ok I admit I haven''t seen an Xbox in action but I have read about it.
der! of course consoles are "computers" but they are different in that they almost never crash, have almost no glitches, never have speed problems, take no time to load (at least the N64 doesn''t) and you can play games in the lounge room with mates without having to crowd around a computer and share a keyboard.
I''m just annoyed that institutions like Nintendo and their games could possibly be shoved out of the way by the power of Microsoft.
Anyway, this was supposed to be about the business aspect, not the raging debate of console superiority.
🎉 Celebrating 25 Years of GameDev.net! 🎉
Not many can claim 25 years on the Internet! Join us in celebrating this milestone. Learn more about our history, and thank you for being a part of our community!
Who is winning the console wars?
Sony Playstation takes about the same time to load as a PC.
N64 games are alot smaller, therefor quicker aswell.
I can''t comment on the Dreamcast, never seen or used it.
I''m going to assume X-Box is going to be similar to the Play Station, both of which are basically PC''s dedicated to games.
Nintendo and Sega are the _true_ game consoles of the 90''s.
N64 games are alot smaller, therefor quicker aswell.
I can''t comment on the Dreamcast, never seen or used it.
I''m going to assume X-Box is going to be similar to the Play Station, both of which are basically PC''s dedicated to games.
Nintendo and Sega are the _true_ game consoles of the 90''s.
>> der! of course consoles are "computers" but they are different in that they almost never crash, have almost no glitches, never have speed problems, take no time to load (at least the N64 doesn't) and you can play games in the lounge room with mates without having to crowd around a computer and share a keyboard.
Really? My computer almost never crashes. Is just as fast at loading as an N64(There's a neat little program out that allows you to use your RAM for Hard Drive Space, makes things load up extremely quickly), and I can play games in the lounge room by hooking my PC up to my TV and plugging in my MS Sidewinder's to my USB ports.
So what exactly is the difference...?
Games. Plain and simple. Games.
Game Developers develop for Xbox. Game Developers develop for GameCube. I really see no difference here.
>> I'm just annoyed that institutions like Nintendo and their games could possibly be shoved out of the way by the power of Microsoft. <<
Why is that? Nintendo is a business. Microsoft is a business.
Just because Nintendo was there before Microsoft, then Microsoft shouldn't try to compete with them?
>> Sony Playstation takes about the same time to load as a PC. <<
Depends on the the game, hard drive, RAM, etc., I don't see how you came to that conclusion.
>> N64 games are alot smaller, therefor quicker aswell. <<
N64 games are also on cartridges, which are quite a bit faster then CDs.
>> Nintendo and Sega are the _true_ game consoles of the 90's. <<
True game consoles of the 90's? Not sure what you mean by that. My Playstation and Turbo-Graphix 16 weren't "True Game Consoles"?
-Janus
Edited by - Janus-DG on March 1, 2002 3:40:30 AM
Really? My computer almost never crashes. Is just as fast at loading as an N64(There's a neat little program out that allows you to use your RAM for Hard Drive Space, makes things load up extremely quickly), and I can play games in the lounge room by hooking my PC up to my TV and plugging in my MS Sidewinder's to my USB ports.
So what exactly is the difference...?
Games. Plain and simple. Games.
Game Developers develop for Xbox. Game Developers develop for GameCube. I really see no difference here.
>> I'm just annoyed that institutions like Nintendo and their games could possibly be shoved out of the way by the power of Microsoft. <<
Why is that? Nintendo is a business. Microsoft is a business.
Just because Nintendo was there before Microsoft, then Microsoft shouldn't try to compete with them?
>> Sony Playstation takes about the same time to load as a PC. <<
Depends on the the game, hard drive, RAM, etc., I don't see how you came to that conclusion.
>> N64 games are alot smaller, therefor quicker aswell. <<
N64 games are also on cartridges, which are quite a bit faster then CDs.
>> Nintendo and Sega are the _true_ game consoles of the 90's. <<
True game consoles of the 90's? Not sure what you mean by that. My Playstation and Turbo-Graphix 16 weren't "True Game Consoles"?
-Janus
Edited by - Janus-DG on March 1, 2002 3:40:30 AM
How do you define who would win the console war?
In terms of sales, the PS2 will. In terms of great ''gamer'' games, Nintendo will. In terms of shear power, the X-Box will/has.
I''ve been both impressed and dissapointed by all three systems, but will always buy the great games for each system - I am not bothered by which one sells the most.
