Xbox release games (1 Viewer)

[JohnE]

It's not a release game, but one title I'm VERY interested in is Enclave. I haven't read or seen a whole lot, but what I have seen sounds and looks very promising.

 

[James D S]

Halo looks very impressive.
As does Project Gotham and Marrowmind.
News on these games is not coming out fast enough to keep up with my excitement.

 

[Derrik Draven]

Halo, Project Gotham (damage modeling...YES!!!), and Blood Wake are my MUST have's, for now.
To a lesser degree, Oddworld is close behind.
Does anyone know when Gotham is scheduled for release? Can't remember if I read it was a launch title or not.

 

[Dean DeMass]

Does anyone know when Gotham is scheduled for release? Can't remember if I read it was a launch title or not.

Well, if they go by the same release date model as Metroplois Street Racer, it will be delayed so many times your head will spin. However, in the end, MSR is still the best racer I have ever played.
-Dean-
------------------
Link Removed
"I've seen you and you are not cool."

 

[Morgan Jolley]

Umm...am I the only one who still keeps in mind that the X-Box isn't worth it? If nobody buys the games on it, they will end up on another console anyway. The PS2 has more functionality out of the box than the X-Box and is the same price. The X-Box itself it not worth it, even when all of its extra components are added on. Add to the fact that all of its good games will be available somewhere else and that the GameCube is actually more powerful in the polygon department. Yes, it is, I have read articles about the specs and the GC is the most powerful visually, with the X-Box the most powerful in its audio. Think about how big the XB is. Its huge! And even if a game or two ends up being good and not just speculation (there are games for the PS2 that will be good without a doubt, same for the GC), you have to use that ugly and big controller to play them. Microsoft did study groups to find out what games want to be in a console, and they must have skipped over the parts about small controllers that dont have too many fae buttons or the size of the console actually mattering or the HDD being more than just 8 GB.

 

[BrianB]

quote: They did loads of testing to come up with this design. Most E3 attendees didn't have anything negative to say about the feel of the controller.[/quote]
Everyone I know who has used the controller has hated it.
quote: I'm rooting for XBox because it's an American console, with American components.[/quote]
Why on /earth/ does this matter? American components? I think you'll find the vast majority of XBox machines will be built & assembled outside the USA. Do you plan on only playing games created in the USA too?
Why on /earth/ does it matter what nationality designed the machine?
------------------
Nothing In Particular
[Edited last by BrianB on July 24, 2001 at 08:47 AM]

 

[James D S]

Pride Brian, pride...

 

[BrianB]

Pride Brian, pride...

What on earth does that have to do with anything? Does this mean your HTF components are all American made? Are all your movies American made, with American production teams?

------------------
Nothing In Particular

 

[paul h]

I thought gaming was about the games and not where the console was made...ho hum...anyway it's not like MS needs the money!
The HDD for the PS2 will eventually be used for storing movies/music/games and whatever other content Sony will offer for downloading, that's why it's 40gb.
I won't spend another £300, or whatever price the XBox comes in at, until it has a decent selection of exclusive titles that i want...at present that isn't the case.

 

[Jason Seaver]

I don't think anyone's saying that the X-Box being made by an American company will play much of a factor in their purchasing decisions. Just, all else being equal, that they'd rather have an American product on top.
Not that it'll mean much. Those "Made In The USA" stickers on the box of the Atari Jaguar didn't move a whole lot of systems.

 

[BrianB]

Just, all else being equal, that they'd rather have an American product on top.

Like I said: why, though? What does it matter? It doesn't indicate the games will be any better - in fact, if anything, it means they'll be worse as Japanese software houses have been traditionally slow to support non-Japanese machines.
------------------
Nothing In Particular

 

[James D S]

Wow Brian. You are taking this a tad serious, aren't you?

 

[Jason Seaver]

Just, all else being equal, that they'd rather have an American product on top.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like I said: why, though? What does it matter? It doesn't indicate the games will be any better - in fact, if anything, it means they'll be worse as Japanese software houses have been traditionally slow to support non-Japanese machines.

