo's got the market cornered for the casual 'never played a game in my life prior to this because it was complicated' I think it leaves enough of a base for those two (MS/Sony) to get enough onboard for thier systems.

Sony will be relevant but not dominant.

I think overall, current systems will be around a bit longer than last gen so I don't see the rush.
 
[quote name='CappyCobra']nuuu uhh! StarCrunch baby![/QUOTE]

My brother from another mother! A finer lump of chocolate, caramel, and puffed rice cannot be found for a quarter!
 
I'm not worried about consumers and their knowledge of HDTVs when you spending money.. you learn... quickly. People learned quickly when we were dealing with the HD Tuner fiasco, couple years back.
 
After Halo 3?

Ninja Gaiden 2.

I could see Dead Rising 2 with co-op coming.

That would get alot of people's attention.

However.....

With both Metal Gear Solid 4 and *two* Final Fantasy XIII games coming next year, Sony is by no means "almost finished".
 
[quote name='CappyCobra']

I think overall, current systems will be around a bit longer than last gen so I don't see the rush.[/quote]

I sure as hell hope so. I was kind of pissed that XBOX only lasted for 4 years and it seemed Nintendo gave up on Gamecube. Granted it was a different situation back then, but this time around the systems and games are so expensive I would like to see them last a little longer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top