BTW I am a Gamecube/GBA developer, but my opinions on gaming HAS to be and IS completely neutral. In fact, my X-Box currently gets most attention ;-)
Marc Lambert
marc@darkhex.com
Gamecube Programmer - DigiGuys:
www.digi-guys.com
Amateur PSone programming:
www.yarozescene.co.uk
In terms of sales, the PS2 will. In terms of great ''gamer'' games, Nintendo will. In terms of shear power, the X-Box will/has.
I''ve been both impressed and dissapointed by all three systems, but will always buy the great games for each system - I am not bothered by which one sells the most.
BTW I am a Gamecube/GBA developer, but my opinions on gaming HAS to be and IS completely neutral. In fact, my X-Box currently gets most attention ;-)
Marc Lambert
marc@darkhex.com
Gamecube Programmer - DigiGuys:
www.digi-guys.com
Amateur PSone programming:
www.yarozescene.co.uk
Author
>>I am not bothered by which one sells the most.
I think the sales are important because the success/domination of one or two consoles might be to the detriment of others (ie Dreamcast). Nintendo might not be around one day. That is how I define a console war (from a business perspective of course)
>>N64 games are alot smaller, therefor quicker aswell.
do you mean in comparison to PS1 or PS2? I thought N64 games are bigger than PS1 games, and they still load faster.
>>and I can play games in the lounge room by hooking my PC up to my TV and plugging in my MS Sidewinder''s to my USB ports.
oh that sounds really convenient
>>Nintendo is a business. Microsoft is a business.
Just because Nintendo was there before Microsoft, then Microsoft shouldn''t try to compete with them?
sure everyone has a right to compete. but I think it sucks how Nintendo/Sega/etc have been pioneers of the industry but now have to face a multi-billion (or are we up to trillion?) dollar rival who is jumping on the bandwagon, raining on the parade.
I think the sales are important because the success/domination of one or two consoles might be to the detriment of others (ie Dreamcast). Nintendo might not be around one day. That is how I define a console war (from a business perspective of course)
>>N64 games are alot smaller, therefor quicker aswell.
do you mean in comparison to PS1 or PS2? I thought N64 games are bigger than PS1 games, and they still load faster.
>>and I can play games in the lounge room by hooking my PC up to my TV and plugging in my MS Sidewinder''s to my USB ports.
oh that sounds really convenient
>>Nintendo is a business. Microsoft is a business.
Just because Nintendo was there before Microsoft, then Microsoft shouldn''t try to compete with them?
sure everyone has a right to compete. but I think it sucks how Nintendo/Sega/etc have been pioneers of the industry but now have to face a multi-billion (or are we up to trillion?) dollar rival who is jumping on the bandwagon, raining on the parade.
who isn''t jumping on the bandwagon. everyone and there grandmother thinks there a programmer these days; just cause they''ve spent 2 seconds developing there personal webpage.
To the vast majority of mankind, nothing is more agreeable than to escape the need for mental exertion... To most people, nothing is more troublesome than the effort of thinking.
To the vast majority of mankind, nothing is more agreeable than to escape the need for mental exertion... To most people, nothing is more troublesome than the effort of thinking.
quote: Original post by Dr Chi
>>Nintendo is a business. Microsoft is a business.
Just because Nintendo was there before Microsoft, then Microsoft shouldn''t try to compete with them?
sure everyone has a right to compete. but I think it sucks how Nintendo/Sega/etc have been pioneers of the industry but now have to face a multi-billion (or are we up to trillion?) dollar rival who is jumping on the bandwagon, raining on the parade.
Coincidentally, that statement describes Sony just as accurately as it does Microsoft. Yet I dont seem to recall quite so many people jumping on Sony''s back when they launched the playstation. Then again, after seeing how Playstation hurt(killed?) the Saturn, and then to see the Playstation 2 hurt(kill?) the Dreamcast the next time around, maybe people are just a little more aware of the possible consequences this time around.
. it seems we cant do without those cool walkmans.
Actually.. the whole sony thing is completely different. Originally, sony hadn''t even thought of entering the console market, until nintendo came to them and asked for help developing a SuperNES-CD (similar to Sega-CD). Well, about 3/4 of the way finished, and Nintendo backed out of the deal, so sony took what they''d done (basically almost finished a complete console anyways) and finished it up to be a standalone (IE, doesn''t need any super nes to run) and put it to market. It sold amazingly well, so they produced a 2nd version. So, in all, it doesn''t describe sony as it does microsoft, because sony was brought in by Nintendo, and then Nintendo dropped their deal with sony, leaving sony a 3/4 console to either forget about, or make into something.
