Xbox 360 is NOT a Revolution

[Naraku_Diabolos]

http://cube.ign.com/articles/670/670078p1.html

Let's face it. Xbox 360 is powerful now (until PS3 comes and storms over 360's graphics), but does it measure up in games and gameplay? What about mascots? Oh sure, they have Blinx, the cat who 'could' control time, but it looked like a rip-off of Lugi's Mansion AND it seemed like a rip-off of Zelda: OoT.

Yes, they have Halo, which they are high-tech GI Joe's who are wearing shiny Teletubbie costumes and are trying to defeat evil space aliens who are trying to destroy Earth. YAWN, wow, we've had a lot of movies and books based off of that concept, such as War of the Worlds and the book series Animorphs, where the alien Yeerks were trying to enslave humans by going into their brains (which is still my #1 favorite and original book series). What a plot line Halo has. Plus that, my friend already has a 360, and he can't play any of his older Xbox games on it. Talk about backward-compatibility, Microsoft.

Microsoft doesn't have franchises such as Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Pokemon, F-Zero etc.

Are you even willing to shell out $400 just to play Xbox games that have better graphics and still have the same gameplay as the original system did? Besides, those games run from $50-60+. No doubt that PS3 will cost $700+ and their games will run for $60-80.

Or, are you willing to pay for a Revolution that is under $200 and has their new controller that will have limitless gameplay options?

You decide what to buy, but be warned: 360 is an enhanced version of the original but has prettier graphics. And the system has more features. Who would want to buy a video game system that looks like a freaking TANPON?

 

[Chris]

Let's face it. Xbox 360 is powerful now (until PS3 comes and storms over 360's graphics), but does it measure up in games and gameplay? What about mascots? Oh sure, they have Blinx, the cat who 'could' control time, but it looked like a rip-off of Lugi's Mansion AND it seemed like a rip-off of Zelda: OoT.

Have you actually read about or played Blinx? NONE of the features of that game come anywhere close to "ripping off" Luigi's Mansion or Ocarina of Time. The game makes use of the Xbox's hardware to pause, rewind, fast forward, slow and record events in time to fight enemies and solve puzzles. OoT simply involved going into the past and the future. Luigi's Mansion's vacuum cleaner sucked in ghosts and shot out elements. Blinx's controls time. Big difference.

Yes, they have Halo, which they are high-tech GI Joe's who are wearing shiny Teletubbie costumes and are trying to defeat evil space aliens who are trying to destroy Earth. YAWN, wow, we've had a lot of movies and books based off of that concept, such as War of the Worlds and the book series Animorphs, where the alien Yeerks were trying to enslave humans by going into their brains (which is still my #1 favorite and original book series). What a plot line Halo has. Plus that, my friend already has a 360, and he can't play any of his older Xbox games on it. Talk about backward-compatibility, Microsoft.

That's because he has to DOWNLOAD a patch for the Xbox 360 to recognize some of the Xbox games. Older Xbox games are difficult to emulate on the 360 because of how the way the machine was built. And Microsoft is still adding games that they're making possible to be backwards compatible.

Microsoft doesn't have franchises such as Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Pokemon, F-Zero etc.

All of those are NINTENDO property. Of course they don't have them. e_e

Are you even willing to shell out $400 just to play Xbox games that have better graphics and still have the same gameplay as the original system did? Besides, those games run from $50-60+. No doubt that PS3 will cost $700+ and their games will run for $60-80.

The system JUST launched. Of course games don't look appealing now. ALL consoles are like this. Look at what the GameCube first had to offer. Most people were dying from waiting for Super Smash Bros. Melee to come out due to the lackluster launch titles (although Super Monkey Ball was awesome). Just wait it out. Developers haven't even started working on the console. Wait until mid-way into its life before you give any kind of ridiculous statements like that.

Or, are you willing to pay for a Revolution that is under $200 and has their new controller that will have limitless gameplay options?

And developers that are confused as to how the hell to work about making games using their controller. Not to mention, barely anything has even been mentioned about what's in store for the Revolution. And if history is to repeat, Nintendo will once again abandon the console by making either a new handheld or a new console and only provide a few amount of good games of their own while letting 3rd party developers go at it with their console. One of the big problems of the N64 and GameCube is that they had very few actually good Nintendo made games with their franchises. Mostly everything you'll find on either console is a 3rd party developed game.

