Xbox=Cube=about 20 million sold - So why is one = failure?
- Thread starter electrictroy
- Start date
GreenMonkey
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
I think Electrictroy has a valid post since the thread start.
Electrictroy, I think it's because the Xbox is a bigger seller specifically in the U.S., and has more 3rd part support. Everyone then calls the Gamecube a failure because it sells slightly less consoles and a lot less software. And rappers like it so it's "popular" which = "successful".
It is funny to see how so much fanboyism is flying about the thread. "OMG the Gamecube controller suxorz for FPS" - When this generation started I don't think anyone expected there to be such an upsurge in popularity for FPS games. They were very few and far between...GoldenEye and Quake on n64 come to mind. It's a great controller for anything that's not a fighting game (which needs an arcade stick IMO anyway) or a FPS.
And comments about it having no games. Please. Super Smash Brothers Melee. Super Monkey Ball (you xbox fanboys got a VERY VERY late port). Pikmin. Mario Kart DD. Paper Mario 2. Animal Crossing. Pac Man Vs (ok it's simple but very unique). These are all very unique games that almost establish their own genres.
Admittedly perhaps the Gamecube has peaked...I think Nintendo is spending time on games for the new console.
IMO FPS on a dual analog setup is subpar at best - for someone raised on mouse FPS gaming I don't understand the ranting here. Halo does it better because it is a native console game, but I don't think there is anything worse than a ported-from-PC FPS game.
That post about all the "Great games" still being made for xbox:
[quote name='mietha']
For starters, software sales. Nintendo has had a grand total of 2 gamecube games in the top 20 of sales this year. The Xbox has 6 this month alone, including #2 and #4. Secondly, the Xbox has vastly outsold the Gamecube everywhere except Japan, where the Xbox IS considered a failure. Thirdly, at the end of it's life cycle, the Xbox is churning out wonderful game after wonderful game (Far Cry Instincts, Doom 3, Half Life 2, Burnout Revenge, etc. etc.)
[/QUOTE]
Far Cry Instincts: almost a PC port
Doom 3: PC port
Half Life 2: PC port
ooooooohhh, quality "xbox" games of 2005. It's like a flashback to early in the console's life, when people were taking snipes at it saying it only had PC ports.
And to you people complaining about kiddie games:
Obviously you must be younger kids that didn't experience the greatness of the 8-bit and 16-bit eras - good games don't have to be adult styled.
Either that or typical adults who only like games with boobies and guns. That's the reason the movie industry sucks
Electrictroy, I think it's because the Xbox is a bigger seller specifically in the U.S., and has more 3rd part support. Everyone then calls the Gamecube a failure because it sells slightly less consoles and a lot less software. And rappers like it so it's "popular" which = "successful".
It is funny to see how so much fanboyism is flying about the thread. "OMG the Gamecube controller suxorz for FPS" - When this generation started I don't think anyone expected there to be such an upsurge in popularity for FPS games. They were very few and far between...GoldenEye and Quake on n64 come to mind. It's a great controller for anything that's not a fighting game (which needs an arcade stick IMO anyway) or a FPS.
And comments about it having no games. Please. Super Smash Brothers Melee. Super Monkey Ball (you xbox fanboys got a VERY VERY late port). Pikmin. Mario Kart DD. Paper Mario 2. Animal Crossing. Pac Man Vs (ok it's simple but very unique). These are all very unique games that almost establish their own genres.
Admittedly perhaps the Gamecube has peaked...I think Nintendo is spending time on games for the new console.
IMO FPS on a dual analog setup is subpar at best - for someone raised on mouse FPS gaming I don't understand the ranting here. Halo does it better because it is a native console game, but I don't think there is anything worse than a ported-from-PC FPS game.
That post about all the "Great games" still being made for xbox:
[quote name='mietha']
For starters, software sales. Nintendo has had a grand total of 2 gamecube games in the top 20 of sales this year. The Xbox has 6 this month alone, including #2 and #4. Secondly, the Xbox has vastly outsold the Gamecube everywhere except Japan, where the Xbox IS considered a failure. Thirdly, at the end of it's life cycle, the Xbox is churning out wonderful game after wonderful game (Far Cry Instincts, Doom 3, Half Life 2, Burnout Revenge, etc. etc.)
[/QUOTE]
Far Cry Instincts: almost a PC port
Doom 3: PC port
Half Life 2: PC port
ooooooohhh, quality "xbox" games of 2005. It's like a flashback to early in the console's life, when people were taking snipes at it saying it only had PC ports.
And to you people complaining about kiddie games:
Obviously you must be younger kids that didn't experience the greatness of the 8-bit and 16-bit eras - good games don't have to be adult styled.
Either that or typical adults who only like games with boobies and guns. That's the reason the movie industry sucks
pimp tyranny
Banned
good points crocodile
i love PC to console FPSs. i never played Deus Ex or its sequel on PC, and i loved them. i did play Half-Life, Jedi Knight, Earthsiege 2 (not truly an FPS, but close) and more on PC, but after i got my playstation i just stopped playing PC games. sure it's easier to control on PC, more precise, but console is so accessible.
and yeah, mietha's definitely delivering gamefaqs in spades. three ports and a multi. greeeat examples.
i love PC to console FPSs. i never played Deus Ex or its sequel on PC, and i loved them. i did play Half-Life, Jedi Knight, Earthsiege 2 (not truly an FPS, but close) and more on PC, but after i got my playstation i just stopped playing PC games. sure it's easier to control on PC, more precise, but console is so accessible.
and yeah, mietha's definitely delivering gamefaqs in spades. three ports and a multi. greeeat examples.
[quote name='GreenMonkey']
And comments about it having no games. Please. Super Smash Brothers Melee. Super Monkey Ball (you xbox fanboys got a VERY VERY late port). Pikmin. Mario Kart DD. Paper Mario 2. Animal Crossing. Pac Man Vs (ok it's simple but very unique). These are all very unique games that almost establish their own genres. [/QUOTE]
SSBM is a sequel. Monkey Ball is just a puzzle game. Pikmin is awesome. DD isn't as good as MK64. Paper Mario 2 is a sequel. Animal Crossing roxzorz. Pac Man Vs. is a shitty game.
