»

[kupoartist]

Originally Posted by eurogamer

Gamers in Europe, Russia, the Middle East, Africa and Australasia will now have to wait until March to get their hands on a PS3. However, the console is still on track to launch in Japan on November 11 and in North America on November 17. Sony still plans to ship 6 million PS3 units globally before the end of the 2007 fiscal year.

Quelle Surprise

[Berserker]

OK, that's it then if it were to release globally I was thinking of getting one on the release date. But now we get one when all the hype is settling down...forget it Sony. I'm not getting one till it's damn cheap...

[merylsilverburg]

Wow, that really sucks for Europe. I could understand if it were delayed until December or January, but March? I wonder why, if they knew/had a feeling they were running out of the laser diodes, they didn't split up the process? Give half to the NTSC versions and half to the PAL ones? Sorry if that's just a stupid question to ask...

Well on the bright side, hopefully by March there'll be some decent games out in time for the European launch. Because the US launch titles are just...sad. Not that Japan's launch is any better, but at least they have Boku no Natsuyasumi 3 (My Summer Vacation 3).

EDIT: I just read here that the US is confirmed to have 400,000 units at launch while Japan will only get a measly 100,000. They said they "want to focus on the Japanese and US markets."

[Berserker]

They don't give half to the pal-versions cause they don't care about the european market...
About the launch titles, won't be surprised if all the cool titles that will be out in the US by then will come out december 2007 in Europe. I'm affraid we will never lose the 3rd world status that Sony gave us. Oh well, it saves me money. Thanx Sony!

[tempted]

That just sucks. It's always the same thing. Its not even funny anymore. Well i'm not getting one, period.

[jjmoohead]

Hey Guys, Not only is Europe getting the finger, so is the rest of the world. Sure you might not offically get a release until March 2007, but hey guess what. Canada will get about 40,000 units spread all over this vast land. So the chances of getting one before March 2007 are slim and nill.

But on a side note, 80% of the people in here were not getting one until more games came out and with March 2007 a month expected for good releases then it shouldnt really matter.

Also the comment about Games not reaching Europe late 2007...although could be true, to say its all Sony isn't really fair considering most are not even affiliated with sony. Europe has always been the victum of late releases and hate to say it, but all companies were guilty of it. Heck even some movies get released 6 months later.

Anyway sorry Europe for your bad luck.

[Harry]

Originally Posted by jjmoohead

Hey Guys, Not only is Europe getting the finger, so is the rest of the world. Sure you might not offically get a release until March 2007, but hey guess what. Canada will get about 40,000 units spread all over this vast land. So the chances of getting one before March 2007 are slim and nill.

But on a side note, 80% of the people in here were not getting one until more games came out and with March 2007 a month expected for good releases then it shouldnt really matter.

JJ is right. The problem is really on a bigger scale. All PAL countries - Europe, Russia, Middle East, Africa, and Australasia - won't get the console until March 2007. This is a huge portion of the market.

The causes of this delay are many, and most of them won't ever make it on an official press release from Sony.

Sony has always treated customers in Old World countries poorly. There are many reasons behind this delay,

1. SCEE is easily the less responsive, less inspired branch of SCEI - according to my personal experience, even their PR offices are the slowest in answering requests from the press, lost in the all-European bureaucracy that is non-existent in the North American SCEA. If you consider Final Fantasy XI for the PlayStation 2 was never released in Europe, and that the Network Adapter for European consoles doesn't include a built-in modem, you already have a good idea of how SCEE pales in comparison with SCEA.

2. They must have the feeling that the market in the Old World is already in their hands. In Europe, the Xbox is and will always be considered a second-choice system, that will hardly ever reach the popularity of the PlayStation, even though the Xbox360 launch went fairly well in United Kingdom. Anyhow, European kids in the stores talk about PlayStations, not about Xbox, or Xbox 1.5.

