The longer I wait, the more I'm thinking 360 is a rip-off

[Nurb]

I've been reading on the 360, and its comparisons to the xbox, and the fact the games aren't truely HD or next-gen quality. So, I'm beginning to realize that the money for the systems and the extra 10 - 20$ for the games aren't reeeeeally worth it. I just don't feel like the 360 is truely the ground breaking next gen system the companies were sayin this was.

the Peter Moore interview back in Feb is making me think, here's some snippets from the Whole Interview (http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.offset=0&cId=3147131):


EGM: Wouldn't you be pissed if you paid $400 for a new console and many of its games looked only marginally better than their current-gen equivalents?

PM: You wanna call out some games? Because I'm not gonna call out any games.

EGM: The 2K Sports games. Amped 3. Tony Hawk. Need for Speed. Gun. King Kong. People can argue they're not getting that big nextgen leap in graphics. On top of that, you're asking consumers to pay an extra $10 for these games. To quote you, "Next-generation games will combine unprecedented audio and visual experiences, create worlds that are beyond real, and they'll deliver story lines and gameplay so compelling that it'll feel like a..."

PM: "...lucid dream."

EGM: And then you also said that every game has to have the "essentials," certain requirements every game must have.

PM: Well, the essentials have always been every game needs to output in [highdefinition resolution] 720p. It's gotta have multichannel sound, 5.1 minimum. The games have to render in 16x9 aspect ratio, and they've gotta have 2x antialiasing. The games do.

You know, you called out King Kong as not looking next generation. The Xbox version looks great; you put it against the Xbox 360 version, though...[the 360 version] looks unbelievable. Games like Gun have not done well, but I don't know whether that's because of the graphics or because of the gameplay. It seems to be struggling in sales. But, it's such a subjective situation.

I've gotten a lot of e-mails, believe me, in the last 10 days from consumers on all kinds of things. It's the first time I've heard from people; nobody has ever said, "I'm unhappy with the game experience from the next generation." I've had a lot of complaints about a lot of [other] stuff, but nobody's complained about the games yet.

I think also, gamers—the guys and the gals that are lining up on the sidewalks during the first 24 or 48 hours—are also very rational about what they expect on day one. They know things are going to continue to look even better as we get into the platform cycle. If it's graphics that they're concerned about, those will continue to get even better than they currently are today. But again, graphics...it's such a subjective thing, and one man's meat is another man's poison when you look at particular games.

http://www.1up.com/media?id=2634974(the image they were referencing)

EGM: But let's look at the PS1 generation and the jump to Dreamcast. On all levels, no matter which games you look at, you can immediately see a huge improvement in graphics. With a lot of 360 games, the leap isn't there, don't you agree?

PM: That's an opinion that I don't share, but look at it [this way]...we're selling games at an unprecedented rate; we're breaking records. Clearly, consumers are happy about something. And I think it's not just people looking at the graphics. Where people are really excited is the online experience, the Marketplace experience, Xbox Live Arcade, and being able to join Xbox Live Silver for no charge and no credit card.

You can't just pinpoint and say the graphics in Gun don't look good, therefore the entire ecosystem's got a problem. Gamers are smarter than that. They're looking at the entire experience. They also know games will continue to look better, if looking good is one of their higher criteria, which it typically is. But there are enough greatlooking games out there to combat that, if you're looking for graphics.

You know, people have to make their own choices, and if they determine that this is not worth their 400 bucks, then it does seem like there's somebody in line behind them that does think it is.


Also, The article about "is it really the HD era?" is a good read for comparisons on the games and the old and new systems. http://hdera.1up.com/

My question is this, is it really worth over a grand to have a machine that only adds slightly higher resolution, AA, AF, and depth of feild? I dunno, but I may wait a generation. Besides, all the best games on 360 are on PC at the moment too *snerk* :D

am I stretching it all that much?