And comments about it having no games. Please. Super Smash Brothers Melee. Super Monkey Ball (you xbox fanboys got a VERY VERY late port). Pikmin. Mario Kart DD. Paper Mario 2. Animal Crossing. Pac Man Vs (ok it's simple but very unique). These are all very unique games that almost establish their own genres. [/QUOTE]
SSBM is a sequel. Monkey Ball is just a puzzle game. Pikmin is awesome. DD isn't as good as MK64. Paper Mario 2 is a sequel. Animal Crossing roxzorz. Pac Man Vs. is a shitty game.
GreenMonkey
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='evanft']SSBM is a sequel. Monkey Ball is just a puzzle game. Pikmin is awesome. DD isn't as good as MK64. Paper Mario 2 is a sequel. Animal Crossing roxzorz. Pac Man Vs. is a shitty game.[/QUOTE]
Monkey Ball - puzzle game implies Tetris or maybe Lolo from NES. You need serious reflexes and persistance for Monkey Ball. And it doubles as a great party game.
And SSBM, MK DD etc may be sequels, but no one else is making games like that (I guess a few clones are starting to pop up, like Jak X racing).
Personally, I think MK DD > MK64. Except the battle mode, which sucks on DD.
And Pac-Man vs is some good fun for 3-4x people
Monkey Ball - puzzle game implies Tetris or maybe Lolo from NES. You need serious reflexes and persistance for Monkey Ball. And it doubles as a great party game.
And SSBM, MK DD etc may be sequels, but no one else is making games like that (I guess a few clones are starting to pop up, like Jak X racing).
Personally, I think MK DD > MK64. Except the battle mode, which sucks on DD.
And Pac-Man vs is some good fun for 3-4x people
[quote name='evanft']SSBM is a sequel. Monkey Ball is just a puzzle game. Pikmin is awesome. DD isn't as good as MK64. Paper Mario 2 is a sequel. Animal Crossing roxzorz. Pac Man Vs. is a shitty game.[/QUOTE]
Are you serious? Is that actually supposed to be a counter argument? GTAIII was a sequel (hence the III). Vice City + San Andreas were sequels. Final Fantasy X was another enrty in a long established serries which had a direct sequel. DoA 3 is a sequel. I could go on and on for games on all systems. The DD vs MK64 is a subjective thing so I can't say you're right or wrong. I'll just say IMO, that DD > MK64 in all respects except battle mode (how did they screw that one up?). Plus just because you don't like puzzle games doesn't mean other people don't. Remember Tetris and its countless spin-offs and sequels? Or the fact that Lumines is one of the best games on the PSP (and will probably remain a well loved game for years). Jeez.....
Anyway, I agree with Green Monkey in being surprised how the FPS genre exploded this generation. But I suppose that's Halo's doing. That's certainly not a bad thing at all but since most (me included and I don't think it has anything to do with fanboyism) think the GCN controller isn't so FPS freindly, that didn't help the GCN.
As for MS or any other purchasing developers, you have to rememeber that a sale is a two deal. Why would Capcom, Konami, Sega or whoever sell to MS when they are all making plenty of money being multi-platform. Nintendo let Rare go cause they hadn't made an excellent game in YEARS. Let's also factor in that the Japanese could give a flip about the Xbox of FPS games and Capcom + co. are Japanese companies. Finally there is that sense of national pride which I feel applies to all companies in all business all around the world. If they are doing well and don't need "saving", why would any comapny want to be owned by a foreign firm? The money would have to be DAMN good but it already is for the big name studios. So why sell?
Are you serious? Is that actually supposed to be a counter argument? GTAIII was a sequel (hence the III). Vice City + San Andreas were sequels. Final Fantasy X was another enrty in a long established serries which had a direct sequel. DoA 3 is a sequel. I could go on and on for games on all systems. The DD vs MK64 is a subjective thing so I can't say you're right or wrong. I'll just say IMO, that DD > MK64 in all respects except battle mode (how did they screw that one up?). Plus just because you don't like puzzle games doesn't mean other people don't. Remember Tetris and its countless spin-offs and sequels? Or the fact that Lumines is one of the best games on the PSP (and will probably remain a well loved game for years). Jeez.....
Anyway, I agree with Green Monkey in being surprised how the FPS genre exploded this generation. But I suppose that's Halo's doing. That's certainly not a bad thing at all but since most (me included and I don't think it has anything to do with fanboyism) think the GCN controller isn't so FPS freindly, that didn't help the GCN.
As for MS or any other purchasing developers, you have to rememeber that a sale is a two deal. Why would Capcom, Konami, Sega or whoever sell to MS when they are all making plenty of money being multi-platform. Nintendo let Rare go cause they hadn't made an excellent game in YEARS. Let's also factor in that the Japanese could give a flip about the Xbox of FPS games and Capcom + co. are Japanese companies. Finally there is that sense of national pride which I feel applies to all companies in all business all around the world. If they are doing well and don't need "saving", why would any comapny want to be owned by a foreign firm? The money would have to be DAMN good but it already is for the big name studios. So why sell?
[quote name='Crocodile']Are you serious? Is that actually supposed to be a counter argument? GTAIII was a sequel (hence the III). Vice City + San Andreas were sequels. Final Fantasy X was another enrty in a long established serries which had a direct sequel. DoA 3 is a sequel[/QUOTE]
Here's the thing though: GTA3 was vastly different than the two before it. So much so that the first 2 GTA games might as well not exist. GTA was also more groundbreaking and original that anything Nintendo has done in the last five years on the Cube.
Also, my point was that the games listed weren't original. I never said anything about DoA or GTA.