You decide what to buy, but be warned: 360 is an enhanced version of the original but has prettier graphics. And the system has more features. Who would want to buy a video game system that looks like a freaking TANPON?

Again. Wait it out. The console JUST came out. It's not gonna have much to work with on launch. ALL game consoles are like this. ¬¬

Btw, why are we listening to IGN? They're the most biased form of the media to ever roam the earth. Or have we forgotten their numerous attempts to bash the Nintendo DS and praise the PSP, even by the people running the DS section?

 

[JoshYEAH]

http://cube.ign.com/articles/670/670078p1.html

Let's face it. Xbox 360 is powerful now (until PS3 comes and storms over 360's graphics), but does it measure up in games and gameplay? What about mascots? Oh sure, they have Blinx, the cat who 'could' control time, but it looked like a rip-off of Lugi's Mansion AND it seemed like a rip-off of Zelda: OoT.

Blinx... meh, read what Ed said, he summd it up nicely. Want a good mascot and launch title?

Perfect Dark Zero.
Hugs and Kisses~
Rare

Yes, they have Halo, which they are high-tech GI Joe's who are wearing shiny Teletubbie costumes and are trying to defeat evil space aliens who are trying to destroy Earth. YAWN, wow, we've had a lot of movies and books based off of that concept, such as War of the Worlds and the book series Animorphs, where the alien Yeerks were trying to enslave humans by going into their brains (which is still my #1 favorite and original book series). What a plot line Halo has. Plus that, my friend already has a 360, and he can't play any of his older Xbox games on it. Talk about backward-compatibility, Microsoft.

Actually, Halo has a rather good plot in an honest opinion. Although, I think many will disagree. Halo was/is a good game, why?
The levels are beautifully designed, the enemy AI is perfect according to the difficulty level, and everything about the game is pretty damn awesome.
Oh, and it's awesome online too, although a tad on the overkill-with-12 year olds side.

Microsoft doesn't have franchises such as Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Pokemon, F-Zero etc.

That's because Microsoft isn't Nintendo. Omg.

Are you even willing to shell out $400 just to play Xbox games that have better graphics and still have the same gameplay as the original system did? Besides, those games run from $50-60+. No doubt that PS3 will cost $700+ and their games will run for $60-80.

Yes, because I'm an Xbox fan and I like the look of the 360, oh, and it has new games that I, and other people will want to play.

Or, are you willing to pay for a Revolution that is under $200 and has their new controller that will have limitless gameplay options?

Yes, because I'm a Nintendo fan and I like the look of the revolution, oh, and it has new games that I, and other people will want to play.

Wordplay is awesome.

You decide what to buy, but be warned: 360 is an enhanced version of the original but has prettier graphics. And the system has more features. Who would want to buy a video game system that looks like a freaking TANPON?

NEWSFLASH FOR YA KID.
Most new consoles are similar to their predecessors, with added stuff, and cool new prospects. OMG YES. REALLY. And using a "Tanpon" arguement is pathetic. ;/

Weeeeeee~

 

[Chris]

NEWSFLASH FOR YA KID.
Most new consoles are similar to their predecessors, with added stuff, and cool new prospects.

To add on to this..

Playstation + DVD drive + new black, thin casing that can be set vertical or horizontal + new stuff to make the console 128-bit and compete in that realm (I ain't exactly a technical genius, so I'll let Latios or someone else do a better explanation of this later on >_>) = Playstation 2.

 

[WinterSnowblind]

Very, very fanboyish topic. But as the previous posters have already pointed out most of your massive, massive flaws, it makes my life easier.

The one thing I will point out however is that the PS3 is not going to storm over the 360 graphically wise. The PS3 is infact almost EXACTLY the same as the Xbox 360. It has been stated, many times by numourus developers, including Hideo Kojima - when he stated that the Xbox could very easily pull off Metal Gear Solid 4, in real-time. So please, what does the PS3 actually have to show for itself past a few tech demos?

And secondly, they have not told us how much the Revolution will be, but if it wants to compete with the PS3/Xbox it will have to be more expensive than people are hoping for. You can say that you don't need a powerful console, but when we now have massivly detailed games with super realistic physics, advanced A.I. and huge game worlds, then sorry, but power if a very neccesairy part of gaming. And about the 360's backwards compatability, over 100 games currently work, so unless your friend bought a core pack I have no idea what you're talking about. They're slowly patching games, so that eventually ALL games will work, but right now they're focusing on making the popular ones work. Microsofts choice to focus more on new software being better, rather than making original Xbox games work was a good move in my opinion. Sure, the fanboys use this as a reason to make the 360 sound bad, but in the end, I'm buying a 360 to play NEW games, not all my old ones. But as I said, they'll all work eventually.