3. There is a shortage of components, mostly caused by the high production costs; production costs of high-tech components go down exponentially, month after month. By delaying the launch in PAL countries, Sony is borrowing time, waiting for production costs to go down. I think it's obvious that if the Xbox 360 wasn't around, the PlayStation 3 would have been released worldwide no sooner than late 2007 - but Sony needs to release the system as soon as possible, or Microsoft (and Nintendo, in Japan) could become more dangerous than they ever expected to. So, they decided to delay the launch in the less troublesome market, focusing all their resources on the market where they really have to fight with all they have, North America.

In other words, PAL countries will get their console in March 2007 not because consoles in these countries are any different from those in North America, but because Sony’s marketing experts decided this was the only way to cut production costs without having to delay the launch worldwide. Market in Old World countries is immensely “slower” than in North America – at this point, a delay in the launch in North America could kill the PlayStation brand.

Anyhow, at first I though all the delays were part of Sony’s marketing plans. They hoped, and probably they still do, to make the Xbox 360 look even more like a rushed out Xbox 1.5 by releasing a more powerful system. But now it’s obvious SCEI is having a lot of problems with the PlayStation 3. Even the Dual Shock-less controller gaffe (why didn’t they admit they couldn’t use the technology because of the copyright infringement lawsuit they lost against a company now half owned by Microsoft, instead of shoveling stupid excuses to the public?) is a symptom of SCEI’s problems. Which company in good health would have accepted to trash a project like the Dual Shock, on which it has spent millions and millions of dollars in development and marketing?

[dan da man]

Sony can fuck off now!!!!

https://www.thisiswaiting.com/

Alot of angry European Photoshoppers.


EDIT Also Harry what's the deal with XBOX 1.5! I've had a XBOX 360 since release last year and it's brought me and my friends next gen gaming since 2nd of December, now that's a 2 year christmas headstart over PS3 which is pathetic, hmmm so it's okay too drop Europe as usual and make sure Japan (where it's cool) and the USA (where the sales are) to get the ps3 first becuase they cant stick to there sad promises as usual, man I hate liars and Sony should get no different treatment. Wii60 FTW!!!

[kupoartist]

When it comes down to it, Europe has waited a similar ammount of time (often longer) for almost every games console ever released. It's disappointing, but about as unexpected as Paris Hilton... well, being Paris Hilton. In fact, just think about Paris for a while and it's strangely enlightening on the whole Playstation 3 issue. Or something.

And considering the PS3's launch price, the less units, the less people who become amputees, prostitutes and ebaytards.

[Harry]

Dan da man, you surely have your reasons to love the Xbox 360, especially if you are a fan of Sports games. We also have one Xbox 360 console in the office - it's honestly the less exciting, less solid, more badly assembled piece of gaming equipment we have seen in 20 years of videogaming. Simply put, it's even more than its predecessor a crippled PC. The design is ridiculous; the lack of the HDD in cheaper bundles is idiotic; the software emulation for backward compatibility is a shame (what, several GB of space on the $99 20GB HDD must be used to play older games?); and finally, most of the games released until today are some of the worst and less exciting titles I have played in a long, long time (with the exception of Oblivion). Not to mention the fact they released a new Xbox just 4 years (this is pathetic!) from the release of the previous system. At first I thought Microsoft would have brought some good competition to the industry; now I believe they are ruining it, and Sony's biggest error is they are following Microsoft's strategy instead than ignoring them, like Nintendo has been doing until today. If Sony wants to survive, they must focus their attention on the software, on their first and second party titles developed in Japan and on third party exclusives. If Sony plans to win this console war only with hordes of mindless, unimaginative titles like those developed by EA or Ubisoft and shared with the Xbox 360, they are doomed.

Really, I am a console collector myself, but if it wasn't we need this Xbox360 in our office to compare cross-platform releases we get from press offices, I would have already sold this unit on eBay. It insults my intelligence, everytime I watch it. On a note, we bought it so early just because I found a new unit for little more than $200 (HDD included).

Originally Posted by kupoartist

When it comes down to it, Europe has waited a similar ammount of time (often longer) for almost every games console ever released. It's disappointing, but about as unexpected as Paris Hilton... well, being Paris Hilton. In fact, just think about Paris for a while and it's strangely enlightening on the whole Playstation 3 issue. Or something.

And considering the PS3's launch price, the less units, the less people who become amputees, prostitutes and ebaytards.