[quote name='Crocodile']As for MS or any other purchasing developers, you have to rememeber that a sale is a two deal. Why would Capcom, Konami, Sega or whoever sell to MS when they are all making plenty of money being multi-platform. Nintendo let Rare go cause they hadn't made an excellent game in YEARS. Let's also factor in that the Japanese could give a flip about the Xbox of FPS games and Capcom + co. are Japanese companies. Finally there is that sense of national pride which I feel applies to all companies in all business all around the world. If they are doing well and don't need "saving", why would any comapny want to be owned by a foreign firm? The money would have to be DAMN good but it already is for the big name studios. So why sell?[/QUOTE]
MS has more money that god. All they would have to do is convince the shareholders of those companies to sell their stock to them at a premium price and BOOM! they have a lot of control over said companies. From there, it wouldn't take much for them to just buy the company outright, assuming the heads of the company don't own 51% of the stock.
Look at how EA is going after Ubisoft. They didn't approach them directly, they just bought up 25% of their stock. Now the heads of the company are all in a tizzy about being taken over by EA.
Here's the thing though: GTA3 was vastly different than the two before it. So much so that the first 2 GTA games might as well not exist. GTA was also more groundbreaking and original that anything Nintendo has done in the last five years on the Cube.
Also, my point was that the games listed weren't original. I never said anything about DoA or GTA.
[quote name='Crocodile']As for MS or any other purchasing developers, you have to rememeber that a sale is a two deal. Why would Capcom, Konami, Sega or whoever sell to MS when they are all making plenty of money being multi-platform. Nintendo let Rare go cause they hadn't made an excellent game in YEARS. Let's also factor in that the Japanese could give a flip about the Xbox of FPS games and Capcom + co. are Japanese companies. Finally there is that sense of national pride which I feel applies to all companies in all business all around the world. If they are doing well and don't need "saving", why would any comapny want to be owned by a foreign firm? The money would have to be DAMN good but it already is for the big name studios. So why sell?[/QUOTE]
MS has more money that god. All they would have to do is convince the shareholders of those companies to sell their stock to them at a premium price and BOOM! they have a lot of control over said companies. From there, it wouldn't take much for them to just buy the company outright, assuming the heads of the company don't own 51% of the stock.
Look at how EA is going after Ubisoft. They didn't approach them directly, they just bought up 25% of their stock. Now the heads of the company are all in a tizzy about being taken over by EA.
electrictroy
Banned
[quote name='shipwreck']Could the OP at least post where he got the 20 million figures sold figures from? They might be right, but I have an awfully hard time believing that Gamecube has sold as many units as Xbox.[/QUOTE]
I wish people would learn to READ. I said, "Virtually tie at 20 million units". In other words, the Cube might be 19 and the Box might be 20, but for all practical purposes ("virtually") they are tied. (SOURCE=japanese+european+american sales figures from magicbox & TTRD)
[quote name='klwillis45']
But you would call the Cube a "sustained console"? If yes, then you should list Atari 7800 & Saturn too, because they sold as much as the 2nd place competitors SMS and N64.
troy
I wish people would learn to READ. I said, "Virtually tie at 20 million units". In other words, the Cube might be 19 and the Box might be 20, but for all practical purposes ("virtually") they are tied. (SOURCE=japanese+european+american sales figures from magicbox & TTRD)
[quote name='klwillis45']
I wouldn't call the 7800, TG16, and Saturn sustained consoles.[/QUOTE]
But you would call the Cube a "sustained console"? If yes, then you should list Atari 7800 & Saturn too, because they sold as much as the 2nd place competitors SMS and N64.
troy
electrictroy
Banned
[quote name='klwillis45']
But you would call the Cube a "sustained console"? If yes, then you should list Atari 7800 & Saturn too, because they sold as much as the 2nd place competitor.
troy
I wouldn't call the 7800, TG16, and Saturn sustained consoles.[/QUOTE]
But you would call the Cube a "sustained console"? If yes, then you should list Atari 7800 & Saturn too, because they sold as much as the 2nd place competitor.
troy
electrictroy
Banned
[quote name='captaincold']Microsoft stock split in feburary 2003 from $48 to $24 roughly. Almost 3 years later and it's valued at roughly $25.[/QUOTE]
And you call that a "loss"????? Wow, that's a really stupid remark. $24--->$25 is a GAIN of 4%! That's better than most companies are doing.
Any brain-dead idiot can see what Microsoft is doing:
- Losing money on the Xbox (costs ~$300 - sold for $150) to make a name for themselves
- Now they are producing a budget-concious console (360) that will make a small $10-20 profit
- So even if Microsoft comes in at 2nd again, they'll still have made profit between 2006-2010
It's so obvious... I might as well tell you that grass is green.
- Microsoft's Xbox division lost ~$4 billion dollars since 2000 (yes this is a verifiable fact).
- Nintendo's Gamecube division has several billion in cash reserves (yes again verifiable by reading the anual financial booklet).
So even though many people consider Nintendo a "doomed console company", on the verge of becoming the next Sega (no console), the truth is that Nintendo is actually in GREAT shape. As for Nintendo positioning itself as #2 to Sony or Microsoft... that's cool too. Nintendo makes great games, and that's why I have a Cube sitting next to my main console.
troy
And you call that a "loss"????? Wow, that's a really stupid remark. $24--->$25 is a GAIN of 4%! That's better than most companies are doing.
Any brain-dead idiot can see what Microsoft is doing:
- Losing money on the Xbox (costs ~$300 - sold for $150) to make a name for themselves
- Now they are producing a budget-concious console (360) that will make a small $10-20 profit
- So even if Microsoft comes in at 2nd again, they'll still have made profit between 2006-2010
It's so obvious... I might as well tell you that grass is green.
- Microsoft's Xbox division lost ~$4 billion dollars since 2000 (yes this is a verifiable fact).
- Nintendo's Gamecube division has several billion in cash reserves (yes again verifiable by reading the anual financial booklet).