Um, you saw the "all else being equal", right?
I don't know as it matters in any terribly important way. People just tend to root for the home team. A lot of my neighbors could probably save themselves a lot of heartache by deciding to be Lakers fans, but continue to root for the Celtics anyway.
And isn't it kind of paradoxical to say Americans shouldn't care about the system's nationality because the Japanese do?

 

[BrianB]

And isn't it kind of paradoxical to say Americans shouldn't care about the system's nationality because the Japanese do?

Should have explained that in more detail: most Japanese software companies haven't given much support for US machines, not because they're American (though it may be part of it), but because, generally, they've sold anywhere near enough to make it worthwhile for them in Japan or elsewhere.
------------------
Nothing In Particular

 

[James D S]

quote: ...Most Japanese software companies haven't given much support for US machines, not because they're American.[/quote]
Actually that's not far off in the sense that Japanese companies in the past have not supported the few American grown systems largely because the Japanese populace is far more jingoistic than we are. American made systems do not sell well over there, not for lack of software or hardware prowess, (indeed the 2600, TI-1XX, Jaguar and 3DO were technologic 'juggernauts' in their day) but the simple fact they were not Japanese. Video gaming is considered a religion over there, as I'm sure you've picked up on, and they are very territorial.
All that being said, I seriously doubt anyone is going to pick up an XBox for the simple reason that it was designed and manufactured in America by our Sony, Microsoft. Most likely, the system features and software will sell the units, primarily. If the games are not up to par (PS2 anyone?), the system might lag in sales (PS2 anyone?), but with some support and Microsoft's financial backing (far more clout than Nintendo had in the late 80's!), a la Sony, the system might survive long enough for the lag in software and sales to correct itself (PS2 anyone?).
For crying out loud, America created this industry! I sure wouldn't mind taking back the throne. Being a gamer for over a decade and a half, seeing all the prime Japanese projects and games never making it to American soul for market considerations, it does my heart a lot of good knowing there's a system out there with OUR interest at heart for a change.
I'm not buying the XBox simply because it's American, but dammit, it sure helps.
[Edited last by James D S on July 24, 2001 at 02:10 PM]

 

[Morgan Jolley]

Nonetheless, you guys are missing the fact that the X-Box isn't worth it. All the good games for it will end up on another platform if they aren't successful on the XB, so it's not like the only way to play them will be buying an XB. Also, the XB has one advantage over the PS2's DVD ability (Prog. Scan) which Sony has fixed through a driver update being made along with the Sony DVD Remote for PS2. And the fact that most people don't have ethernet in their homes makes the modem go to waste, but you still pay for it. If I got an X-Box, I would get a memory card so I can move files from my house to my friends house, which makes the HDD meaningless unless you use it for something else. If I don't want to pay for the HDD and ethernet modem, I shouldn't have to. That is why the PS2 has them as optional acessories. The PS2 might not do HD or 5.1 in real-time, but who cares if it has good games (Devil May Cry, MGS2, SH2, FFX, SSX, and many others). The PS2 also has all of the good PSX games, which means that out of the box you can get good games for it. When you buy a PS2, it's like getting a DVD player, CD player, PS2, and PSX for $75 each. Thats cheaper than some of those components alone! The X-Box gives you just an X-Box for the same price. And who cares if the XB is just a little bit ahead of Sony technologically. The GC is by far better than the XB (more texture displays, higher average polygon counts for the games demoed so far, etc.) and is cheaper than it by $100! And once again, who cares if the GC gets a bunch of kiddie games like Mario and Pokemon. Is it just me, or have Mario and Zelda and Metroid been some of the best videogame series ever? Overall, the X-Box isn't worth it compared to whats out there.

 

[James D S]

All the good games for it will end up on another platform if they aren't successful on the XB, so it's not like the only way to play them will be buying an XB.