And as for the Revolution having limitless possibilities? we haven't even seen any games for it, so you're just pulling this out of your ***. The DS was supposedly going to use the touch screen completely reinvent games, what have we seen so far? a map? wow, I can literly feel the advancement.

Oh, and before you go bashing Halo anymore, maybe you should actually play the game, or at least find out about it, because saying it doesn't have a plot just makes you look completely ignorant. I can assure you that Halo 2's Covenant story arc has a lot more depth to it than "rescue the princess" ever will.

The one positive thing I can say is, true, Microsoft doesn't really have many big franchises such as Zelda or Mario, but it does have a LOT of third party support, hundreds of great games still come out for it. They made not be Zelda, but that doesn't make them great. If you're happy with one or two games like that per console, then so be it. Other people would like some varity.

So please, do you have an argument against the Xbox that isn't completely based on miss-information and fanboyish spite?

 

[Swifty]

The levels are beautifully designed

I hope to God you're not talking about the first Halo.

However, the 2nd Halo? I definitely would agree with you there.

 

[Chris]

Actually, I'll have to agree that the plot of Halo ain't exactly anything new and that the first game was simply orgasmed over by people who've either never touched a FPS on the PC in their life or were just marveling over the (now dated) graphics. At that time, all there currently was was the Playstation 2 and Dreamcast. Both were the first to enter the 128-bit era early. Xbox and GameCube soon came later and slightly improved on this to get an upper advantage.

 

[WinterSnowblind]

"there are those who said this day would never come.. what have they to say now?"

Come on, Halo may not have the most original plot, but it was certainly very well done. The first one didn't have much to show except for introducing the first Halo, and some awesome characters, such as Guilty Spark, but the second games story was pretty awesome, especially from the perspective of the Covenant, as you watch them pretty much fall apart from the inside. The only bad thing I can say about Halo's story, is the ending to the second one. "Sir! finishing this war!" it ended far, far too soon, without really explaining anything.. but that's why we're waiting for a sequel.

 

[JoshYEAH]

Shadowfax, I agree completely. And that was totally a ploy to increase the Hype of the inevitable Halo 3. ;/
But yeah, I think I'm one of the few who thinks that Halo has a really awesome storyline that certainly pulls it's own punches at some points, it has pretty good prosteocts, supposing Bungie don't piss it about in Halo 3 and mess up the ending. Halo 3 can be so much in single player, alas, it will be overhyped and get stick because of people wanting too much from it. But, what can ya do?

And yeah Swifty, when I talk about all those good points, the focus is mainly Halo 2

 

[Swifty]

Both were the first to enter the 128-bit era early.

Funny how the X-Box isn't a 128-bit machine when it's actually 32-bit machine, yet it was the most powerful in its generation. So is the GameCube which is kinda ironic since the N64 had a 64-bit processor... And yet it's more powerful than its predecessor and it's 128-bit competitor, the PS2.

I've never understood the bit wars. It certainly mattered back in the days in the NES era, when the largest number you could store was 255. :\ It seems to have ended with the Playstation 2, X-Box, and GameCube era since 32-bits is enough for anything these days and there are certainly numerous other factors that make a system more powerful other than simple "bit power." Hell it wasn't until two years ago when PCs finally started making the transition to 64-bit processors in the consumer market.

And here I am, still with an Athlon XP processor.

 

[WinterSnowblind]

Can't believe you put Oblivion in there as a rehashed game, you should die for that. Oblivion doesn't follow the same plot, it doesn't continue on from Morrowind, Arena nor Daggerfall, it's a completely new story, in a completely new province with completely new chracters. I see games such as Zelda, that do the same thing time and time again to be more of a rehash than that. Go through dungeons, find items, save the princess, etc. But yeah, I do understand what you're saying, but I don't agree. Nintendo are the kings at rehashing the same thing over and over again. Pokemon itself is a prime example of that. There's been, what, 9 games, with next to no advancement.