So even though many people consider Nintendo a "doomed console company", on the verge of becoming the next Sega (no console), the truth is that Nintendo is actually in GREAT shape. As for Nintendo positioning itself as #2 to Sony or Microsoft... that's cool too. Nintendo makes great games, and that's why I have a Cube sitting next to my main console.
troy
I really, really don't understand all the anger over this. Who the heck cares? Figure out what you like and can afford and buy it.
The idiocy of "MY CONSLEZX teh NUMBER 1zzz!1 U suxxxx!!!" is just that, idiocy. Saying you don't like a particular console is fine. Telling someone who does like it that they're wrong is stupid. Shut up and enjoy your games and let others enjoy theres.
I think the argument posed early on in the thread was one of the few that was dead on. Maybe Dr. Pepper isn't the number one soft drink in the world. So? They're still making money, providing jobs for people and products to consumers that enjoy it. If the market can now support three consoles for the long term, great. You needn't be number one to make money, support your company, and provide quality products for consumers.
The fact is, at least for this generation, neither Sony, Microsoft, nor Nintendo are going anywhere. What the future will hold, no one will be able to tell, even "733t CAGerz."
daroga
The idiocy of "MY CONSLEZX teh NUMBER 1zzz!1 U suxxxx!!!" is just that, idiocy. Saying you don't like a particular console is fine. Telling someone who does like it that they're wrong is stupid. Shut up and enjoy your games and let others enjoy theres.
I think the argument posed early on in the thread was one of the few that was dead on. Maybe Dr. Pepper isn't the number one soft drink in the world. So? They're still making money, providing jobs for people and products to consumers that enjoy it. If the market can now support three consoles for the long term, great. You needn't be number one to make money, support your company, and provide quality products for consumers.
The fact is, at least for this generation, neither Sony, Microsoft, nor Nintendo are going anywhere. What the future will hold, no one will be able to tell, even "733t CAGerz."
daroga
jeffreyjrose
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
[quote name='evanft']Here's the thing though: GTA3 was vastly different than the two before it. So much so that the first 2 GTA games might as well not exist. GTA was also more groundbreaking and original that anything Nintendo has done in the last five years on the Cube.
Also, my point was that the games listed weren't original. I never said anything about DoA or GTA.
[/QUOTE]
Well that last bit about GTA is pure, an not unvalid, opinion so while I disagree I can't and won't change your mind on that. Anyway, SSBM is a very unique fighting game. Very few fighters are even remotely comparable. It is the premier party-based, 4 player, non-lifebar based fighting game amongst ALL systems. Mario Kart DD is part of the premeir kart racing fanchise across ALL systems and added the two rider apsest which had A LOT of depth. Did you ever play co-op? It was amazing. Paper Mario is different from the vast majority of RPGs (American or Japanese) in its humours and relatively non-serious take on the genre. Plus it has one of the most pro-active and invovling battle systems of modern RPGs. I don't even have to mention how Pikmin and Animal Crossing stand apart from the crowd. I can't vouch for Pacman Vs. as I've never played it though. In short all those games are quality games that are at or near the top of their respective genres with few comparable games due to the unique aspects each game offers. So in short you're wrong.
Ubisoft is small taters compared to Capcom, Konami, etc. MS can't buy them if they wanted to cause they are too big, too powerful, and too well in control of their affairs. They gain too much from being multi-platform. MS even tried to buy Nintendo and we all know that went nowhere. MS can't go around buying big JP developers and they know it. That's why they are trying real hard to court them this gen to give their system good games.
Also, my point was that the games listed weren't original. I never said anything about DoA or GTA.
[/QUOTE]
Well that last bit about GTA is pure, an not unvalid, opinion so while I disagree I can't and won't change your mind on that. Anyway, SSBM is a very unique fighting game. Very few fighters are even remotely comparable. It is the premier party-based, 4 player, non-lifebar based fighting game amongst ALL systems. Mario Kart DD is part of the premeir kart racing fanchise across ALL systems and added the two rider apsest which had A LOT of depth. Did you ever play co-op? It was amazing. Paper Mario is different from the vast majority of RPGs (American or Japanese) in its humours and relatively non-serious take on the genre. Plus it has one of the most pro-active and invovling battle systems of modern RPGs. I don't even have to mention how Pikmin and Animal Crossing stand apart from the crowd. I can't vouch for Pacman Vs. as I've never played it though. In short all those games are quality games that are at or near the top of their respective genres with few comparable games due to the unique aspects each game offers. So in short you're wrong.
Ubisoft is small taters compared to Capcom, Konami, etc. MS can't buy them if they wanted to cause they are too big, too powerful, and too well in control of their affairs. They gain too much from being multi-platform. MS even tried to buy Nintendo and we all know that went nowhere. MS can't go around buying big JP developers and they know it. That's why they are trying real hard to court them this gen to give their system good games.
[quote name='Crocodile']Well that last bit about GTA is pure, an not unvalid, opinion so while I disagree I can't and won't change your mind on that. Anyway, SSBM is a very unique fighting game. Very few fighters are even remotely comparable. It is the premier party-based, 4 player, non-lifebar based fighting game amongst ALL systems. [/QUOTE]
It's SSB with more stuff. It also has its ass handed to it by VF4, SC3, and Tekken 5. P
[quote name='Crocodile']Mario Kart DD is part of the premeir kart racing fanchise across ALL systems and added the two rider apsest which had A LOT of depth. Did you ever play co-op? It was amazing. [/QUOTE]
Outside of co-op, all the second rider provides is mechanism for using weapons. The rest of the game is just a rehash of everything we've seen before, especially in the single player. Also, the fact that the multiplayer is not online kinda kills the multiplayer aspect.
[quote name='Crocodile']Paper Mario is different from the vast majority of RPGs (American or Japanese) in its humours and relatively non-serious take on the genre. Plus it has one of the most pro-active and invovling battle systems of modern RPGs. [/QUOTE]
Star Ocean, Tales of Symphonia, and Shadow Hearts would like a talk with you about that whole proactive thing.
