PDA

View Full Version : XBOX might make a terrible mistake!



hiter101
12-05-2002, 08:37 PM
they are so much promoting XBL and making a fuse about XBL games i dont think they realize most people dont have XBL and need to produce better single player games and give add ons not just to XBL people for example people who dont have live and bought SC still deserve the add on becayse they paid the same 50 bux its pretty sad that the only non XBL game that im excited about is Star Wars KOTOR :(

Dre
12-05-2002, 08:42 PM
Originally posted by hiter101
they are so much promoting XBL and making a fuse about XBL games i dont think they realize most people dont have XBL and need to produce better single player games and give add ons not just to XBL people for example people who dont have live and bought SC still deserve the add on becayse they paid the same 50 bux its pretty sad that the only non XBL game that im excited about is Star Wars KOTOR :(

You can play XBL games without having XBL. Disregarding a game as having good single player simply because they are Live enabled is a huge mistake.

On a side note...

Brute Force, Star Wars: KOTOR, Ninja Gaiden, DOAX Volleyball, Fable, many more non xbl games that are going to be great are on their way.

hiter101
12-05-2002, 08:45 PM
can u truley tell me games like mechassault and ghost recon are worth 50 bux a peace just for their single player

Dirty DeStrO
12-05-2002, 08:48 PM
One more thing is that I think when Microsoft launched XBOX it was under the presumption that it would focus most of its resources to games with online capabilities. That fact was a big selling point to alot of people.

Dre
12-05-2002, 08:50 PM
Originally posted by hiter101
can u truley tell me games like mechassault and ghost recon are worth 50 bux a peace just for their single player

I haven't played them, so I couldn't tell you from my own experience. However, a friend of mine said that the MA single-player campaign was lots of fun. Dunno how long it was though...

Koopa
12-05-2002, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by Dre


I haven't played them, so I couldn't tell you from my own experience. However, a friend of mine said that the MA single-player campaign was lots of fun. Dunno how long it was though...

it was short...really fun while it lasted, though

Liquid Gears
12-05-2002, 09:22 PM
Originally posted by Dirty DeStrO
One more thing is that I think when Microsoft launched XBOX it was under the presumption that it would focus most of its resources to games with online capabilities. That fact was a big selling point to alot of people.

Actually.....no it wasn't

bbchs_trash
12-05-2002, 09:24 PM
Well actually, I think the downloads should be Live exclusive. You paid the same $50 for the game, but we paid the $50 for Live. And yes, Mech Assault is worth getting without Live. The single player is awesome, 20 missions long, and yes Ghost Recon's single player is also very good.

You complain like the only games that are coming out are Live games. Dude there are like a whole 8 Live games, half of which are sports games. Soo whoopie doo.... you act like they quit making Single Player games. If you're so up and mad about it get Broadband and Live.

They are not making a mistake, pointless topic!

CharlieHustle
12-05-2002, 09:53 PM
Also Ghost Recon is very fun without live. You control a squad of 2 (4 per squad). You are only given a handful of soldiers. These are no stupid soldiers also *cough* conflict desert storm *cough*, they will advance do recon or cease fire at your order. You can also switch between soldiers at any point. So, you must try to keep them alive for further missions. You get to unlock specialists after each mission also. Its very fun to play offline.

hiter101
12-05-2002, 10:02 PM
Originally posted by bbchs_trash
You complain like the only games that are coming out are Live games. Dude there are like a whole 8 Live games, half of which are sports games. Soo whoopie doo.... you act like they quit making Single Player games. If you're so up and mad about it get Broadband and Live.

They are not making a mistake, pointless topic!

8 games for now microsoft said that in 2003 they would have more then 50 XBL games 50! thats alot of games you may have paid extra but thats to compete against other but we should not be without added contesnt to games cuz we dont have XBL its like saying we get half the game and u get the whole game plus the ability to play online for the price of only 50 bux for a starter kit i really dont think its fair

NINE BREAKER
12-05-2002, 10:05 PM
Mech Assault is hella worth the 50 bones! Don't know about SC, believe me I AM getting it, but MA's single player and multi player are awesome.