[XxPunkerxX]

Ya i agree with u.. i have been looking at the graphics and have played most of the games on the system and im not impressed.... This definatly is what the next gen should not look like it actually is kind of sad.

[vman]

you have to remember that every console is never at its best the first year its out. the developers need more time to figure out how to use the hardware fully before games actually start to look like a step up.

For example. Halo:CE at launch looks a lot worse than, lets say Black at the end of the Xbox life. its just something that comes with new hardware. it takes time to get the most out of the system.

[Ainokeatoo]

EGM: The 2K Sports games. Amped 3. Tony Hawk. Need for Speed. Gun. King Kong.

^^The games listed above were made with the xbox graphics, I know because I have read the interview that was on the official xbox site.^^

Also if you have played Call of Duty 2 or Perfect Dark Zero, you'll see what next-gen graphics are all about, some of the release games for the 360 were made from the xbox graphics I can tell you that much. Vman is right, every console that first starts out isn't going to be the top of the line once it hit's shelfs it will take about half a year to a year to perfect it. I could care less about the graphics, even though I don't, Xbox 360 offers more things than you can imagine. including everything it has now, you will be able to get what they call a "Web Cam" for the 360 and hook it up and vid chat with other people. That is what i am looking forward to and is what I would want, actually having this available in a console should make it the hot item of the year, you should really give props to microsoft for making that available.

[Highlite23]

Like vman said, its not uncommon for the first batch of games to be less than expected visually when a console comes out.

But to say the system isn't all its cracked up to be isn't acurate either, as far as graphics, Condemned, COD2, Kameo, there are more impressive titles on the 360 than not IMO.
As for the system itself, well again IMO, its the perfect package in design as well as functionality. the marketplace, XBL, downloadable content, Media extentions, and all of these functions will develop and improve just like the games will.

[swivel]

you have to remember that every console is never at its best the first year its out. the developers need more time to figure out how to use the hardware fully before games actually start to look like a step up.

For example. Halo:CE at launch looks a lot worse than, lets say Black at the end of the Xbox life. its just something that comes with new hardware. it takes time to get the most out of the system.

I agree with Nurb, but I also agree with what vman is saying. Historically vman is correct... but there is a big difference with this generation that nobody really talks about. You see, the previous consoles got tapped-out. Developers started feeling constrained by the abilities of the hardware. Devs were thinking that they could render these scenes much better, and add these effects and do this and that, but they don't have the hardware. We never got to that point with the last generation. God of War was just showing that the PS2 still had life in it. And XBox games kept getting better and better. No telling where XBox games would be right now, but most of the talent left for XBox2 development a year ago, so we will never know.

The point is, we made the hardware jump before the software guys really needed it. There was not this pent-up energy being dammed back by hardware limitations. That is what we saw when the Dreamcast came out. The wall of PS1 tech broke, and all these techniques and tools that were lying in wait came gushing out. No such pressure was built up behind the XBox and PS2. The next generation came because MS wanted to revamp the image of their console. It was a financial and strategic decision, not one due to a clamoring from the devs and the public. In fact, both were pretty much ignored when design decisions were made for the new systems (both Sony and MS are guilty of this. See the core/premium system and boomerang controller and multi-core chips for examples)

I think this entire transition to a new generation of consoles is going badly for everyone. All three companies are making mistakes that were easily avoidable.

Maybe Sega can come out with something in three years, when we really would have needed a new console anyway, and push gaming in the right direction? :hump:

[Highlite23]

I can see your point swivel, and your right, we probably didn't need a new system yet I'll agree with that completly. The bigger problem, if you can call it that, is that gaming isn't what it used to be.

While gaming was considered "Childs Play" by many in the past, the reality is that it's a multi-billion dollar business and companies are needing to increase the user base as much as they can.

So while us "Gamers" may not like it, in the end the bottom line is what all these companies are striving for, the average age of a gamer is constantly going up which taps into the "Disposable Income" territory.