[quote name='Crocodile']I don't even have to mention how Pikmin and Animal Crossing stand apart from the crowd.[/QUOTE]
I said they rocked, but they didn't affect gaming to a degree anywhere NEAR GTA3. Besides, Animal Crossing's concept had more or less been done in The Sims
[quote name='Crocodile'] I can't vouch for Pacman Vs. as I've never played it though. [/QUOTE]
Then don't mention it.
[quote name='Crocodile']In short all those games are quality games that are at or near the top of their respective genres with few comparable games due to the unique aspects each game offers. So in short you're wrong. [/QUOTE]
No, they're not. They're mostly just remakes of n64 games that don't really add anything to gaming.
[quote name='Crocodile']Ubisoft is small taters compared to Capcom, Konami, etc. MS can't buy them if they wanted to cause they are too big, too powerful, and too well in control of their affairs. They gain too much from being multi-platform. MS even tried to buy Nintendo and we all know that went nowhere. MS can't go around buying big JP developers and they know it. That's why they are trying real hard to court them this gen to give their system good games.[/QUOTE]
When did MS try to buy Nintendo?
And MS can simply make it more worthwhile for a company to be bought by undercutting their losses and greatly increasing their capital for game development. If they don't have to make games across all consoles to make money anymore, they won't, and if they have MS to bail them out if a project goes south, then they can be more creative and secure.
It's SSB with more stuff. It also has its ass handed to it by VF4, SC3, and Tekken 5. P
[quote name='Crocodile']Mario Kart DD is part of the premeir kart racing fanchise across ALL systems and added the two rider apsest which had A LOT of depth. Did you ever play co-op? It was amazing. [/QUOTE]
Outside of co-op, all the second rider provides is mechanism for using weapons. The rest of the game is just a rehash of everything we've seen before, especially in the single player. Also, the fact that the multiplayer is not online kinda kills the multiplayer aspect.
[quote name='Crocodile']Paper Mario is different from the vast majority of RPGs (American or Japanese) in its humours and relatively non-serious take on the genre. Plus it has one of the most pro-active and invovling battle systems of modern RPGs. [/QUOTE]
Star Ocean, Tales of Symphonia, and Shadow Hearts would like a talk with you about that whole proactive thing.
[quote name='Crocodile']I don't even have to mention how Pikmin and Animal Crossing stand apart from the crowd.[/QUOTE]
I said they rocked, but they didn't affect gaming to a degree anywhere NEAR GTA3. Besides, Animal Crossing's concept had more or less been done in The Sims
[quote name='Crocodile'] I can't vouch for Pacman Vs. as I've never played it though. [/QUOTE]
Then don't mention it.
[quote name='Crocodile']In short all those games are quality games that are at or near the top of their respective genres with few comparable games due to the unique aspects each game offers. So in short you're wrong. [/QUOTE]
No, they're not. They're mostly just remakes of n64 games that don't really add anything to gaming.
[quote name='Crocodile']Ubisoft is small taters compared to Capcom, Konami, etc. MS can't buy them if they wanted to cause they are too big, too powerful, and too well in control of their affairs. They gain too much from being multi-platform. MS even tried to buy Nintendo and we all know that went nowhere. MS can't go around buying big JP developers and they know it. That's why they are trying real hard to court them this gen to give their system good games.[/QUOTE]
When did MS try to buy Nintendo?
And MS can simply make it more worthwhile for a company to be bought by undercutting their losses and greatly increasing their capital for game development. If they don't have to make games across all consoles to make money anymore, they won't, and if they have MS to bail them out if a project goes south, then they can be more creative and secure.
PittsburghAfterDark
CAGiversary!
MS approached Nintendo with a friendly offer before they went the Xbox route. It wasn't to the point where they laid down particulars or put a dollar amount on the purchase but they did ask them if they would be receptive to a buyout offer. Yamauchi said no and that was the end of it.
Ubisoft is not immune to a buyout. They are in no position to fight off an EA or Microsoft hostile effort. However MS has not shown any inclination of a hostile takeover of a gaming studio. Every single one of their partnerships or mergers have been on the best of terms. The danger of a hostile buyout is pretty obvious, the talent revolts and flees.
There are very few game franchises that could survive a hostile buyout and then come out on the other end in as good as or better shape. Too many teams have been together for too long to make the truly great games great. You start screwing with that chemistry your purchase may turn out to be pointless. When I think of what happened to Origin and Westwood that pretty much sums up why takeovers aren't a good strategy if not welcomed with open arms.
I mean how can you kill the Wing Commander, Privateer, Syndicate and Command & Conquer franchises? Unfriendly management or perceived unfriendly management.
Ubisoft is not immune to a buyout. They are in no position to fight off an EA or Microsoft hostile effort. However MS has not shown any inclination of a hostile takeover of a gaming studio. Every single one of their partnerships or mergers have been on the best of terms. The danger of a hostile buyout is pretty obvious, the talent revolts and flees.
There are very few game franchises that could survive a hostile buyout and then come out on the other end in as good as or better shape. Too many teams have been together for too long to make the truly great games great. You start screwing with that chemistry your purchase may turn out to be pointless. When I think of what happened to Origin and Westwood that pretty much sums up why takeovers aren't a good strategy if not welcomed with open arms.
I mean how can you kill the Wing Commander, Privateer, Syndicate and Command & Conquer franchises? Unfriendly management or perceived unfriendly management.
[quote name='evanft']It's SSB with more stuff. It also has its ass handed to it by VF4, SC3, and Tekken 5. P[/QUOTE]
SSBM added A LOT to the SSB formula. Also it isn't comparable to those other fighting games. It's wholly different and there are very few games like it. Plus IMO, it's MUCH more fun.