Hahahaha I agree! We will have some serious problem buying the two consoles we need this November.

[jjmoohead]

Now I know Im a teacher and maybe this is why this bothers me, but really to open with a line of Sony can F off right now, just turns me away from reading. This is a great discussional topic that in my mind doesnt need to be ruined by the introductions of harsh language. Now that my teacher side of me has left the conversation let me add something to what Harry said.

Xbox 360 was a machine that I seriously considered picking up. Admittedly the idea of a next gen system in my living room made me really want to buy one. Shortly after launch and ebays double price extravaganza, I went to a store with the full ententions of getting one. The problem I had was the lack of games that screamed out "Pick Me".

Everyone knows I am a big sports fan and Harry, this is what i want to add to yous. You said its a good if your into sports games...but Harry did you play the launch title sports games. Every EA title was slashed in such a way that it made my NBA LIVE 2001 for PS2 cry. Tiger Woods cut many courses out of the game. NBA Live had an AI system that looked like EA fell asleep in 2006 and some how woke up in 1999. Not to mention the lack of indepth season/franchias modes in those and other games like Madden.

Now with that said, out comes the 2007 line up. Madden 07 seems to be a solid hit across all system releases. Now this is only personal but after playing Madden for PS2, Xbox, and Xbox 360, I have to say the one that dissapoints me out of the 3 games is the 360 version. On original Xbox, the controls are solid, well laid out and comfortable. However on the 360, they seem to be all over the place. I truely had to relearn a game that I absolutely love to play, and for the first time in a long time the "basic" controlls, furstrated me to no end. Now I am more then sure you could map out your own controls, but the thing I love about sports games is that year after year I can open the packed put in the game and play a quick exabition or preseason game using quick play and get a instant feel of the new look and get excited. Xbox 360 Madden 07 didnt allow me to do that as I had to reach for the manual after the first quarter, essentially taking away the best thing of sports games in my opinion.

Now I am not saying all of Xbox 360 games are crap, not by any means. But as Dan said about how almost 2 christmas have passed since the 360 was released giving them the edge. However what has nearly 2 years brought us in games and experience? I myself can't see spending the money to pick it up for less then a handful of games that interest me. Especially when most of those I can get on a system I already own. Tomb Raider is a great example. Ok game, but better graphics for the same game play, not a huge factor in my mind. So far renting a system for a weekend here and there has allowed me to enjoy most of those games to their full extent.

Finally, I am not saying that the PS3 will release and not do the same thing, but only 6 months after realease I can see about 10 quality games I am looking forward to and by next Christmas (baring any delays in 3rd party software) I can easily see myself with a 20 game collection. So for a 2 year advance on a now delayed PS3 release, what has Xbox 360 really given me. Nothing I can't get on a PC and nothing I can't wait a short time for on the PS3. NOTE" Meaning nothing I need to open up my wallet for to get an entire system and that game.

Also note in Canada, Xbox 360 run at $500 for a new high end Xbox. The high end PS3 will be $650. Whats another $150 for me? Granted thats not the same in all countries especially USA, but for me, I can't see myself getting a 360 for that price unless Sony announces a delay in Canada too.

[dan da man]

Harry all I can do is laugh (really I am), because your telling me the 360 a poorly assembled machine haha, sorry but the xbox 360 is one of the best consoles I've owned. I’ve owned plenty of consoles of every generation since the NES. All adding there own gaming experiences in different styles to me and to say it insults your intelligence WHAT?!?! What’s so 1337 about the ever so delayed playstation 3 what’s just blatantly "robbed" many features from the 360 and Wii, now that’s a insult, the 360’s guide button, the movment of Wii’s controller just to name a few.

And no I don’t even play sports game so I don’t know where that came from for mostly being American sport titles and Fifa is just pure shit every year, I don’t even own any sports title on the 360 yet it still gives me next gen gaming guess I‘ll have to name a few titles worth purchasing the 360 because I’m not a sports game fan. Condemned, Kameo, PGR3, Perfect Dark Zero, Dead Rising, Oblivion, Saints row, Enchanted Arms, just a few games in my collection that blow my mind away while playing online or offline and not to the name the future titles which will keep me happy.