I guess my point is thet gamers don't hold as much of the "Demographic" as they used to, oh, we may still be the biggest part, be we aren't the only part anymore.

I don't know, I kind of liked it when my "Adult" friends made fun of me, know everybody plays in one way shape or form, and unfortunatly they wouldn't know a good game from a bad one if it blew up in there faces.

I guess we just ride the wave and make the best choices for ourselves.

[Infraredragon]

Yes,it is true that any time something gets realy popular someboby else makes something even better, sometimes it's a good thing,sometimes it's a bad one.Ether way you cant stop it.A realy good example is,in fact,the most obvious.We had the NES,nintindo made a profit and sombody else wanted that profit too,so they made a gaming system.Eventualy,after rises and falls in the gaming economy we ended up with what we have in the next-gen(or cerrent-gen,however you look at it).

An example of when this can be a bad thing is when,as stated above,another console comes out to soon,or when something in the real world becomes popular and they make a game based on it,such as 50 cent Bulletproff,which still made more money than alot of realy good games.

But,you can't stop it,the 360 will have some realy good games,and some not so good one's,and thats just the way it is.

[CarGuy]

Are we really debating this? This is a joke.. This is just the way all of technology goes. You can always make a case against a new technology or product, but I've gotten so much more out of the 360 than the Xbox. All of a sudden towards the end of the XBox big game run the games just didn't impress me. Graphically they plateaued and games like HL2 felt like they they were too much for the Xbox to handle. Chances are if you're complaing about a 360 you actually own you're probably not playing it on an hdtv with surround and you don't have Live. Don't like it for what ever reason? Don't play it. Sell it and wait. I'll be over here enjoying GRAW, Oblivion, PGR3, and Fight Night. Then when I'm done i'll switch over to the dashboard with the press of a button on my wireless controller and download some high def movie trailers,game demos, and maybe play a little Geometry Wars or Guantlet online. All the while streaming music wirelessly from my PC.

[Ainokeatoo]

YES FINALLY SOMEONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, thank you carguy for putting your input here, he is absolutely right, if you don't like the system you either doh't have a widescreen or hdtv (like i do) or surround sound (like i do) or live, (like everyone here does.).

[CarGuy]

Maybe Sega can come out with something in three years, when we really would have needed a new console anyway, and push gaming in the right direction? :hump:


Are you friggin serious? Some of the things I mentioned above are just the tip of the iceberg with the 360. What else do you want??? :bang:

[Infraredragon]

I agree with carguy too,and I didn't say anything was wrong with the 360.
I was just saying that we will have great games in the future that can use the 360 to its full poteintial,but there is no doubt in my mind that games like Oblivion are amazing.However you can't say the Xbox was over either,but thats something we'll have to deal with.

[Double_Diablo]

Play Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter and The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion in HD and tell me that's not next-gen. Come on! I dare ya!

[Ainokeatoo]

Sega has gotten out of the console business, their last console was dreamcast now all they do are games.

[Jelloman653]

i can agree with some of the posts here. not all the games are next gen. but take a look at Fight Night Round 3 and say it doesn't look beautiful.

[FatBox]

I think Splinter Cell is going to bring out the best of the the Xbox 360's hardware.

[pjh13]

i can agree with some of the posts here. not all the games are next gen. but take a look at Fight Night Round 3 and say it doesn't look beautiful.


yeah true story. i may suck at that game but it is amazing to look at.

