Kanbee-san
Member
MightyHedgehog said:
Ummm ummm DOOM3 and Half Life 2 use opengl !!!!! :lol
Would you have bought an xbox if...
- Thread starter loffer
- Start date
Ummm ummm DOOM3 and Half Life 2 use opengl !!!!! :lol
MightyHedgehog
Member
Oh teh noes!!11 That means that Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 can't run on the XBOXEN!!! What're id and Valve thinking?!?!1
Kanbee-san
Member
MightyHedgehog said:
OMGWTFBBQ thay are going to PS3 instead !
MightyHedgehog
Member
Indeed!Kanbee-san said:
Still haven't bought an Xbox. PS2 and GC are enough for me, and probably most gamers save for those who run through games, have massive amounts of time on their hands, or game reviewers. i may get one down the road, or eventually get an Xbox 2 is it's backwards compatible.
To answer the question, it would ultimately depend on the games. What kept me from buying an Xbox was the lack of Japanese games. i'd imagine if Xbox was like the Dreamcast in terms of power, it would've been a harder sell to developers and publishers, especially as a newcomer to the market. It would've also been incredibly stupid on Microsoft's part, not releasing a system that was at least on par with their competitors.
To answer the question, it would ultimately depend on the games. What kept me from buying an Xbox was the lack of Japanese games. i'd imagine if Xbox was like the Dreamcast in terms of power, it would've been a harder sell to developers and publishers, especially as a newcomer to the market. It would've also been incredibly stupid on Microsoft's part, not releasing a system that was at least on par with their competitors.
Oh god it's the xbots hive here and they must protect it at all costs. PS3 will have superior graphics, Nvidia middleware, OpenGL and you still have the delusion that PC devs will stick with Xenon. And to tell you the truth I don't even know why I'm arguing on this. PC gaming is dying nowadays.
It means that when xbots talk about console ports or xbox games in general they care for graphics and they laugh at the idiots who bought the "inferior versions" (even if these idiots have bought the "inferior" version a year ago) or they just proud of how great the xbox games look, but when they talk about PC ports and Xenon suddenly everyone is a "graphics whore".
It means that when xbots talk about console ports or xbox games in general they care for graphics and they laugh at the idiots who bought the "inferior versions" (even if these idiots have bought the "inferior" version a year ago) or they just proud of how great the xbox games look, but when they talk about PC ports and Xenon suddenly everyone is a "graphics whore".
seriously, it ALL depends on the games. I think the Xbox-exclusive games are WAY better than the ps2-exclusive games.
It does not matter to me that the xbox is the most powerful.
without Halo, Halo2, Star Wars KOTOR, Fable, Ninja Gaiden et c the console would be a piece of crap even if it had the best hardware.
therefore;
Yes I would buy an Xbox2 for the games.
It does not matter to me that the xbox is the most powerful.
without Halo, Halo2, Star Wars KOTOR, Fable, Ninja Gaiden et c the console would be a piece of crap even if it had the best hardware.
therefore;
Yes I would buy an Xbox2 for the games.
MightyHedgehog
Member
Che said:
WTF were you thinking when you came into this thread? And there you go making statements that are far from fact, at this point. At least, you got the part about PC gaming dying right.
Are you high right now? 'Cause, I am.
Kanbee-san
Member
Che said:
Your'e talking out of your ass. Come back when all your "facts" have been confirmed and i will gladly kiss your ass..... ie that day will never happen.
I would've never bought the Xbox (or GC) as a primary console, but I would've probably bought it still as a secondary console. There's enough titles that I want to play it to make it a good secondary console, even assuming it would not have been "more powerful" than the ps2. Now, that assumes that it would have gotten the same games in that case, which is doubtful, but still. The answer is yes.
SonicMegaDrive
Member
Yes. Graphics do not a good game make. Sure they're nice to look at, but they don't detract from my enjoyment of a game. And in this case, it isn't much of a downgrade. So, yes I would still buy an Xbox if it was less powerful than the PS2.
SpokkX said:
But seriously people...... How do you think your favorite xbox games would look on a weaker machine?
If Halo, Ninja Gaideen, etc look worse compared to your average ps2 title, they should not be your favorites anymore....
Xbox would had bombed hard and by now it should had been withdrawn from the market.
Do you really think that something like Halo even would be possible to achive on a machine with less power than a ps2?
With 10 fps it would be a great hit don´t you think? :lol
My point is that you have all the thing you can ask for on a ps2, except for the power to make a FPS like HALO. If the Xbox would have less power, no one, besides serious gaming fans, would have bought it.
loffer said:
Actually, I do believe a similar game would have been possible on the PS2 (which is what I assume you mean, instead of "less power than a PS2"); it might not have been as graphically impressive, but the main gameplay would have easily been transferrable.
DavidDayton said:
I meant less power,but anyway, maybe you are right.
But still, if the xbox was´nt more powerfull not many would have bought it.
I belive even Microsoft realised that, so they postponed( is that the right word??) it, to make it more powerfull and realesed it later I think?
Sorry for my bad English and spelling, hope you can understand........