That is a legitimate concern, to a point. For that reason, a lot of people do not game on PCs as the good games eventually get ported (where it is possible, of course) - But a lot of people still game on the PC. your's truly being one of them. So that arguement does not hold up well considering similiar models have held the opposite experience. More to the point, as far as ports go, porting from the PC (where RPGs and FPS have yet to be matched on a console) will be done easier and with fewer, if any, compromises.
I do not like the fact that there are no exclusive titles as of yet, but I doubt that fact will remain so.
Microsoft has something Atari did not have, money (!) and and inhouse development (a la Nintendo) that is better tuned with today's gamer and a working knowledge (duh) of their programming for their system, in this case of DirectX and X86 programming. Sony's developers are already complaining about the difficulty associated with programming for the PS2. Most of these companies would have little trouble porting over to the XBox. Many of them will. (Not to mention many companies have long histories of making NVidia based video procs scream!)
Final Fantasy is not exclusive to Sony. Early reports suggest that Project Gotham will not leave the GT3 fan wanting. (So that leaves us with Twisted Metal: Black as the lone killer app for the PS2? - for me.) More important software similarities are inevitable considering Microsoft's clout and established market connections.
Morgan, I'm having trouble making sense of you hardware argument. Are you saying that for the same price, getting more is a problem? Getting more hardware for you dollar is a bad thing? Do not confuse the fact that EVERY facet of the XBox's hardware is superior to the PS2. No disrespect to the 'Emotion Engine' (cute), but it pales next to what Intel, NVidia, and Microsoft have put together.
But all this is premature. We need to wait and let all the premarket hype settle.
Right now, though, it looks like the GameCube, by virtue of Nintendo's rep and pricepoint, and Microsoft XBox, by virtue of it being the meanest testosterone-driven badass this gamer has ever seen and its pricepoint.
Should be fun.

 

[James D S]

The PS2 also has all of the good PSX games, which means that out of the box you can get good games for it. When you buy a PS2, it's like getting a DVD player, CD player, PS2, and PSX for $75 each.

So why do I have to pay for those features if I don't want them? That is, of course, what your original argument was, wasn't it? Don't you already have a PSX, CD Player (a superior one I'm sure), and a DVD player (a superior one I'm sure)? Would this not also be wasted money by your concern?

 

[Aaron Copeland]

OK...I actually posted this on a gaming list I'm on, but it lists the reason I'm going with an XBOX:
I had originally planned to pick up a Gamecube at launch. In fact, I have had a GC reserved at our local Software Etc for close to nine months now. My plan was to pick up a GC first and then an XBOX a couple months later if it looked good. But now, I have changed my mind and here are my reasons:
(1) I like the games...after reading up on some of the games, I think a lot of them hold great potential. The ones that interest me are: Dead or Alive 3, Bloodwake, Azurik, Amped, Halo, Unreal Championship, Project EGO, and Morrowmind. And to a lesser degree, Nightcaster and Oddworld. I think all these games have the potential to be good. I'm sure they all won't be, but I'm betting a few of them will be very good.
(2) 720p and 1080i resolutions: I have an HDTV that can display both of these resolutions. The GC is not capable of running games at either of these resolutions. If you have ever seen a Dreamcast running through a VGA box at 480p, then you know how great it looks...I can only imagine how fantastic a game running at 720p would look (yes, I have a TV that supports 720p).
(3) A standard hard drive. The GC doesn't even have a HD. The hardrive will allow the XBOX to do things with games than no other console can. Like larger levels. You will also be able to rip MP3s to the hard drive, and for games that include this option, you will be able to have the songs of your choice play while you play the games. That's just cool.
(4) Full broadband support out of the box. I do think MS is making a mistake by not having a 56k modem available, but since I have DSL, I won't have to buy a broadband adaptor like I would with the GC...plus MS appears dedicated to really supporting full-on broadband online gaming.
(4b) LAN capability. You will be able to connect XBOX together over basic PC hubs. I'm not sure how often I'll get to use this feature, but it's nice knowing it's there.
(5) Full real-time 5.1 multi-channel audio support. This simply kicks ass. This combined with the 720p resolution and you have the potential for a very engrossing gaming experience. I don't even think the GC is capable of this...but I'm not positive.
(6) Nifty peripherals like the headset. I really like this headset. Being able to actually talk to people you are playing with online is very nice. Some people may not see this as that big ofa feature, but it all goes back to personal experience. Just a couple of years ago, this would have meant nothing to me. But since I got DSL and have been heavy into team oriented online PC games, communication with teammates (via Roger Wilco and TeamSound) has shown to be absolutely critical in teams matches....especially in brutally heavy and organized clan matches. Lack of team organization = embarrassing defeat. I've seen teams of highly skilled individual players go down hard to organized groups of average players. Since the XBOX appears as though it will have a least a few great FPS games, I simply couldn't ignore this feature. The headset is supposed to cost around $10...so money simply isn't an issue. Plus it has two buttons, one for communicating to your teammates only, and the other for talking to (i.e talking trash) everybody in the game. This is vastly superior to any other communication option...be it pre-made quotes (i.e. PSO) or a keyboard.
(7) Nintendo's decision to go with 0.5 MB memory cards. This is a really bad choice. Their decision to go with such small standard memory cards has already caused EA to announce that they will have to remove features from the GC version of Madden. That really sucks. The XBOX will not only have a hard drive to save games, but will have 8 MB memory cards as their standard size.
(8) Straight-up power. The XBOX is easily the most powerful of all the current generation systems.
Well, those are the reasons I'm now buying a XBOX before a GC. Certain games like Rogue Squadron 2 and Eternal Darkness look great for the GC...but I can't seem to get excited about a game where Luigi vacuums up ghosts and Metroid is looking more doubtful everyday with the problems Retro Studios is having. I'll probably end up with a GC as soon as a Zelda game hits, but unless Nintendo comes up with something spectacular at Spaceworld, I'm placing the GC behind XBOX in purchase order.
Aaron
Edit: Just for the record, I already own a PS2.
[Edited last by Aaron Copeland on July 24, 2001 at 06:58 PM]
[Edited last by Aaron Copeland on July 24, 2001 at 06:59 PM]
[Edited last by Aaron Copeland on July 24, 2001 at 07:00 PM]