[Nurb]

You guys are forgetting the costs involved, sure, its nice to have the 360, but the tech jump came too soon. The costs of development are so great, they price of the games and accessories went up quite a bit. We pay 10-20 bucks more for the SAME games. Quake 4 wasn't optomized for the 360, and it looks like crap on it, plus its 10 dollars MORE than the PC version.

http://hdera.1up.com/media?id=2533646&type=lg
http://hdera.1up.com/media?id=2533639&type=lg
http://hdera.1up.com/media?id=2535502&type=lg

this isn't a ps1 to dreamcast jump, and with the PS3 pushed back, it gives sony more time to develop thier system and frankly it worries me, because with only a year or so between the dreamcast and ps2, sony's machine blew sega's out of the water.

besides, people are STILL making games on thier preference, the ps2 packages for cross platform games, or xbox, then porting it. And with such a lack of development for the 360, its making the system a money waster for the time being. The games announced don't mean anything.. remember the LOOONG list of pushbacks and cancelations for xbox? well in an early OXM issue (in early 02 I think), they made a list of the 200 most important xbox games that were announced, (orchid, BC, B&W, and TFO) but all but a handfull were dropped, making the xbox lineup very sparse compared to the PS2; mostly shooters sportsgames, and a few crappy RPGs. Not to mention the letdowns of Brute Force and Sneakers, which was gonna freak everyone out by those fur shaders. So you can't trust what's announced just yet.

PD0 was pretty much a ledown from what I read, and its tough to find a really good 360 exclusive title. RARE is yet to produce its fabled legendary games considering Kameo wasn't recieved well, and MS just bought lionhead despite thier reputation for big over-hyped ideas that can't be done and release a game like all the others. combine those things with the high game costs, and you have few people buying fewer games.

it still seems like a mistake to come out so early when the PS3 is still being worked on, but time will tell, and I'm thinking I'll still wait a while longer... I'm writing these criticisims because I want my xbox investment to pay off demmit! I want them to make the right moves, but they just seem to be screwing up and focusing on thier supercool LIVE networking doodly-bobs and less on the games themselves

[vman]

Well, if all you're complaining about is the costs (as in its too expensive for what its actually offering) then you probably should've waited for a price drop or something. There was a lot of media downplaying the 360 before launch saying that it really wasnt worth the $400. I read an article (i forgot where) that basically said the 360 will probably feel like a ripoff the first year you own it. I guess all I can suggest is to just have patience and wait for more blockbuster hits that will blow your face out of the water.

and like Carguy said.... If you don't have a big, widescreen, HDTV with surround sound, and all the proper cables, then you are not getting the most out of the console. That is part of the reason why I havent made the jump yet, cause i'm not gonna spend $400+ on a console and games to just take it home to play on my 4 year old RCA 19" screen TV.

[swivel]

Are you friggin serious? Some of the things I mentioned above are just the tip of the iceberg with the 360. What else do you want??? :bang:

Serious about Sega making another console? Nope, that was a joke I was making while bashing my head against a brick wall. The irony was the similarity between the Dreamcast and the XBox2. I've seen tons of reasons why the DC failed, but I think it all boiled down to lack of demand. A new console wasn't needed or wanted yet.

I also agree with all of your points, so there isn't any need for being hostile towards me just because we disagree on some things. You are right that the XBox2 is best if you have HD, 5.1, and Live. I doubt anyone would suggest otherwise. I also know that there is plenty of entertainment to be had with the new console, and some of the games look much better than anything on the XBox. But nothing will convince me that the XBox was tapped out, that a technology ceiling had been reached, and that we needed a new console when we did.

I think the only company that needed an upgrade was Nintendo. The GameCube was being ignored by outside devs, and needed an upgrade. I think they are right to ignore HD this generation (and all my TV's, three of them, are HD. So this isn't a sour-grapes argument). They are killing with the DS, and need to move that ingenuity to the big TV. So I understand the Wii coming out this holiday season.

But I feel like the PS3 is coming out a year too early, and the XBox2 came out 3 years too early. MS released the XBox2 in order to shake up what was a losing market for itself. I think the internal strategy was to win over the Asian market. I think that was their prime directive. Sony's mistake has been to allow MS to scare them into an unplanned upgrade.