The SONY playstation 3 which IS the insult because Ken and his chum make big time fake promises about a "worldwide" launch at the E3 which the biggest Gaming convention in the world, No just 100.000 units for Japan and 400.000 for USA which is a disgrace IMO. Being massively overpriced, big and ugly, c’mon we like our £475 gadgets to at least look nice, same ps2 pad which is god awful for FPS, and then fair enough it’s a blue ray player so you get that for your money but nah I’ll stick to HD thanks, I don’t see Blue ray beating HD anyway.

[kupoartist]

Originally Posted by dan da man

same ps2 pad which is god awful for FPS

Anyone who cares that much about FPS doesn't used a pad full-stop if you ask me ^_^, but then the wii sounds an interesting alternative I suppose. Not that I can imagine the Wii with any more than a handful of particuarly exciting FPS games (I'd be surprised to see Valve, ID, Epic or Bungie developing anything for it, in fact Valve and Epic are already developing for both the 360 and PS3 and shunning the Wii). I also can't imagine, whilst the controller undoubtably is more intuitive due to simply pointing at what you want dead, that it necessarily makes FPS games easier. Hell if it does Wii will be banned when the next crazy person strolls into an american school with a gun.

I think one thing to keep in mind is that what went last generation isn't applicable here though. The X-Box became a machine filled with marginally different PS2 ports not because it was a worse machine than the PS2, but a machine with a smaller user base. Sony doesn't have that advantage anymore, and the 360 user-base isn't to be scoffed at. If the PS3 hasn't sold impressive enough numbers this time next year (and lets face it, the 360 is going to be unchallanged for ANOTHER christmas rush in Europe and in shortage everywhere else) developers are going to be putting their resources into Xbox 360 development and not investing in PS3 ports. They need to make money after all.

Then we'll talk about which system has the best games. After all, though I am also personally uninspired by the 360's lineup, the PS3 is hardly standing at the foot of my tower and wooing me into letting down my hair. They both need to lose weight and mature a little, and I guess I need to work on growing my hair out. What were we talking about again?

[Harry]

Dan da man, calm down. As I said, you may have your reasons to like your console. Condemned, Kameo, PGR3, Perfect Dark Zero, Dead Rising, Oblivion, Saints row, Enchanted Arms - leaving aside Oblivion, in my opinion, a lot of these games do contain a few good ideas, but they were poorly executed and developed. Most of these games are all-action titles, with nothing to offer to the player that wants something "more" from videogames. You can like this style of games, or you can hate it.

Telling us the PlayStation 3 is copied from the Xbox 360 is non-sense; Sony copied something important only from Nintendo, and this is obvious. And please, Microsoft using the 360 guide button as a revolutionary feature is sad - Hmmm we always wanted to have a button to jump to Microsoft online market thing! And look, it turns on/off the console! That's next-generation! So everybody adding the same obvious functionalities to their consoles is copying Microsoft, right? Don't be ridiculous. The architecture of the two consoles couldn't be more different, with Sony launching a system containing some new technologies, while Microsoft has just assembled another PC. I repeat: to me, the Xbox 360 is simply a crippled, rushed out PC with no soul. Oh, and about the controller: the Xbox 360 has a good controller (terrific when used with a good PC), but the Dual Shock layout remains the best out there for all different genres of videogames.

Finally, I don't know why you seem to think I am a staunch supporter of the PlayStation 3. I do not like what I have seen so far from Sony, as I said clearly in a few posts, mostly because Sony is marketing their PlayStation 3 too much like Microsoft marketed their Xbox. The only good thing that came from SCEA in the latest months was Katuragi's humble admission of Sony Computer Entertainment's difficulties in the production of the PlayStation 3 - this is the way to go, if SCEA wants more respect from the industry. The only console that convinces me this time around is the Wii, and the only company that I really respect because of their coherency and loyalty to their fans is Nintendo.

