Jason Moyer on 6/5/2005 at 02:11
Quote Posted by Renzatic
They're the exact same screenshots posted for the PC version...no difference whatsoever.
Odd, isn't it? I didn't realize that until right after I posted.
Jason Moyer on 6/5/2005 at 02:13
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
Also, there'll never ever be a console that can out-perform a PC, it just isn't possible to bring that kind of performance to a console budget.
Didn't the Dreamcast, PS2, and Xbox all outperform PC's when they were initially released?
When DX2 and Thief 3 came out, they both required decent spec PC's to run well, and that was several years into the xbox's life cycle.
Spike14 on 6/5/2005 at 06:56
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
XBox 360... what happened to XBoxes 2-359?
Also, there'll never ever be a console that can out-perform a PC, it just isn't possible to bring that kind of performance to a console budget.
Thank-you! :D
Finally someone who agrees with me.
Is there any speculation as to what the PC system specs for Oblivion are going to be? I want to make sure I have a PC that's ready to rock on the day of release (already got my copy pre-ordered and pre-paid :cool: ).
Quote Posted by JC Denton
and cuz idiots will think xbox 2 is lesser than playstation 3
It probably will be. PS2 > XBox, so it logically follows that [sequel to PS2] > [sequel to XBox], unless Sony screws up big-time (e.g.: Removing on-line (laughs at GameCube and the fact XBox Live cost money)) or changes their controller design (laughs at XBox and GameCube), or makes removes backwards compatibility (laughs at the fact GameCube wasn't cartridge-based, laughs at the fact XBox doesn't have a prequel thanks to the fact Microsoft should've stuck with PCs instead of screwing their roots for less-than-half of teenagers w/consoles everywhere), or makes it so they loose money on every console and go broke (laughs at Dreamcast, laughs at the fact that Microsoft Games looses $300 on every XBox sold).
If you think XBox 360 (ooh, VR? No, just Microsoft Games in all their dazzling stupidity) is going to be greater than PS3, then you don't know where things currently stand as far as video games. According to a GameFAQs poll, PS2 is the foremost gaming console, followed by PC, with XBox in a distant third, trailed by GameCube, then portable consoles.
Quote Posted by JC Denton
Its good that xbox360 is more powerfull than PC's now... because it means that you PC gamers with your sweet games can be ported to xbox really easy(with XNA also) and games can be made equally for PC and xbox2 and they're wont be no more DX2 disasters
A game console will never be more powerful (Strontium Dog already said this, just re-iterating because it doesn't seem to sink in) than a PC, owing to the fact that game consoles aren't upgradeable (to a great extent), and the technology that has to be put into a game console and then be released can (and will be, unless the company designing it lusts after loss-of-potential-profit) be released earlier, raw, for the PC.
Quote Posted by Renzatic
(ain't gonna call it no 360 no sir)
(honest-to-God no sarcasm) You are the only sane one.
Quote Posted by Jason Moyer
When DX2 and Thief 3 came out, they both required decent spec PC's to run well, and that was several years into the xbox's life cycle.
My PC was "several years into it's life cycle", and it would run DX2 and Thief 3 no problem.
Bottom Line: PC > Game Consoles, PS2 > XBox, PS3 > XBox 2 U 360 (whatever Microsoft Games decides to call it).
Sorry, but I'm sick of console-fanatics stomping all over PCs good (and well-deserved) name.
For reference: I own PS2, Dreamcast, N64, and I'll admit that they are all inferior to the PC. I considered buying an XBox not long ago, and didn't, because their controller design sucks, having to pay for on-line blows, and Halo isn't worth it (I can play Halo on my PC, and Halo 2 isn't worth the money :cheeky: ).
And don't think my anti-XBox is because I don't own an XBox. I have a friend who has both and he agrees that XBox is inferior.
And what's with XBox's massive size?
Spike14 :thumb:
P.S.: Strontium Dog, you rule :thumb:.
P.P.S.: [searching for common ground] Does everyone agree Oblivion is going to rule? :cool:
RyushiBlade on 6/5/2005 at 21:14
You really don't want to play this game with me, bud. I have a PS2 and an XBox, a Dreamcast, a PSone, and an N64. I would mention that I have a PC, but that's a bit self-explanatory.
Unlike you, I will address both sides. I will not address the Gamecube; I do not own one nor have I played one, so I have no right to judge it (*raises an accusing brow*). The upsides of the XBox is its enormous hard drive which, by the way, comes standard. A much smaller hard drive is sold for the PS2, but must be bought seperately.
One of the biggest pluses of an XBox is the simple four controller hook-up. Both the PSone and the PS2 are plagued with the problem of having only two controller ports. For God's sake, it's the new millenium. Despite even the N64 having two controllers, the PS2 came out only a few years ago and the fact that it doesn't have four controllers is nearly inexcusable. So obviously, the XBox (and the Gamecube, I suppose) has far, far better party games.
The PS2 has also been proven to be very, very flimsy. It is the most likely to break versus the XBox. The upside of this is portability, but I remind you that people rarely carry their consoles around with them.
The XBox comes with the ability to record songs from CDs and store them on the XBox hard drive. Other games will allow you to play these songs while you play. The PS2 does nothing like this at all.
The PS2 does, I admit, have a better controller. But XBox can hardly copy the design for the PS2. The original XBox controller was, also admittedly, very big and clunky. But their new controller (which now comes standard) is a much better fit.