And although I respect Nintendo for what they're doing with the Revolution, I don't have a great amount of faith in it, as I've pointed out before. If it's done right, it should be great, and it'll be loads of fun especially playing with friends, but if they do revolutionise gaming in the way they're trying to do, I see the Revolution as mainly being a secondary console, to sit alongside the PS3 or Xbox 360. I don't think it's going to take off as the gaming revolution the way they're hoping. Most people pass the remote right off as a bad gimmick, without even finding out what it's capable of, it's never going to be popular amongst more casual fans.

And as I've stated before, this is basically the same thing they tried to do with the DS - add a new layer of gameplay, which is essentially nothing but a gimmick. I'am yet to play a game on the DS that actually uses it's features in a clever way and really revolutionises gaming in anyway. The one game that really does anything with it, is Nintendogs.. that was fun for about a week, and can barley be classified as a game anyway.

I'd love to see Nintendo get this right, and for the Revolution to become the most popular thing ever, but we're yet to see anything solid from Nintendo that shows otherwise. In my opinion at least, it just sounds like another DS attempt where the remote will be used as nothing more than a gimmick, and the actual controller will be used for the core gameplay.

 

[WinterSnowblind]

Hey, the whole "die" thing wasn't serious, don't worry. I get what you're saying, but it's basically the same with the Elder Scrolls. As I said before, the story and all that is different each time, but there's not really much of a focus on story in the Elder Scrolls. You basically create your own character and are thrown into an absoloutly massive, immersive world where you can pretty much do whatever you want. That's why it's fun that's why it's great. You could just put the game in to kill a few hundred townsfolk, or steal all their food so nobody has anything to eat - so that they have to pay you a ridicolous amount of money. Or you could simply just wonder around the massive, massive terrain looking for secret stuff. The story is there if you want to follow it, but if you don't, then simply make your own story.

Unsure what you meant about the fanboy thing. I'm definatly an Elder Scrolls fanboy, I'm not ashamed to admit that. I'm yet to play any game I'd consider better. But if you're talking about consoles, I disagree. I do own every console, I'd just rate Microsoft's as the best As some who actually owns all three, I'm sure I have the right to do that, I'm not just bringing up tired statements that other people have made about them. I'm more than willing to give Sony and Nintendo a fair chance next gen, but as I said, they've yet to show us anything solid that really convinces me otherwise. The PS3 has had a few tech demo's, and they've lied to us about the specs, and the system itself seems to be vapour ware (no vents.. at all? Even the water cooled 360 needs them, yet this holy more powerful system doesn't need any holes in the entire thing?) and well.. I'm sure I've made my veiw on the Revolution clear.

 

[ghost master]

I read this before it seemed reasonable but, this creator warped everything. Also yes IGN is biased when people ask questions in their mailbag or they write something that is about their opinion. I don't recall the DS editor bashing the DS but, I do recall the cube editor bashing the DS. I remember bashing when it was considered a gimmicky, clunky, and graphically weaker than the PSP. For the longest time the DS recieved crappy, short games just using the touch screen because it was there. The IGN editors are biased when asked their opinion on the matter you can easily avoid those editorials. I think the topic creator warped things. There was also one on the PS3.
Also there seems to be a misconception. The 360 and the PS3 run pretty much at the same level and their isn't that much of a difference. If you ask me the 360 is doing better because it will most likely be cheaper and comes out a good lot sooner.
The article pretty much said that it has virtual console and that Microsoft can't really compete against that, it will be cheaper, It will sport some hardcore nintendo online games like SSB online, It has a large variety of first parties that neither companies have, the experience is similar to the previous generation, The target audience is a lot bigger and if Nintendogs is any proof than we should see it happening, many genres will be changed for the best like MP3, the 360 has limited quantities, Revolution is small, stylish, quick and quiet, and of course the controller.

 

[Bulk]

To Shadowfax - Games that take advantage of the touchscreen in a way no Xbox could.

Pac-Pix - Draw Pacman
Wario Ware Touched - Every mini game (over 200) is controlled by touch screen and blowing on the screen. In one part, you draw a line to stop a bouncing ball falling to the floor. Simple but highly effective
Metroid Prime Hunters (I've only played the demo) - Pinpoint accuracy first person shooter. If Halo was like this you'd be all over it
Advance Wars: Dual Strike - Instant selection of units meaning faster and funner game play

And, games I haven't played but do know use the touch screen for "revolutionary" gaming.