On the other hand, you seem a staunch supporter of the Xbox 360. Do you like buying a new system every four years? Rest assured that on paper both the PlayStation 3 and the Wii will be more advanced, in a way or another, than the Xbox 360 - that's unavoidable. But the real fight (between Microsoft and Sony, because Nintendo has nothing to fear with its unbeatable range of first party titles and its disinterest in selling more consoles than either Microsoft or Sony) will be in the quality of the gameplay of the exclusive software offered to the players.

[Harry]

Originally Posted by jjmoohead

Finally, I am not saying that the PS3 will release and not do the same thing, but only 6 months after realease I can see about 10 quality games I am looking forward to and by next Christmas (baring any delays in 3rd party software) I can easily see myself with a 20 game collection. So for a 2 year advance on a now delayed PS3 release, what has Xbox 360 really given me. Nothing I can't get on a PC and nothing I can't wait a short time for on the PS3. NOTE" Meaning nothing I need to open up my wallet for to get an entire system and that game.

JJ, I think the same. The Xbox 360 introduced nothing new to the industry. It "feels" like an upgraded Xbox because it doesn't offer something really different from its predecessor. About Sports games, I admit I have just watched others playing them, and while some left me unimpressed, others looked sleek. Anyhow, Carlito was complaining a lot about some of the things you mentioned, in particular the awful AI and the awkward controls. What I meant when I said "it is good if you like Sports games" is simply that all action/adventure titles available for the system right now are second-rate games, that disappear in comparison with PlayStation 2 games like God Of War, Shadow Of The Colossus, Mark Of Kri, and so on. But after all, I suppose it is just me not liking Microsoft's way of intending videogames - for example, I have always hated Halo and Halo 2, for many good reasons.

Originally Posted by kupoartist

I think one thing to keep in mind is that what went last generation isn't applicable here though. The X-Box became a machine filled with marginally different PS2 ports not because it was a worse machine than the PS2, but a machine with a smaller user base. Sony doesn't have that advantage anymore, and the 360 user-base isn't to be scoffed at. If the PS3 hasn't sold impressive enough numbers this time next year (and lets face it, the 360 is going to be unchallanged for ANOTHER christmas rush in Europe and in shortage everywhere else) developers are going to be putting their resources into Xbox 360 development and not investing in PS3 ports. They need to make money after all.

All true, even though I do not agree when you say the difference between the Xbox and PlayStation came just from the smaller user base behind the Xbox. There is much more than that, in my opinion. This is a subject I'd like to talk about in more detail, but in general, what I mean is that while the biggest portion of sotware sales often come from generic titles, there are a few games that really "define" the "aura", the "soul" of a game console. The PlayStation 2 and the Xbox had a lot of games in common, but the Xbox could have never had games like ICO, Shadow Of The Colossus, Dark Cloud, Konami's Shadow Of Destiny, and many, many others, simply because Microsoft doesn't have the "sensibility" to develop or promote this kind of titles. Sony has the great strength of being a Japanese-American company, and I am sorry to say that with few glaring exceptions, Japanese do it better. Their creative freedom, the unique way in which they mix elements from different cultures, the extraordinary depth behind a lot of their games... Sony will lose the battle if they start to rely only on the North American market AND culture, because nobody can beat Microsoft at home. And I am not speaking just of sales (which are unimportant to me), but of the quality of the games offered to the players.

Anyhow, as you said, I should go back to the topic of this thread. In addition to the delay in the launch of the console, which is an insult to European gamers that Sony should have avoided at all costs, European players are also lucky enough to have to pay more, MUCH more for their consoles. The $1 = Euro 1 conversion is an insult, but the price in countries outside the Eurozone is criminal. And if this is (maybe) justified in countries that are much richer than the average in Europe, like Norway or Sweden, there is no reason for a PlayStation 3 to cost something like $810 in UK.

[merylsilverburg]

Originally Posted by jjmoohead

Finally, I am not saying that the PS3 will release and not do the same thing, but only 6 months after realease I can see about 10 quality games I am looking forward to and by next Christmas (baring any delays in 3rd party software) I can easily see myself with a 20 game collection.