Games! Honestly, you can't judge the console on the games. Microsoft doesn't make most of their XBox games (they do oftentimes lend a helping hand, more so than Sony.) The PS2 has a broader range of games, but this isn't necessarily a good thing. A lot of those games are bad. Having more games does nothing to make the console itself better. The XBox also has a good amount of games, and a lot of these are very well done. The XBox specializes in first person shooters and the ilk, while the PS2 specializes in RPGs. Both have racing games and fighters.
The graphics are an iffy subject. The XBox does hold more potential. But not all games utilize this because it's more expensive. (Halo 2 was done wonderfully and really utilized the graphical capabilities of the XBox. It was also an extremely expensive game to make.) I don't program games, but I doubt the PS2 could match the graphics presented in Halo 2.
Backwards compatability is an absolutely idiotic subject to bring up. The XBox has no predecessor, which again doesn't make it any lesser the console. The XBox 2 will most likely be backwards compatable. Another issue I have with the PS2 that, though it's backwards compatable, the memory cards aren't. You have to start all over again with any PSone game if you start it on the PS2. The PS2 also doesn't enhance the graphics at all of the old game. I can't say for sure if the XBox 2 will be able to do this, but because of it's hardware, I think it's likely they could atleast pull off some nice anti-aliasing (taking the average of two pixels and placing a new pixel in between, softening up the edges and making the game look nicer.)
Remember how I said Microsoft lends a helping hand in many of its software titles? There's a reason for that. You hit the nail on the head in the fact that Microsoft loses money on every XBox sold. They make much of it back on their software. It may not be the safest way to play, but it allows the consumers to buy a fully loaded console. And just to be fair, Microsoft can buy Sony out completely.
That's about all I have to say for now. *grins broadly*
SithLord2001 on 7/5/2005 at 02:14
Well I will say as far as the Xbox360 outpowering a PC goes...I will say that for the money you will spend on the Xbox360 compared to having to keep upgrading your PC I think really it IS more powerful because you know the games now are probably only testing the low to mid range capabilites, as the next few years go on you'll get even better games graphically on the Xbox360 without having to upgrade your graphics card or your entire PC....Also I think the Xbox>ps2 in terms on On-line yes you pay for it with the xbox but look how much more stable it is than PS2's I mean there's less Lag and better reliability. Graphically it is better than the PS2 and is definitly better when it comes to sound. and of course it comes with a standard Hard Drive. IMO lately Xbox has been coming out with better games than the PS2 even in the RPG categoy. So really I think the Xbox now is better and the Xbox360 will be better than the PS3 and What Nintendo's "revolution" or w/e (I don't own a GC but I hear almost nothing on because it sucks except for a few games so I don't follow their progress at all)
EDIT: Although as far as backwards compatibility I heard that might not be included in the Xbox360 due to the change in hardware and so on...not sure if it's changed but that would certainly hurt MS if they couldn't get that to work...
RyushiBlade on 7/5/2005 at 02:34
I concur, Sithlord.
The last I heard, backwards compatability was looking better because Microsoft knew it needed a strong opening line up, and that it would please more customers. No promises, but it's a definite possibility.
Briareos H on 9/5/2005 at 14:36
Quote Posted by RyushiBlade
Games! Honestly, you can't judge the console on the games.
Yes. Yes you can. And you have to. On what else can you judge a console ? Horsepower ?
RyushiBlade on 9/5/2005 at 20:13
Yes. Because otherwise you miss the point of the argument completely. Like I said, Microsoft helps out a lot in the games produced for the XBox, but it doesn't design them. Similarly, Sony doesn't design or produce many of the games for the PS2. Both rely on third parties for this. Judging the consoles and judging the games available for the consoles are two completely different things, and as such should not be pinned on the creators of the console (Microsoft and XBox respectively.)
If you want to talk about that, fine, but I still stand by my original conclusion. Did I not make one? Hm. Well. It's all up to preference and, when push comes to shove, I don't give a toss what anyone else likes. I like the XBox, and if you don't, then go stuff yourself, heh. I don't care. Woo! :thumb:
Briareos H on 9/5/2005 at 20:33
I admit you CAN judge on... well I'm not saying performance because the architectures are too different... ok so basically horsepower or accessories. But what is it good for ? I mean, people play games, they don't say "mine is bigger than yours". In the end, the goal is to know where you have the most fun, or am I missing something ?
Pisces on 10/5/2005 at 01:04
Quote Posted by Spike14
A game console will never be more powerful (Strontium Dog already said this, just re-iterating because it doesn't seem to sink in) than a PC, owing to the fact that game consoles aren't upgradeable (to a great extent), and the technology that has to be put into a game console and then be released can (and will be, unless the company designing it lusts after loss-of-potential-profit) be released earlier, raw, for the PC.
Stop making yourself look like an idoit. An upgradeable system can never run to the same potential as an insinc system. Everyone knows that and it is the reason why this computer is losing 150 MB of ram when only running 50MB of programs.
Quote Posted by RyushiBlade
The PS2 does, I admit, have a better controller. But XBox can hardly copy the design for the PS2. The original XBox controller was, also admittedly, very big and clunky. But their new controller (which now comes standard) is a much better fit.
I think that is just a matter of taste. The xbox controller is moulded to fit your hands, while you need hands moulded to the controller for a PS2 controller. And I like the original controllers much more because I don't have the hands of a 5 year old.
As for games, xbox has Halo 2, morrowind (which is also on PC), jade empire and fable. PS2 has bushido blade and thats the only game I liked on it and it is a PS1 game. I think consoles are better for 1st person games and fighting games but the computer definitly has the high ground for RTS for obvious reasons (mouse).