Zion
12-05-2002, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by hiter101
can u truley tell me games like mechassault and ghost recon are worth 50 bux a peace just for their single player

I've been playing Ghost Recon for about 3 weeks straight, and I've only gone online with it one time..and that was becuase a friend (Discretion) invited me in so I tried it. Online in incredible. Stupendous. Stellar.

Single player is just as good.

qpid
12-05-2002, 10:43 PM
It's called a selling point, m$ is having the downloads and addons for games to get people to buy xbl

SPARTAN VI
12-05-2002, 11:12 PM
FEAR NOT! MS won't make anymore mistakes, XBOX LIVE is a blessing as are the games that are coming to it. I think there will conitinue to be a steady flow of offline games as well as LIVE enabled games. Ehh... I hope.

Welcome to XBA qpid.:)

rockola
12-05-2002, 11:39 PM
this is why I think MS isnt really advertising xboxlive that hard. people are already starting to think that just because a game is live enabled it isnt good withought. live is awesome and like it or not. internet gameplay will be a big part of any consoles future. but just because games are live enabled doesnt mean that the game isnt good for people that dont have it. yea sure some will be and some wont. but they said that 50 games will be live compatable. but what is the compatability. splinter cell is live compatable but it is strictly a single player game. MA is a good single player game, along with ghost recon but live adds to its replayability. and makes the game better than it is withought it.


dont fight it, get with it, you'll have a lot of fun

bbchs_trash
12-06-2002, 08:29 AM
I wouldn't have payed the $50 bucks if there was no downloadable content. If they start giving it to the people who didn't buy it, or are whining about it, then I would be pretty ****ed off. You get the full single player experience so shutup. You don't get robbed. The extra levels for SC will be on OXM(well half of them) and most other downloadable content is meant for those of us on LIVE. More like mulitplayer maps, weapons, and characters aren't for those who aren't online. Just quit all your *****ing and moaning and buy Live... its not that expensive, I'm 15 and pay for it all, Broadband account and Live.

hiter101
12-06-2002, 08:43 AM
Most people dont have Live because they dont have broadband and wil prob not be gettin it but releasing games like star wars galaxies which can only be playes on live will really hurt M$ because 80% of xbox owners dont have live ;)

shnike123
12-06-2002, 09:54 AM
Hmm i dont have braudband atm but if i my parents ever decide to get it live will be my first buy. I love playing pc games online and being able to take a consol online is even better. eheh oh and btw mech assault is very worth 50 bucks but i havent play ghost recon yet. Another thing BUY SPLINTER CELL NOW. hehe

qpid
12-06-2002, 10:01 AM
Well according to iga via http://xbox.ign.com/articles/379/379464p1.html



"Those without Xbox Live won't be left behind
If you don't have Xbox Live, all of the online content will be made available to all gamers. The method for delivery hasn't been decided yet, but the content won't be offered until after it's available for download on Xbox Live."


Thanks for the welcome btw

SaintHax
12-06-2002, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by hiter101
can u truley tell me games like mechassault and ghost recon are worth 50 bux a peace just for their single player


Ghost Recon is a MUCH better single player game. It's multiplayer aspects are so bad that me and my room mate quite playing it together and just started seperate campaigns. Not being able to use a named specialist, not having stats for your generic troops, having to solve the same mission in the campaign and in a quick mission to unlock multiplayer missions and other unlocks sometimes have you beating the mission as a single palyer 5 times. UGH!!

rockola
12-06-2002, 11:45 AM
Originally posted by hiter101
Most people dont have Live because they dont have broadband and wil prob not be gettin it but releasing games like star wars galaxies which can only be playes on live will really hurt M$ because 80% of xbox owners dont have live ;)


starwars galaxies was always a online MMORPG. releasing that game will not hurt MS. MS is lucky to get that game imo. it couldve just remained on the PC only. games like that is going to be what causes people to eventually get broadband.

yea theres a lot of people that CANT get it because it isnt offered, but there are a lot of people that dont get it because they just dont want it or understand the benifit etc. theres a guy that works with me right now that has aol and a second phone line and complains all the time- and for about 5 bucks more he could have cable- but he dont think he uses the internet enough to justify getting cable. a LOT of people think about broadband that way.