 

[Morgan Jolley]

First of all, the PS2 has 4 functions out of the box compared to the X-Box's one function and for the same price, my point is that the PS2 is a better deal in that respect.
While you don't need all 4 functions, they are added more or less because it required little effort to add them. Since the PS2 can read DVDs, adding the DVD playback was common sense, but I admit that it isn't needed. Adding the PS1 chip gave the console a large library of games from the get-go, plus it allowed CD playback to be added easily.
As for Final Fantasy, X and XII are exclusive, but XI isn't.
The PS2 may not be as powerful as the X-Box, but if X-Box games end up on it anyway, the PS2 is a better deal. You get DVD/PS1/PS2/CD, plus games with excellent graphics, even if they aren't the best available.
Pulling out the DVD/PS1/CD functions of the PS2 wouldn't lower the price as much as pulling the HDD and modem out of the X-Box. What I'm saying is that you don't need the modem and HDD, but you pay for them. While you don't need some features of the PS2, they only add to its functionality, whereas the X-Box's HDD and modem just add to the price and aren't going to be too much use (you can use memory cards and don't need the HDD to save games).
Just because the X-Box is more powerful than the PS2 doesn't mean the PS2 is bad. Once developers understand how to work with the PS2, they will pump out games quicker and better, thus allowing the games to continue to push the consoles limits even after a few years. If the games are being made at the limits of the console's power in the first year, then we won't have anything to look forward to unless the gameplay gets improved. The Nintendo 64 kept getting itself pushed graphically, which is what made Perfect Dark so good compared to GoldenEye 007.
The reason there are few GC games announced is because Nintendo is very quiet about these things. They still have games that they haven't announced, and the number of developers has significantly increased from the N64's.
I think that Nintendo will come out on top with its cheaper and powerful hardware and excellent software lineup. The X-Box and Ps2 will probably be tied or close to eachother in the race because they each have strong followings and similar lineups. I hope the PS2 wins because it has consistantly come up with great games, and I think that the cell technology that they are looking into for the "PS3" will be cool. All the consoles will probably stick around, and that is only going to bring benefit to the consumers.