Billy - BillyB@mrsnj.com
Billy - BillyB@mrsnj.com
My opinion on this matter is that the PS2 will win the console wars pretty clearly. Why? Games. Playstation has been in the market longer than any of the other consoles, game developers have been developing for it the longest. Any idiot should be able to tell you that right now MOST of the hottest games are out for PS2. When I say most, I mean assuming there are 30 titles considered to be hot, PS2 has 20 of them, and no other console has >= 20 of those titles. Also the hottest coming titles are on PS2 also. In games, there simply is no other competitor.
I know Nintendo fans will be pissed at me for saying that. I know Nintendo develops top titles for their console - but that doesn''t make up more than 2 or 3 of the top 30 titles out. And unfortunately Nintendo doesn''t have many good third party developers on their consoles(like N64). That would be why it(N64) failed. Sure Mario Tennis, Smash Bros., Super Mario 64 were epic, but now someone OTHER than Nintendo needs to make great games...it never happened.
X-Box games...they have some good ones. In fact somen beast ones, a few epic ones. Like a PS2 but less in number.
Graphics, X-Box is obviously the raw winner. But raw winners only win on paper. As far as what the gamers can see, X-Box is not a clear winner. With games on the PS2 like Gran Turismo 3, Ace Combat 4, Final Fantasy X, and Ico, X-Box is still not the clear winner. Though I admit, it is ahead.
Future for all consoles? Many people say GameCube will loose hard. I think not - the graphics for GameCube are still to be disputed. If you look at the Metriod Prime movies for GameCube, you''ll think it was a Halo clone. GameCube will also have some solid and epic titles coming. Remember, we still have Zelda, Mario, Star Fox, and Metroid comin'' people. When they hit the industry, it may not recover for a while. X-Box''s future to me is like PS2...but smaller a lil'' worse. Basically, they will have solid, great, and epic titles. But smaller in number than the PS2 and in the port form a few months after it too. PS2 to me has the brightest future. It rocked this past Christmas season in terms of sales, spite being out for a year and competing against newer consoles(PS2 already proved itself). And it will have the best games coming out for it. With the release of the Dev Kits, Network Adapter, and hard drive - it could(note could) bring endless possibilities.
Note to X-Box fans now pissed at me. I believe the X-Box has a solid/good future, but following behind PS2 in terms of how good it does. I know X-Box has an epic title now(Halo) and its extremely great, but alone you can''t say that it beats out PS2 because it has epic titles, and of which I can name more than just one. Gran Turismo III, Grand Theft Auto III, Devil May Cry, and Ace Combat 4.
By the way, I define an epic game as something people will play years from now, and will look back and say "damn, that was a great game..." and it will be compare to games a few years from now, even when it''s outdated.
I know Nintendo fans will be pissed at me for saying that. I know Nintendo develops top titles for their console - but that doesn''t make up more than 2 or 3 of the top 30 titles out. And unfortunately Nintendo doesn''t have many good third party developers on their consoles(like N64). That would be why it(N64) failed. Sure Mario Tennis, Smash Bros., Super Mario 64 were epic, but now someone OTHER than Nintendo needs to make great games...it never happened.
X-Box games...they have some good ones. In fact somen beast ones, a few epic ones. Like a PS2 but less in number.
Graphics, X-Box is obviously the raw winner. But raw winners only win on paper. As far as what the gamers can see, X-Box is not a clear winner. With games on the PS2 like Gran Turismo 3, Ace Combat 4, Final Fantasy X, and Ico, X-Box is still not the clear winner. Though I admit, it is ahead.
Future for all consoles? Many people say GameCube will loose hard. I think not - the graphics for GameCube are still to be disputed. If you look at the Metriod Prime movies for GameCube, you''ll think it was a Halo clone. GameCube will also have some solid and epic titles coming. Remember, we still have Zelda, Mario, Star Fox, and Metroid comin'' people. When they hit the industry, it may not recover for a while. X-Box''s future to me is like PS2...but smaller a lil'' worse. Basically, they will have solid, great, and epic titles. But smaller in number than the PS2 and in the port form a few months after it too. PS2 to me has the brightest future. It rocked this past Christmas season in terms of sales, spite being out for a year and competing against newer consoles(PS2 already proved itself). And it will have the best games coming out for it. With the release of the Dev Kits, Network Adapter, and hard drive - it could(note could) bring endless possibilities.
Note to X-Box fans now pissed at me. I believe the X-Box has a solid/good future, but following behind PS2 in terms of how good it does. I know X-Box has an epic title now(Halo) and its extremely great, but alone you can''t say that it beats out PS2 because it has epic titles, and of which I can name more than just one. Gran Turismo III, Grand Theft Auto III, Devil May Cry, and Ace Combat 4.
By the way, I define an epic game as something people will play years from now, and will look back and say "damn, that was a great game..." and it will be compare to games a few years from now, even when it''s outdated.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