Now, some people will point out that the upgrade path is 5 years, period, and therefore it was time to move up. I disagree with that as well. My last computer stayed near-top-of-the-line for almost 4 years. We have recently seen a stagnation in hardware that hasn't happened in all of my lifetime. CPU speeds sat around 3 Ghz for almost 4 years. A ceiling was hit that required a move to multi-core procs to get past. Memory technology swam through molasses. MS hasn't had a new OS in forever. Creative Labs had the same high-end soundcard for years. HD technology was reaching a ceiling as well.

Then, half a year ago, you had this quantum leap in technology. The Audigy came out, multi-core procs, DDR3, Vertical HD recording was announced, video cards took a huge leap after various failed launches, the technology was moving again after this long pause. That long pause is why 5 years was not enough this time. MS and Sony are having to pay a premium for advanced technology right as the pace of innovation is taking off. These consoles will not feel powerful 2 years from now compared to what is cheaply available. For instance, I think Physics Add-On Cards are going to be standard in two years for PC's.

Everyone kicks the PS2 around for being built on aging hardware, but play God of War or Metal Gear Subsistance to see what good devs can do. There was plenty of life left in the XBox, and it was abandoned two years too early.

[ll Mista GT ll]

Serious about Sega making another console? Nope, that was a joke I was making while bashing my head against a brick wall. The irony was the similarity between the Dreamcast and the XBox2. I've seen tons of reasons why the DC failed, but I think it all boiled down to lack of demand. A new console wasn't needed or wanted yet.

I also agree with all of your points, so there isn't any need for being hostile towards me just because we disagree on some things. You are right that the XBox2 is best if you have HD, 5.1, and Live. I doubt anyone would suggest otherwise. I also know that there is plenty of entertainment to be had with the new console, and some of the games look much better than anything on the XBox. But nothing will convince me that the XBox was tapped out, that a technology ceiling had been reached, and that we needed a new console when we did.

I think the only company that needed an upgrade was Nintendo. The GameCube was being ignored by outside devs, and needed an upgrade. I think they are right to ignore HD this generation (and all my TV's, three of them, are HD. So this isn't a sour-grapes argument). They are killing with the DS, and need to move that ingenuity to the big TV. So I understand the Wii coming out this holiday season.

But I feel like the PS3 is coming out a year too early, and the XBox2 came out 3 years too early. MS released the XBox2 in order to shake up what was a losing market for itself. I think the internal strategy was to win over the Asian market. I think that was their prime directive. Sony's mistake has been to allow MS to scare them into an unplanned upgrade.

Now, some people will point out that the upgrade path is 5 years, period, and therefore it was time to move up. I disagree with that as well. My last computer stayed near-top-of-the-line for almost 4 years. We have recently seen a stagnation in hardware that hasn't happened in all of my lifetime. CPU speeds sat around 3 Ghz for almost 4 years. A ceiling was hit that required a move to multi-core procs to get past. Memory technology swam through molasses. MS hasn't had a new OS in forever. Creative Labs had the same high-end soundcard for years. HD technology was reaching a ceiling as well.

Then, half a year ago, you had this quantum leap in technology. The Audigy came out, multi-core procs, DDR3, Vertical HD recording was announced, video cards took a huge leap after various failed launches, the technology was moving again after this long pause. That long pause is why 5 years was not enough this time. MS and Sony are having to pay a premium for advanced technology right as the pace of innovation is taking off. These consoles will not feel powerful 2 years from now compared to what is cheaply available. For instance, I think Physics Add-On Cards are going to be standard in two years for PC's.

Everyone kicks the PS2 around for being built on aging hardware, but play God of War or Metal Gear Subsistance to see what good devs can do. There was plenty of life left in the XBox, and it was abandoned two years too early.


:hail: I have a 360, but none of the games really appeal to me. I'm still playing Halo 2. I mean I love that game. I think that when Halo 3 comes out for the 360, things will change drastically. I think that I would have been fine waiting another year for my 360. I do like the dashboard and the new XBL, but none of the games are "amazing" for me.