No the lack of onlines doesn't kill the multi-player at all. Online is always welcome but I know that I ALWAYS have more fun playing games with me friends in the same room or nearby. I can barely stand Halo online while with my friends I can actually enjoy it. Plus you can't say "outside of co-op". That's like saying "outside of system link or online ablilies for Halo...." Co-op is a big deal. Finally, Mario Kart remains the best kart racing franchise amongst ALL platforms. It stands heads and shoulders above the res.
Note how I said majority and NOT all. Good job reading there. Plus Paper Mario's battle system is much different from the one in Star Ocean and Tales of Symphonia ( I don't know much about SH though I want to play it). It's still turn based it just makes the whole thing very fun.
What does affect on gaming have to do with anything? We are just talking about if there are quality and unique games on the GCN. There are (like on every system). This is a FACT. How much a certain game affects gaming isn't reflective of its quality. Good games can be easily forgotten or swept under the rug (Beyond Good & Evil). GTA series is a quality series and very popular but that doesn't put it miles ahead better than the games like the ones already mentioned. They are all really good games.
If you consider some of the games there remakes then you have to say the same about countless other games on other systems like Halo 2, every GTA after III, etc. But I know you won't do that. You just have double standards.
[quote name='evanft']Nintendo is much smaller than MS. MS could probably buy Nintendo with one FY's profits.[/QUOTE]
You still seem not to get it. I (and PAD too) have explained to you countless times, there is much more to buying a comapny than just money. It would be VERY hard for Microsoft to do and they know it.
SSBM added A LOT to the SSB formula. Also it isn't comparable to those other fighting games. It's wholly different and there are very few games like it. Plus IMO, it's MUCH more fun.
No the lack of onlines doesn't kill the multi-player at all. Online is always welcome but I know that I ALWAYS have more fun playing games with me friends in the same room or nearby. I can barely stand Halo online while with my friends I can actually enjoy it. Plus you can't say "outside of co-op". That's like saying "outside of system link or online ablilies for Halo...." Co-op is a big deal. Finally, Mario Kart remains the best kart racing franchise amongst ALL platforms. It stands heads and shoulders above the res.
Note how I said majority and NOT all. Good job reading there. Plus Paper Mario's battle system is much different from the one in Star Ocean and Tales of Symphonia ( I don't know much about SH though I want to play it). It's still turn based it just makes the whole thing very fun.
What does affect on gaming have to do with anything? We are just talking about if there are quality and unique games on the GCN. There are (like on every system). This is a FACT. How much a certain game affects gaming isn't reflective of its quality. Good games can be easily forgotten or swept under the rug (Beyond Good & Evil). GTA series is a quality series and very popular but that doesn't put it miles ahead better than the games like the ones already mentioned. They are all really good games.
If you consider some of the games there remakes then you have to say the same about countless other games on other systems like Halo 2, every GTA after III, etc. But I know you won't do that. You just have double standards.
[quote name='evanft']Nintendo is much smaller than MS. MS could probably buy Nintendo with one FY's profits.[/QUOTE]
You still seem not to get it. I (and PAD too) have explained to you countless times, there is much more to buying a comapny than just money. It would be VERY hard for Microsoft to do and they know it.
FriskyTanuki
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 36 (100%)
[quote name='GreenMonkey']And SSBM, MK DD etc may be sequels, but no one else is making games like that (I guess a few clones are starting to pop up, like Jak X racing).
[/QUOTE]
Jak X is nowhere near a clone of MK DD, it's closer to a racing version of Twisted Metal. Now, Crash Tag Team Racing is a clone that you should mention, and it's supposedly good, too.
[/QUOTE]
Jak X is nowhere near a clone of MK DD, it's closer to a racing version of Twisted Metal. Now, Crash Tag Team Racing is a clone that you should mention, and it's supposedly good, too.
PittsburghAfterDark
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Crocodile']You still seem not to get it. I (and PAD too) have explained to you countless times, there is much more to buying a comapny than just money. It would be VERY hard for Microsoft to do and they know it.[/QUOTE]
Re-read what I wrote wonder tard.
Microsoft could buy any major gaming player in existence with the exception of Sony (They wouldn't want the hardware side.) it's not a matter of cash. No one can stand up to $37 billion in cash and zero debt in the gaming industry. There just isn't the will on MS's side to do takeovers under hostile conditions.
I've already outlined the reaons for not doing hostile takeovers in gaming.
Reading comprehension, do you have it mother
er?
Re-read what I wrote wonder tard.
Microsoft could buy any major gaming player in existence with the exception of Sony (They wouldn't want the hardware side.) it's not a matter of cash. No one can stand up to $37 billion in cash and zero debt in the gaming industry. There just isn't the will on MS's side to do takeovers under hostile conditions.
I've already outlined the reaons for not doing hostile takeovers in gaming.
Reading comprehension, do you have it mother
er?
FriskyTanuki
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 36 (100%)
[quote name='GreenMonkey']IMO FPS on a dual analog setup is subpar at best - for someone raised on mouse FPS gaming I don't understand the ranting here. Halo does it better because it is a native console game, but I don't think there is anything worse than a ported-from-PC FPS game.[/QUOTE]
Not to burst your bubble or anything, but Halo was originally a PC shooter, then the Xbox version was pushed to the forefront over the PC version, which came out the next year.
Not to burst your bubble or anything, but Halo was originally a PC shooter, then the Xbox version was pushed to the forefront over the PC version, which came out the next year.
depascal22
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 92 (100%)
Wow, things are getting really hostile here. I have all three systems and like them all. It seems every system gives me another piece of the gaming puzzle. I like being able to go into a store and buy any game from this current generation. The one thing I do know is that I've saw two people walking out of the Circuit City in Yonkers with XBoxes. Maybe it's that copy of Forza that comes packaged with them now but it does seem like the Xbox is picking up steam in the last few months. In most stores the PS2 selection is usually the same amount of shelf space as the GCN and XBox combined. Now it seems like the Xbox selection is closer in size to the PS2 selection and the Gamecube gets a small rack. If you went to the Digital Life Expo in New York recently, you would've seen that the XBox, 360, and DS were well represented. The only time I saw a PS2 was at the Star Wars Battlefront II booth, and that was an even 50/50 split in Xboxes to PS2s. The Gamecube was over in the women's section and they only had one there. I'm not stating any opinions here, just facts and observations.