Wow, really? You must have varied taste because I'm looking at the game list on Wikipedia (yes, I know it’s probably not comprehensive or accurate) and I hardly see anything that interests me. Most of the titles are all sequels again (not that's it's a bad thing otherwise I would have to start dissing off MGS4) and it seems a lot of the titles are very MMORPG-ish (which is like what the Xbox and 360 have) or very blah action-adventure titles. I was really hoping for some new and refreshing games, being that it's a next-gen console.

Originally Posted by dan da man

I don’t even own any sports title on the 360 yet it still gives me next gen gaming guess I‘ll have to name a few titles worth purchasing the 360 because I’m not a sports game fan. Condemned, Kameo, PGR3, Perfect Dark Zero, Dead Rising, Oblivion, Saints row, Enchanted Arms, just a few games in my collection that blow my mind away

I saw an advertisement/commercial for Saints Row on TV and it looks rather, well, like a GTA-copy. So, how does it exactly entail next-gen gaming? The other titles I don't know much about but a buddy of mine's reviews of some of those games say they're pretty good. However, they still don't really "wow" me even though some of the concepts are interesting.

Originally Posted by dan da man

Being massively overpriced, big and ugly, c’mon we like our £475 gadgets to at least look nice, same ps2 pad which is god awful for FPS, and then fair enough it’s a blue ray player so you get that for your money but nah I’ll stick to HD thanks, I don’t see Blue ray beating HD anyway.

What you said here is really just based on your own preferences though. Personally, I don't think the PS3 is "big and ugly" compared to the 360...sure, the 360 may not be big (anymore) but the design isn't really to my taste. It looks like a slimmer version of that piece of hardware of a home PC (sorry, I don't know the term). As for the controllers, is it really fair to accuse because most of the placements on each console's controllers are similar now...they don't have such massive differences IMO. But if you want to gripe about the PS3's same design which is bad for FPS, then I really think it's all about getting used to it. For example, the 360's placement is similar to the Xbox's. The controllers are only smaller. So would I be able to function better playing FPSs with the 360 controller? I don’t really know, but I had a lot of trouble when I was playing Halo on Xbox for the first time because I couldn't get used to the awkwardness of the settings. Eventually I got used to it, but that's the point I'm making: I think it's really a matter of getting used to, not because a certain placement is worse than the other (except for a few exceptions).

Originally Posted by kupoartist

Not that I can imagine the Wii with any more than a handful of particuarly exciting FPS games

The Wii, or Nintendo in general, never seemed like an FPS-type anyway, at least to me. I think they fit the 3rd-person or party game style better, which is fine. Even though I agree the controller would make good use of FPS games.

Originally Posted by Harry

What I meant when I said "it is good if you like Sports games" is simply that all action/adventure titles available for the system right now are second-rate games, that disappear in comparison with PlayStation 2 games like God Of War, Shadow Of The Colossus, Mark Of Kri, and so on.

Well, I could imagine God of War on the Xbox/360, but that's another story. What you said is a reason why I dislike the 360 because it seems like it's only worth the value if you like sports games, since it seems sports games are the greatest asset to the console (of course, with what jj said, it doesn’t seem like that anymore). Even though certain action/adventure titles, like Condemned or Dead Rising, sound interesting, most of the games are really just "okay" to me. Of course, if Shenmue 3 ever decides to make its appearance, this game might be the only one that I would buy a 360. I know, it's a stupid reason, but I really like this series and I'm hoping they'd complete it.

Originally Posted by Harry

All true, even though I do not agree when you say the difference between the Xbox and PlayStation came just from the smaller user base behind the Xbox. There is much more than that, in my opinion. This is a subject I'd like to talk about in more detail, but in general, what I mean is that while the biggest portion of sotware sales often come from generic titles, there are a few games that really "define" the aura, the "soul" of a game console. The PlayStation 2 and the Xbox had a lot of games in common, but the Xbox could have never had games like ICO, Shadow Of The Colossus, Dark Cloud, Konami's Shadow Of Destiny, and many, many others, simply because Microsoft doesn't have the "sensibility" to develop or promote this kind of titles. Sony has the great strength of being a Japanese-American company, and I am sorry to say that with few glaring exceptions, Japanese do it better. Their creative freedom, the unique way in which they mix elements from different cultures, the extraordinary depth behind a lot of their games... Sony will lose the battle if they start to rely only on the North American market AND culture, because nobody can beat Microsoft at home. And I am not speaking just of sales (which are unimportant to me), but of the quality of the games offered to the players.