Go Halo 2! w00t! :D

[Ninjermy]

I stll have not gotten my 360, part of the reason is the lack of quality games to this point so I do agree with what is being said BUT the main reason I did not buy a 360 was because I spent 1000$ last year on my computer and it handles all the 360/PC games on better res then the 360 + HDTV.

[Codefox]

How anyone can say there's no want or demand for the next generation baffles me. The XBox is off the shelves as fast as Microsoft can put it on them. The console is well on its way to exceeding the XBox's sales.

Of course, for me, teh 360 was a huge upgrade, going from my Gamecube to a 360 on a 51" inch HD set. You haven't seen gaming till you've gamed like this.

[Salmonaitor]

There are many good arguements in this thread, but the bottom line is that there is only so much developers can do right now. Many of the great 360 titles are coming out on PC also, and it's not like they look any better on a PC. The PC is the most powerful gaming experience out there, and it's not like there are mind-blowing graphical games coming out on them that aren't coming out on the console. Game Developers have to take gaming to the next level with the tools they have been give by software developers. Maybe there was life left in the Xbox, I don't doubt it, But Microsoft wanted to take Gaming in a different direction, and not just put out a gaming console, but a multimedia experience to the living room.

Next gen looking games will come, but for now, the Xbox360 experience isn't soley about gaming, it's about an interactive entertainment experience.

[mordecai]

besides, people are STILL making games on thier preference, the ps2 packages for cross platform games, or xbox, then porting it. And with such a lack of development for the 360, its making the system a money waster for the time being. The games announced don't mean anything.. remember the LOOONG list of pushbacks and cancelations for xbox? well in an early OXM issue (in early 02 I think), they made a list of the 200 most important xbox games that were announced, (orchid, BC, B&W, and TFO) but all but a handfull were dropped, making the xbox lineup very sparse compared to the PS2; mostly shooters sportsgames, and a few crappy RPGs. Not to mention the letdowns of Brute Force and Sneakers, which was gonna freak everyone out by those fur shaders. So you can't trust what's announced just yet.

PD0 was pretty much a ledown from what I read, and its tough to find a really good 360 exclusive title. RARE is yet to produce its fabled legendary games considering Kameo wasn't recieved well, and MS just bought lionhead despite thier reputation for big over-hyped ideas that can't be done and release a game like all the others. combine those things with the high game costs, and you have few people buying fewer games.


There are always cancellations to game lists, for every console. It was worse with Xbox because that was the first machine Microsoft had released and its competitors were well franchised. Also, that doesn't necessarily say anthing about what's going to happen with the 360, they are different consoles. Besides that though, I ended up happy with the selection of games on the xbox. I'd like it to be better on the 360, which I expect by the end of the year, but I would be content if it were as good as the xbox's.

[swivel]

There are many good arguements in this thread, but the bottom line is that there is only so much developers can do right now. Many of the great 360 titles are coming out on PC also, and it's not like they look any better on a PC. The PC is the most powerful gaming experience out there, and it's not like there are mind-blowing graphical games coming out on them that aren't coming out on the console. Game Developers have to take gaming to the next level with the tools they have been give by software developers. Maybe there was life left in the Xbox, I don't doubt it, But Microsoft wanted to take Gaming in a different direction, and not just put out a gaming console, but a multimedia experience to the living room.

Next gen looking games will come, but for now, the Xbox360 experience isn't soley about gaming, it's about an interactive entertainment experience.

Excellent points, all.

Especially the fact that top-of-the-line PC's are faster than the XBox2, but that doesn't mean that games look an entire generation ahead of it. Right now, I think Fight Night 3 is the best looking game on the market, and it is only on the XBox 2.

Having said that, Oblivion does look much better on the PC than on the XBox 2. You have to change some options, and download a texture pack, and annoying stuff like that... but we PC users have been making boot discs to run games, installing QEMM, editing autoexec.bat and config.sys files and such for ages. Patches are a normal part of gaming for us.