Nintendogs
Feel the Magic: XY/XX
Kirby: Canvas Curse
Yu-Gi-Yo: Super Battle Card Game Thing...

And that's all I can think of but that's still more than you could come up with and none of those games use either screen as a map.

 

[Talo!]

Isnt halo 2 the one of the highest selling games of all time. A gaming system doesnt need a mascot to have good gameplay. The problem with big franchises is that a lot of people only buy the games because of the name and not because it is good. Oblivion is not a rehashed game. It takes place in a completely different continent and in no way relies on you knowing the story line of morrowind to know whats going on in it. Advanced wars DSs use of the touch screen doesnt exactly improve game play and i dont use the touch screen when I play it.

 

[CoolTrainerTerry]

To me, the Xbox 360 isn't appealing. Sure, it's got better graphics, but graphics isn't everything. Gameplay is a key feature for games, not graphics. A game could have the best graphics ever and still be a bunch of crap. The worst looking game in history could be the best game ever because of its gameplay. A couple of my friends got an Xbox 360, and they don't even work. They returned it, and got a new one. It still did not work. At my local Wal-Mart, it wouldn't work, either. They pushed the whole revolutionary gameplay thing way too much, but how would we know if they don't work.
They should have spent more time on the system itself, and not the graphics of the game. Don't even get me started on the control. To me, they could have just released 360 games on the original Xbox instead of making a whole new system. It's all for the money.

 

[Talo!]

http://www.devhood.com/messages/message_view-2.aspx?thread_id=92760&current=last
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2002mar/bga20020325010882.htm
http://www.time.com/time/bestandworst/2004/video.html

Nope.

Well that shut me down. I still remember it being highest selling in something. Must have been an opinion poll. Still it is one of the best FPS ever made and has amazing reviews from websites and everyone I know that has the game. The revolution controller is very revolutionary but to me it seems that it might limit the types of games that can be played on it. Any way none of this really matters to me because Im buying a xbox 360 just to play oblivion and now that ive learned about the other games coming out on it Im definately getting one.

 

[Talo!]

Like I said it is ONE OF the best FPS ever but not the best. Im sure everyone will agree that it is a great game and the guys in those shiny suits have become a xbox trademark.

 

[The Battousai]

This topic reeks of fanboyism. I'm proably buying a ps3 (xbox 360 seems rushed and IMO not a real next gen upgrade), but nonetheless xbox 360 is a great system with a great online service and will be worth the buyers money. I'm probably buying ps3 though because I can only afford one and ps3 will most likely have the most 3rd party support of the three next gen consoles. I also miss my ps2 like crazy and still kept the games just in case I buy a ps3 (and that gamestop gives you a pathetic $5 for each one) so backwards compatibility is important to me. The bottom line don't put people down by disgracing their purchase (or future purchase), I hope you enjoy your revolution, I don't like it but you may and I'm not going to stop you from buying one. I could ramble about revolution's controller all night or about how much nintendo milks their game series (mario's like in every game now) but nintendo still has some strong points (virtual console, the awesome zelda franchise, suber smash bros.) and I'm not going to put down your purchase.

 

[WinterSnowblind]

Again it has to be said, the 360 is next generation, whether or not you want to believe. It's been proved on many occasions that the PS3 is NOT more powerful than the 360. So people expecting it to have better graphics, are going to be sorely dissapointed. And from what we've seen so far the 360 seems to be taking over most of the third party support. It's got GTA, Final Fantasy, Ridge Racer, Resident Evil, pretty much all the big developers. All that seems to be left for the PS3 is ports of 360 games that have already been out for much longer, and will likely be a lot cheaper. And as I pointed out in another topic, Sony are very well known for producing for shoddy equipment.

Plus, it's a little early to be judging the system. Look at the PS2 for example, what did it have to show at launch? a slightly more advanced Tekken 3 and a near identical Ridge Racer? wow! next gen. But now look at what it's capable of. You can't judge the system 2 days after launch.

And theultimatebulk, yes, there are a few games that use the touch screen for something other than a map, but that's not the point. The point is there is yet to be any game that uses it for any real purpose other than just a gimmicky them, usually for mini games. NOTHING that revolutionises gaming in any way. Feel the Magic, Pac Pix, Nintendogs. All just little mini game complilation sort of things.