JJaX
12-06-2002, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by SaintHax



Ghost Recon is a MUCH better single player game. It's multiplayer aspects are so bad that me and my room mate quite playing it together and just started seperate campaigns. Not being able to use a named specialist, not having stats for your generic troops, having to solve the same mission in the campaign and in a quick mission to unlock multiplayer missions and other unlocks sometimes have you beating the mission as a single palyer 5 times. UGH!!

You mean its a MUCH better single player game if you dont have live.

If you have live, the muliplayer goes Doo Doo all over single player game. A hot steamy triple flush doo doo that is.

XBOX MSSC
12-06-2002, 12:07 PM
Originally posted by JJaX


You mean its a MUCH better single player game if you dont have live.

If you have live, the muliplayer goes Doo Doo all over single player game. A hot steamy triple flush doo doo that is.

word. XBL is what MAKES ghost recon imo.

bbchs_trash
12-06-2002, 12:12 PM
Its sold 150,000 units so far. Thats within the first three weeks. I mean seriously, the 80% seems a bit much. And you act like Microsoft just stopped publishing single player games. You are a complete moron.

Brute Force which is published by Microsoft isn't online. They don't even want to make it online. As for 50 games for Live by next year.... who cares? Those games also feature a single player experience. Do you think HALO 2 will be online exclusive. This was a dumb ass post and you need to realize that. No game besides MMORPG's will be online exclusive. Think of LIVE as an extra feature that you can't use.

Quit crying and buy the damned Broadband and Live. If people are going to whine about this then just go buy a Gamecube because that is the only system whos focus isn't on online right now. Games are beginning to go online... and you need to realise this. People have been wanting this forever, and now there are asses like you that are ruining this.

Sit back and watch it flow, single player games will never fade out. That was noted by the Dreamcast with games like PSO... you act like Microsoft limits what people publish. Microsoft won't make the mistake of making all online... it will be third party that does it... if that ever happens. Microsoft is clearly trying to suit the needs of both those with Live... and without. Go look through all the games listed between now and Febuary that feature online play... its dissapointing... barely any. You're point is finally brought down!

hiter101
12-06-2002, 12:22 PM
genious realize this average gamers are kids that dont have the ability to get broadband or dont even know wat xbox live is. im not whining or complaing i think XBL is great idea i just think xbox is marketing it a little to much the only commercial that dont include XBL is DTR. Im just saying that microsoft over promoting XBL when most people dont have broadband isnt such a good idea.

bbchs_trash
12-06-2002, 12:27 PM
Average gamers are more like 15-25 years old. Xbox more like 16-35 years old. Microsoft always intended this to be an adult system... and if you don't want the multiplayer and are going to cry about Microsoft selling the systems through the one big way they can(LIVE) then go play on a Gamecube where the games are made for kids. I'm sorry, but games are heading into a direction many people don't want to go. But for those of us who do, it will be Bittersweet, for those who don't, you get lost in the past.

hiter101
12-06-2002, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by bbchs_trash
I'm sorry, but games are heading into a direction many people don't want to go. But for those of us who do, it will be Bittersweet, for those who don't, you get lost in the past.

EXACTLY! most people dont want XBL im not saying that its bad for hardcore gamers but for those average gamers which make up most of the gaming population wont get XBL and thaat really bad for xbox and wats bad for xbox is bad for xbox owners

MerimacHamwich
12-06-2002, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by hiter101
Most people dont have Live because they dont have broadband and wil prob not be gettin it but releasing games like star wars galaxies which can only be playes on live will really hurt M$ because 80% of xbox owners dont have live ;)

That 80% figure is way off. Maybe 40% don't have it. Everyone I know who has an xbox has xbox LIVE, except one person. By now there is probably around 220,000 xbox LIVE kits sold. Most house holds with an xbox don't only have one xbox user. Probably more like two or three at least. So lets see here. 220,000 x 2 (to be safe) = 440,000 XBOX LIVE users. Pertty much a half a million xbox LIVE users in a month of its release. Sounds to me like there are alot of xbox live users. Releasing xbox live only games is not a mistake my friend.