Power has little to do with. The end result, what it looks like is what counts for me. Obviously I'm part of a minority or Dreamcast would have faired better against first generation PS2. Hype can certainly overpower actual performance and I think it's a safe bet Sony will go with the same tactics this time.
Oh well, it's not like I own stocks in either company. Give me good games and I'll be your consumer.
Oh well, it's not like I own stocks in either company. Give me good games and I'll be your consumer.
Trying to compare this generation to the next in terms of power is kind of pointless. The Xbox is more powerful than the PS2 but the difference wouldn't be as much if Sony had opted for something as simple as more memory. If the PS2 had more than 32 megs, textures wouldn't look the way they do.
I really don't think the visual gap will be as big between the Xenon and PS3. The PS2 launched in March of 2000(in Japan). The Xbox came out 20 months later in November of 2001. If things work out the way we think the PS3 could come out within 6 months of the Xenon.
I really don't think the visual gap will be as big between the Xenon and PS3. The PS2 launched in March of 2000(in Japan). The Xbox came out 20 months later in November of 2001. If things work out the way we think the PS3 could come out within 6 months of the Xenon.
Rorschach said:
Unfortunately that wasn't the case 1 year ago in Japan.
Even now, the new PS2 is about the same as an Xbox Platinum Pack (4 games, DVD, 2 months live), and while the new PS2 has a BB Adapter build in
it doesn't support the HDD 
I'm just waiting for MSKK to literally start giving the Xbox away for free here in Japan.
DavidDayton said:
Actually I don't think it could have been done. Besides the obvious graphics power limitations(which would hurt the draw distance and how many characters on screen at the same time.) The Xbox has a much more powerful processer. A Pentium 3, 733 Mhz processor for more complicated AI, physics, etc... that I don't think could be duplicated on the PS2s 300Mhz processor. Just look at the dumb as rocks AI on Killzone for example... if Sony could have, I'm sure the AI would have been better, but the hardware just doesn't allow it with everything else going on.
My main reason for buying an Xbox at launch was of course the power of the system as well as HD, creating soundtracks for games and of course broadband capable out of the box.
My second reason was all the promised and delivered Sega support, Sega GT, Orta, and Shenmue 2.
I quickly was looking for a new reason to own my Xbox and Xbox Live came out. I got hooked on the Moto GP demo and spent some decent time playing NFL2K3 on Live as well.
Splinter Cell hit which had me going for a longer period of time and of course the onslaught arrived with Rainbow Six 3, Crimson Skies, Gotham 2, and Topspin just a year ago.
A new wave hit in the last year with Gaiden, Splinter Cell PT, and of course Halo 2 and there is certainly more to come.
So will I be back for X2? Yeah, it's the first one out of the box with supposedly a familiar environment for devs to make great games with. The best part of X2 launching a year before PS3 in the states is that by the time PS3 hits X2 will surely have a slew of great games released already.
Does anyone remember when PS2 launched and all you had at launch was Madden and Tekken Tag? PS2 had a serious drought of games for a long period of time after that, and if PS3 is anything like it I guess X2 will have 2 years of great games in the library before PS3 gets a couple of solid games. So you say you have backwards compatability? Who cares about playing Grand Theft Auto or MGS 3 in 2006? X2 will have a years worth of releases at that point that graphically make those games look terrible.
My second reason was all the promised and delivered Sega support, Sega GT, Orta, and Shenmue 2.
I quickly was looking for a new reason to own my Xbox and Xbox Live came out. I got hooked on the Moto GP demo and spent some decent time playing NFL2K3 on Live as well.
Splinter Cell hit which had me going for a longer period of time and of course the onslaught arrived with Rainbow Six 3, Crimson Skies, Gotham 2, and Topspin just a year ago.
A new wave hit in the last year with Gaiden, Splinter Cell PT, and of course Halo 2 and there is certainly more to come.
So will I be back for X2? Yeah, it's the first one out of the box with supposedly a familiar environment for devs to make great games with. The best part of X2 launching a year before PS3 in the states is that by the time PS3 hits X2 will surely have a slew of great games released already.
Does anyone remember when PS2 launched and all you had at launch was Madden and Tekken Tag? PS2 had a serious drought of games for a long period of time after that, and if PS3 is anything like it I guess X2 will have 2 years of great games in the library before PS3 gets a couple of solid games. So you say you have backwards compatability? Who cares about playing Grand Theft Auto or MGS 3 in 2006? X2 will have a years worth of releases at that point that graphically make those games look terrible.
Edit : NM, don't want to get into the CPU argument -
If you run Halo without any shaders it's really a horrendously ugly game, ugly to the point where it's not even worth playing (see killzone for an example of a decent game marred by technical/graphical problems).
Even though the die hard Halo-ites would deny it, a good portion of why Halo is so popular right now is because of how the game looks. Presentation matters a *lot* these days, especially for a title that's meant to be mainstream and attract the gaming public.
That being said, I'm fairly convinced memory and or how it's allocated would be a bigger problem. Halo would be chopped up to even more loading sections than it is now, and I'm willing to bet it would make for a less than exciting experience.