This mirrors what I quoted from you above and I completely agree, so there’s no need for me to add on. But, I just want to say that certain US developed games do have a strong point that I think the Japanese wouldn’t be able to come up with or develop. That is, I think the Japanese have sort of a problem when it comes to pure freedom/independence. Like, what many of the RPGs or certain games developed for the Xbox/360 (like Fable or Star Wars: KOTOR) contain is, the freedom to choose your own life or story or path. Also, choosing what you look like, what you want to be, etc. I think this stems from the culture difference (obviously) that most Americans or whatnot are a bit more independent than the Japanese. This ability is a good thing because players can really use their creativity or choose to "be in the game" by living out their fantasy image with all the freedom given from these customizable games. Japan, on the other hand, has a very "group mentality" mindset (like all Asian countries, really), so that’s why most of their games are really tightly wounded. However, I believe it's for this reason why the chemistry between the game characters, as well as the game to the player, is much more realistic or in-depth. These differences are probably what contributes to the lack of "soul" in Xbox's games...because of the inability to portray genuine feeling or the inability to emotionally connect with the player. This is my opinion.

Originally Posted by kupoartist

Sony doesn't have that advantage anymore, and the 360 user-base isn't to be scoffed at. If the PS3 hasn't sold impressive enough numbers this time next year (and lets face it, the 360 is going to be unchallanged for ANOTHER christmas rush in Europe and in shortage everywhere else) developers are going to be putting their resources into Xbox 360 development and not investing in PS3 ports. They need to make money after all.

I agree. There are a lot more fans behind the 360 now which I think partly comes from the advantage of being released first in the "console war." I sometimes wonder though, that if the PS3 were released first, would the 360 have garnered up the adequate fanbase that they have now? Or is it really the games that made people fans of the 360? Or is it just the appeal of owning the first "next gen console" first?

[Harry]

Yes, as I said some games on the Xbox 360 show some nice ideas, but most of these were badly implemented and poorly developed. The first part of Condemned is great, but then it becomes just a very repetitive action title full of (good looking) gore.

What you said about the freedom offered in some of the best games developed in Europe and in United States is absolutely true, and some of the "glaring exceptions" I referred to in my previous post include Lionhead, Bioware, Bethesda, Valve, Rockstar Games, Surreal Software, and few others. Games like Morrowind and Star Wars: Knights Of The Old Republic are what really made me buy and like the Xbox. One of the many reasons that made it impossible to have those games on PlayStation 2 was the lack of a built-in HDD in the console. Microsoft's decision to include the HDD in their first console was one of the most simple and at the same time brilliant ideas of the latest "console war". The Xbox gained a lot of popularity thanks to games that the PlayStation 2 could have never had - again, exclusive software is the key to win a console war. About freedom in Japanese games, it's worth noting a couple of things. I think we have two different kinds of freedom an action/adventure game can offer to the player - freedom through quantity (size of the environments, number of quests, storylines with multiple branches) and freedom through quality (character/environment interaction, complex AI, advanced game physics). Morrowind is the easiest example of the first group (according to many, brought to an excess), games like Metal Gear Solid or Half Life 2 are examples of the latter (and in fact, I have never understood how people could complain about the linearity of Valve's or Konami's masterpieces). As video games become more technologically advanced, these two aspects will merge within single games, and according to the different attitude and culture of a development team, balance between these two aspects will vary. It's difficult to say it for sure right now, as we need to wait to play at least the next two waves of killer apps for this new generation of consoles, but I think Japanese will focus more and more on the second type of freedom, with some elements of the first, while the opposite will happen among Western developers. Of course, there are, once again, big exceptions - few development teams in the whole world are able to do what Valve did with Half Life 2 (even though the games are very different in many, many ways, the only game I can compare with the "freedom through quality" of HL2 is Metal Gear Solid 3).