50$ (AMERICAN!) per game x 220,000 = $11,000,000

Doesn't sound like to bad of a business venture to me. Ofcourse that would be if one company sold one game to every xbox LIVE purchaser.

So lets go by half of those numbers to be a little more conservative. So then the company would make $5,500,000. That ain't too shabby either. Now lets consider this. How many people who have xbox LIVE right now only have one xbox LIVE compatible game? Probably less than half. How many have two? I would guess around 2/3. How many have 3? Most likely less than half. Now, you can figure out the numbers for sales if you want, but overall it is not a mistake.

hiter101
12-06-2002, 12:47 PM
220,000 people you are saying in the first month thats about it maybe 5 more thousand people might get it if they get broadband so thats 225,000 not how many xbox's where sold? lets make math simple lets say 1 million in all ( i know its more) so that about 1/4 of people who have xboxes have XBL so if they focuse all there intensions on XBL the other 3/4's of people are gettin umm how shal we say this screwed :) so i doubt its a smart buisness choice

MerimacHamwich
12-06-2002, 12:55 PM
But you see they aren't getting screwed. What about me, I don't have the money for Steel Battalion! ****** I AM SCREWED OUT OF A GAME! I HATE MICROSOFT! I CAN'T AFFORD SPLINTER CELL EITHER ******! I HATE MICROSOFT WITH A PASSION! I PAYED 300$ FOR MY SYSTEM AND I CAN'T EVEN AFFORD GAMES FOR IT! WHAT A RIP! XBOX LIVE is an option for gamers. There is a huge market for it out there. That is why they are venturing into it. The downloadable content, like someone else said, is mainly for online multiplayer anyway. Besides, the game the developers release is THE FINAL VERSION. If it wasn't, they wouldn't have released it. The dc is just to provide a little more replayability.

Also, get this, xbox LIVE hasn't been launched world wide yet. So there is still some 1,000,000 users left who are probably going to buy box live.

What I am trying to say is that, no, it isn't a mistake to venture into online territory. it would be a huge mistake if they didn't. If they didn't, you would be complaining becuase sony did and becuase microsoft didn't they are losing the hardcore gamers that wan't to play online.

Online gaming is a certain part of the future. If you can't change, you will be left behind.

RudedogX
12-06-2002, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by hiter101
220,000 people you are saying in the first month thats about it maybe 5 more thousand people might get it if they get broadband so thats 225,000 not how many xbox's where sold? lets make math simple lets say 1 million in all ( i know its more) so that about 1/4 of people who have xboxes have XBL so if they focuse all there intensions on XBL the other 3/4's of people are gettin umm how shal we say this screwed :) so i doubt its a smart buisness choice

If they are focusing all of their attention on XBL, how do you explain that currently there are only about 8 XBL games out, while during the time that XBL came out and now, there have been about 3-4 times that many put out that are not XBL?

Sure doesn't seem like 3/4s of the others are getting screwed. Plus, those live games do have single player capability and multiplayer capability. The inability to enjoy them without online play really lies with the player and not the developer. I personally hated Hitman2, and yet it got rave reviews by many. In other words, it's all a matter of personal taste.

hiter101
12-06-2002, 01:02 PM
i understand that most downloadable content is for XBL but wat about dc for games like SC and Toe Jam and Earl 3 that is like saying u guys pay alittle extra and u get to play online AND get more replability on single player games and other who still pay for the price of the game get half the game if this is continued pretty soon developer would start selling games by discs not by the whole game :rolleyes:

RudedogX
12-06-2002, 01:04 PM
Originally posted by hiter101
i understand that most downloadable content is for XBL but wat about dc for games like SC and Toe Jam and Earl 3 that is like saying u guys pay alittle extra and u get to play online AND get more replability on single player games and other who still pay for the price of the game get half the game if this is continued pretty soon developer would start selling games by discs not by the whole game :rolleyes:

Actually, if I remember correctly, there was talk about a game being made that would have monthly installments. You would pay something like 5 a month for a new installment. Each one would have a cliffhanger kinda like a television show. I think it got scrapped (but still can't fully remember).

hiter101
12-06-2002, 01:05 PM
Originally posted by rudedogX


If they are focusing all of their attention on XBL, how do you explain that currently there are only about 8 XBL games out, while during the time that XBL came out and now, there have been about 3-4 times that many put out that are not XBL?

Sure doesn't seem like 3/4s of the others are getting screwed. Plus, those live games do have single player capability and multiplayer capability. The inability to enjoy them without online play really lies with the player and not the developer. I personally hated Hitman2, and yet it got rave reviews by many. In other words, it's all a matter of personal taste.

dude XBL wasnt even out for a month and already 8 games are out for it that seems like a pretty good statistic and in 2003 50 games thats alot to argue with since xbox doesnt pump out 100 games in 2 - 3 months like sony does wen there half done.

RudedogX
12-06-2002, 01:10 PM
Originally posted by hiter101


dude XBL wasnt even out for a month and already 8 games are out for it that seems like a pretty good statistic and in 2003 50 games thats alot to argue with since xbox doesnt pump out 100 games in 2 - 3 months like sony does wen there half done.

OK, they're at what, 200 games already in a year, and there are going to be 50 live games next year...So how many does that leave for those that are not Live compatible.

Anyone, anyone?

Oh damn...150!

'nuff said. The ratio is still there to show that MS will not forget those that can not play the game on Live.

hiter101
12-06-2002, 01:18 PM
50 that are announced for 2003 and its still only 2002 by the time there done i bet that the ratio would change to 150 xbox live games to like 50-75 non XBL games

RudedogX
12-06-2002, 01:23 PM
Originally posted by hiter101
50 that are announced for 2003 and its still only 2002 by the time there done i bet that the ratio would change to 150 xbox live games to like 50-75 non XBL games

Hmmm...

Anyone smell a witch-hunt brewing?

Damn you're a pessimist.:rolleyes:

MerimacHamwich
12-06-2002, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by hiter101
i understand that most downloadable content is for XBL but wat about dc for games like SC and Toe Jam and Earl 3 that is like saying u guys pay alittle extra and u get to play online AND get more replability on single player games and other who still pay for the price of the game get half the game if this is continued pretty soon developer would start selling games by discs not by the whole game :rolleyes:


Notice that we do pay to get the extra stuff.

Like I said before, you guys who pay for the game still do get the full version. otherwise the developer would not have released the game. Notice that this is "EXTRA" content we are getting.

Plus, everything you are saying is based on your personal opinion of what may happen in the future. Is microsoft a stupid company that does not know that alot of people can't get xbox LIVE. NO.

As was said before many many times, thoe xbox live compatible games are still playable offline. Those games that are only xbox live compatible are meant for those of us who want an amazing online experience. Are you missing out? Yes, but that is your problem. There is still a vast number of people who will be able to enjoy the game.

What microsoft is doing is giving everyone what they want. I really don't get why you are complaining. Like Rudedog said. There is around 150 offline only games out there. That isn't a small number.

Sure there are 8 games out for the launch of live. If there was only 2 then a ton of people would not have gotten it. how many games were there for the launch of the xbox? Around 10 am I right?

Sure the # of Live capable games will increase. So will the number of offline only games.

hiter101
12-06-2002, 01:36 PM
Originally posted by rudedogX


Hmmm...

Anyone smell a witch-hunt brewing?