It's a great time to be a cheap ass gamer.
It's a great time to be a cheap ass gamer.
Ikohn4ever
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 5 (100%)
people need to all calm down, I have laughed at all the fanboys and the I am not a fanboy fanboys. People need to grow up all the systems are better at something than the others they all have their own place in the market, which does tend to overlap and lead to conflict. People need to realize this is just a a business and stop bitchin.
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Re-read what I wrote wonder tard.
Microsoft could buy any major gaming player in existence with the exception of Sony (They wouldn't want the hardware side.) it's not a matter of cash. No one can stand up to $37 billion in cash and zero debt in the gaming industry. There just isn't the will on MS's side to do takeovers under hostile conditions.
I've already outlined the reaons for not doing hostile takeovers in gaming.
Reading comprehension, do you have it motherer?[/QUOTE]
Yep I've got it. Plus I can make my point without calling people names too! I'm not seeing where the problem is since I'm agreeing with you. Sure Microsoft could try a hostile takeover but you've already illustrated why that would almost certainly be a dumb move. I've explained why larger and prominenent developers like Cacpom wouldn't be receptive to a buyout offer. So where's the hate coming from?
Microsoft could buy any major gaming player in existence with the exception of Sony (They wouldn't want the hardware side.) it's not a matter of cash. No one can stand up to $37 billion in cash and zero debt in the gaming industry. There just isn't the will on MS's side to do takeovers under hostile conditions.
I've already outlined the reaons for not doing hostile takeovers in gaming.
Reading comprehension, do you have it mother
er?[/QUOTE]Yep I've got it. Plus I can make my point without calling people names too!
I'm not seeing where the problem is since I'm agreeing with you. Sure Microsoft could try a hostile takeover but you've already illustrated why that would almost certainly be a dumb move. I've explained why larger and prominenent developers like Cacpom wouldn't be receptive to a buyout offer. So where's the hate coming from?
you guys are all out of your minds! who cares! put your money where your mouth is. if you liek the cube, buy it and games for it, if you like xbox buy those, if you like ps2, hell buy those. most of us will buy more then one. what does it matter what people think or deem a failure... everyone has their bias, its not like the cube has been outsold into non-existance. you can go buy one and some games tomorrow, so i think its doing just fine.
Animefalcon
CAGiversary!
theres only one platform im for and thats the PC.
I HATE the xbox I bough that rig back in 99 when i played UT99 and Q3
PS2, a repeat of the N64 RDRAM SUXS(not in sales or products its the my problem with RIMM),
GCN, 8Mb memory card wtf?
I HATE the xbox I bough that rig back in 99 when i played UT99 and Q3
PS2, a repeat of the N64 RDRAM SUXS(not in sales or products its the my problem with RIMM),
GCN, 8Mb memory card wtf?
Trancendental
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='iheartmetal']most of us will buy more then one.[/QUOTE]
You really think so?
You really think so?
*scans the 1st page*
in any rate, EVEN IF the console sold were "virutally tied", Gamecube is consider the failure since the only games that sell on it are in fact Nintendo-brand titles(except RE4, which is currently on PS2), making the console useless to third-party developers.
*ahem* you may continue
in any rate, EVEN IF the console sold were "virutally tied", Gamecube is consider the failure since the only games that sell on it are in fact Nintendo-brand titles(except RE4, which is currently on PS2), making the console useless to third-party developers.
*ahem* you may continue
[quote name='Crocodile']SSBM added A LOT to the SSB formula. Also it isn't comparable to those other fighting games. It's wholly different and there are very few games like it. Plus IMO, it's MUCH more fun..[/QUOTE]
If you wanna argue that SSBM is the best of its genre, then I'm not gonna argue with you there. It's still just SSB+
[quote name='Crocodile']No the lack of onlines doesn't kill the multi-player at all. Online is always welcome but I know that I ALWAYS have more fun playing games with me friends in the same room or nearby. I can barely stand Halo online while with my friends I can actually enjoy it. Plus you can't say "outside of co-op". That's like saying "outside of system link or online ablilies for Halo...." Co-op is a big deal. Finally, Mario Kart remains the best kart racing franchise amongst ALL platforms. It stands heads and shoulders above the res..[/QUOTE]
Here's the thing: online play fundamentally changes multiplayer in a game. With one GC, you're limited to four people playing MKDD at once. Now, imagine if every single character in the game was controlled by a human player. Yeah, pretty kick ass, huh? Well, there's no reason why Nintendo shouldn't have done it this gen.
[quote name='Crocodile']Note how I said majority and NOT all. Good job reading there. Plus Paper Mario's battle system is much different from the one in Star Ocean and Tales of Symphonia ( I don't know much about SH though I want to play it). It's still turn based it just makes the whole thing very fun.[/QUOTE]
I was making the point that the battle system for Paper Mario 2 only seems proactive when compared to traditional turn-based RPGs, which are becoming few and far between these days.
[quote name='Crocodile']What does affect on gaming have to do with anything? We are just talking about if there are quality and unique games on the GCN. There are (like on every system). This is a FACT. How much a certain game affects gaming isn't reflective of its quality. Good games can be easily forgotten or swept under the rug (Beyond Good & Evil). GTA series is a quality series and very popular but that doesn't put it miles ahead better than the games like the ones already mentioned. They are all really good games.[/QUOTE]
I was speaking more to the fact that Nintedno had once been a leader in innovation that was copied by any game developer worth its salt. Today, it isn't.