Another thing we shouldn't forget is that, even though they may not be using it as thoroughly as Western developers nowadays, non-linearity in action/adventure video games was invented by Japanese developers, including Miyamoto (with Zelda, but even the first Super Mario Bros featured examples of non-linearity, even though it was branchless or unidirectional), Sakamoto, and few others.

Hmmm ok, going out of topic again. Kupo will kill us.

[merylsilverburg]

Originally Posted by Harry

As video games become more technologically advanced, these two aspects will merge within single games, and according to the different attitude and culture of a development team, balance between these two aspects will vary. It's difficult to say it for sure right now, as we need to wait to play at least the next two waves of killer apps for this new generation of consoles, but I think Japanese will focus more and more on the second type of freedom, with some elements of the first, while the opposite will happen among Western developers.

For sure, it would really be interesting to see the merging of the two elements...I'm not sure if that would make an incredible or perfect game, but the ability to do such a thing would really be neat to see. People could argue now that certain games of this generation is already doing that (such as GTA: San Andreas, which I think is pretty good, but the quality in storyline is lacking as well as the AI). I also agree that the Japanese might and will continue to stick with the latter elements in their future games, particularly in their worldwide releases. For Japan-only games, I think not so much. But that's just my assumption.

Originally Posted by Harry

Another thing we shouldn't forget is that, even though they may not be using it as thoroughly as Western developers nowadays, non-linearity in action/adventure video games was invented by Japanese developers, including Miyamoto (with Zelda, but even the first Super Mario Bros featured examples of non-linearity, even though it was branchless or unidirectional), Sakamoto, and few others.

Really? I didn't know that. You learn something new everyday.

Originally Posted by Harry

Hmmm ok, going out of topic again. Kupo will kill us.

LOL, yeah. Sorry, I just wanted to add a few comments. Carry on, carry on.

[Harry]

Originally Posted by dan da man

then fair enough it’s a blue ray player so you get that for your money but nah I’ll stick to HD thanks, I don’t see Blue ray beating HD anyway.

Dan, I do not mean to argue about such stupid things, but I do not understand this point and I think discussing it is relevant to the topic of this thread. The Xbox 360 is not a HD-DVD player. The Xbox 360 is a good DVD player, but nothing more. In order to play HD-DVDs with it, you must pay to buy an external drive which will cost more than a Wii console and like the Xbox 360 core pack. In United Kingdom it will retail for 199GBP, in North America $199 dollars. It is a lot of money, if you ask me. People who didn't buy the Xbox 360 at launch can buy it bundled with the console, but prices shouldn't be below 375-400GBP in United Kingdom, according to retail sources, which means a "complete" Xbox 360 will cost just 50 GBP less than a PlayStation 3. And while the PlayStation 3 is huge, the Xbox 360 is already too big, huge if you take into account the amazing power adapter, ridiculously enormous if you add the external HD-DVD player. How can you say this is an example of good design, I really do not know.

The truth is, even though their prices are probably right considering what they offer to their owners and manufacturing costs, both consoles cost enough to give fans of both worlds and their poor parents (especially those living in Europe) nightmares in the next months. How many families will prefer to buy their son a PC instead of one of these consoles? The good thing about the Xbox 360 is that players that do not care about the HD-DVD will hopefully be able to buy the older console pack, without the HD-DVD add-on, but there are already rumors that only those pricey bundles will be available to the public in the future.

The more I consider all these things, the more I think the Wii could be the true winner this time around.

[kupoartist]

Originally Posted by Harry

In order to play HD-DVDs with it, you must pay to buy an external drive which will cost more than a Wii console and like the Xbox 360 core pack.

It's a bit of a hit and miss decision. On the one hand, Sony is stubbornly pushing Blu-Ray upon people when there is little to no evidence that people will rush to ditch their DVDs in favour of HD-Tech disks. On the other hand, games could potentially be the one area in which the higher data capacity of these discs is going to enable something that people actually want. The HD-DVD addon for the 360 will not enable the development of HD-DVD games. DVD streaming in the last generation is pretty much solely responsible for the massive free-form environments seen in games like GTA. Populating an expansive world with the highest quality models and textures would be a nightmare with a DVD alone, or at least highly inefficient (swapping disks, compressing data so that it takes ages to load).