Damn you're a pessimist.:rolleyes:

ROFL!

yes i'm ;)

LynxFX
12-06-2002, 02:22 PM
I've always loved online multiplayer on the PC, ever since Doom and Duke Nukem 3D. Calling up your neighbors computer and playing a 1 on 1 deathmatch was a blast.

I never liked split screen on consoles. 2 was bad but then came 4. I could never get used to that. Now that Xbox is online and with a pretty good system I have started to devert my PC online time to Xbox online time.

I don't think I have bought a single game for the PC that wasn't online multiplayer capable.

I don't see myself doing that for the Xbox but I can see my interest in online games for the Xbox grow more than single player only games. That doesn't mean I won't play them by myself but being online gives the game almost infinate replayability. Every Live game I've played so far has had a great single player when compared to most single player only games out there. Whacked, MotoGP, Mechassault, Ghost Recon, but being online just extends them to a whole new level.

Promote Live like there is no tomorrow MS. :)

Cloud Strife
12-06-2002, 02:36 PM
I have to say the biggest reason why Micorsoft doesn't make many single player games is because the replay value in them is low. Mutli-player games have a longer replay value and Arcade style games usually. I say the Playstation 2 is a single player system, but the games are over within 4-8 hours. They have no multi-player at all. For games like MechAssault, it really depends upon how much you enjoy going through the missions. If you want a single player game, Blinx, Shenmue II Splinter Cell, MGS 2 Substance, and Baldurs Gate Dark Alliance are games to keep you busy. If you were to like these games, there would be no problem.

Cloud Strife
12-06-2002, 02:38 PM
Originally posted by MerimacHamwich
But you see they aren't getting screwed. What about me, I don't have the money for Steel Battalion! ****** I AM SCREWED OUT OF A GAME! I HATE MICROSOFT! I CAN'T AFFORD SPLINTER CELL EITHER ******! I HATE MICROSOFT WITH A PASSION! I PAYED 300$ FOR MY SYSTEM AND I CAN'T EVEN AFFORD GAMES FOR IT! WHAT A RIP! XBOX LIVE is an option for gamers. There is a huge market for it out there. That is why they are venturing into it. The downloadable content, like someone else said, is mainly for online multiplayer anyway. Besides, the game the developers release is THE FINAL VERSION. If it wasn't, they wouldn't have released it. The dc is just to provide a little more replayability.

Also, get this, xbox LIVE hasn't been launched world wide yet. So there is still some 1,000,000 users left who are probably going to buy box live.

What I am trying to say is that, no, it isn't a mistake to venture into online territory. it would be a huge mistake if they didn't. If they didn't, you would be complaining becuase sony did and becuase microsoft didn't they are losing the hardcore gamers that wan't to play online.

Online gaming is a certain part of the future. If you can't change, you will be left behind. Your right about that. That is why Sony is going into online games also. It's just that the adapter isn't available to all systems that cuts online games down.

qpid
12-06-2002, 09:24 PM
Damn some of you are dense, the extra content WILL be available as I said earlier in this post:


Originally posted by qpid
Well according to iga via http://xbox.ign.com/articles/379/379464p1.html



"Those without Xbox Live won't be left behind
If you don't have Xbox Live, all of the online content will be made available to all gamers. The method for delivery hasn't been decided yet, but the content won't be offered until after it's available for download on Xbox Live."


Thanks for the welcome btw

wbio
12-07-2002, 06:39 AM
MS did say there would be more than 50 Live games by the end of next year, but after just one year, the XBOX has almost 200 games. By next year it will be about 400, and only 50 of them will be Live enabled.

Cloud Strife
12-07-2002, 07:56 AM
Originally posted by hiter101


dude XBL wasnt even out for a month and already 8 games are out for it that seems like a pretty good statistic and in 2003 50 games thats alot to argue with since xbox doesnt pump out 100 games in 2 - 3 months like sony does wen there half done. What the heck are you saying, Sony doesn't pump out that many titles. The Playstation 2 has over 300 titles. Not more than 400. Several of those games are crap that 3-DO sends out and lots of outdated EA sports.