[quote name='Crocodile']If you consider some of the games there remakes then you have to say the same about countless other games on other systems like Halo 2, every GTA after III, etc. But I know you won't do that. You just have double standards.[/QUOTE]
No, dumbass. I expect sequels that jump platforms to be more than a graphical upgrade, like MKDD, SSBM, Mario Tennis, Mario Golf, F-Zero GX, etc. Shoot, GTA:SA is probably a bigger series jump over Vice City than any of the games I listed were.
[quote name='Crocodile']You still seem not to get it. I (and PAD too) have explained to you countless times, there is much more to buying a comapny than just money. It would be VERY hard for Microsoft to do and they know it.[/QUOTE]
I'm gonna quote PAD, cause he owned you:
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Re-read what I wrote wonder tard.
Microsoft could buy any major gaming player in existence with the exception of Sony (They wouldn't want the hardware side.) it's not a matter of cash. No one can stand up to $37 billion in cash and zero debt in the gaming industry. There just isn't the will on MS's side to do takeovers under hostile conditions.
I've already outlined the reaons for not doing hostile takeovers in gaming.
Reading comprehension, do you have it motherer?[/QUOTE]
Notice how he said they just didn't have the WILL to do it.
If you wanna argue that SSBM is the best of its genre, then I'm not gonna argue with you there. It's still just SSB+
[quote name='Crocodile']No the lack of onlines doesn't kill the multi-player at all. Online is always welcome but I know that I ALWAYS have more fun playing games with me friends in the same room or nearby. I can barely stand Halo online while with my friends I can actually enjoy it. Plus you can't say "outside of co-op". That's like saying "outside of system link or online ablilies for Halo...." Co-op is a big deal. Finally, Mario Kart remains the best kart racing franchise amongst ALL platforms. It stands heads and shoulders above the res..[/QUOTE]
Here's the thing: online play fundamentally changes multiplayer in a game. With one GC, you're limited to four people playing MKDD at once. Now, imagine if every single character in the game was controlled by a human player. Yeah, pretty kick ass, huh? Well, there's no reason why Nintendo shouldn't have done it this gen.
[quote name='Crocodile']Note how I said majority and NOT all. Good job reading there. Plus Paper Mario's battle system is much different from the one in Star Ocean and Tales of Symphonia ( I don't know much about SH though I want to play it). It's still turn based it just makes the whole thing very fun.[/QUOTE]
I was making the point that the battle system for Paper Mario 2 only seems proactive when compared to traditional turn-based RPGs, which are becoming few and far between these days.
[quote name='Crocodile']What does affect on gaming have to do with anything? We are just talking about if there are quality and unique games on the GCN. There are (like on every system). This is a FACT. How much a certain game affects gaming isn't reflective of its quality. Good games can be easily forgotten or swept under the rug (Beyond Good & Evil). GTA series is a quality series and very popular but that doesn't put it miles ahead better than the games like the ones already mentioned. They are all really good games.[/QUOTE]
I was speaking more to the fact that Nintedno had once been a leader in innovation that was copied by any game developer worth its salt. Today, it isn't.
[quote name='Crocodile']If you consider some of the games there remakes then you have to say the same about countless other games on other systems like Halo 2, every GTA after III, etc. But I know you won't do that. You just have double standards.[/QUOTE]
No, dumbass. I expect sequels that jump platforms to be more than a graphical upgrade, like MKDD, SSBM, Mario Tennis, Mario Golf, F-Zero GX, etc. Shoot, GTA:SA is probably a bigger series jump over Vice City than any of the games I listed were.
[quote name='Crocodile']You still seem not to get it. I (and PAD too) have explained to you countless times, there is much more to buying a comapny than just money. It would be VERY hard for Microsoft to do and they know it.[/QUOTE]
I'm gonna quote PAD, cause he owned you:
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Re-read what I wrote wonder tard.
Microsoft could buy any major gaming player in existence with the exception of Sony (They wouldn't want the hardware side.) it's not a matter of cash. No one can stand up to $37 billion in cash and zero debt in the gaming industry. There just isn't the will on MS's side to do takeovers under hostile conditions.
I've already outlined the reaons for not doing hostile takeovers in gaming.
Reading comprehension, do you have it mother
er?[/QUOTE]Notice how he said they just didn't have the WILL to do it.
Um did you forget the LAN? You can play eight player Mario Kart already. I think up to sixteen even but I'm not 100% on that. Furthermore, I'll still argue that unless you've got no friends who play video games, playing with friends >>>>> online. Online would have been nice but it's not a deal breaker at all.
Nintendo is still a big innovator. They certainly aren't the only ones though. To say so would of course be foolish. I think it's a matter that since Nintendo rarely makes games that appeal to the mainstream, why would others copy them unless there was a concpet that could be applies to a vareity of genres?
Ok it's obvious I won't convince you otherwise so I'll just stop arguing. I think it's pretty clear that SSBM and MKDD are much more than just graphical updates. Furthermore, there are still few current console games like them and they are the kings of their respective genres. Those games (and the others you mentioned) ARE good games and worth getting a Cube for. Not saying you have to like those games but you have to recognize that they are quality. Furthermore, you arguements of "just being graphical updates" applies to other big games for other systems. Again, you've got double standards.
:rollseyes: Microsoft buying somebody like Capcom invovles more than just Bill Gates hoping onto a plane for Japan with a suitcase of money. Note how I NEVER said it was impossible but rather I expalined quite well and throughly why it would be hard for MS to do and PAD even explained why it may not be a good idea. I serious don't see what's so hard to understand here.
GreenMonkey
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 4 (100%)
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Not to burst your bubble or anything, but Halo was originally a PC shooter, then the Xbox version was pushed to the forefront over the PC version, which came out the next year.[/QUOTE]
Pfft
Optimized for Console play first, PC version 2nd. The opposite of PC-to-Xbox ports
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Re-read what I wrote wonder tard.
Microsoft could buy any major gaming player in existence with the exception of Sony (They wouldn't want the hardware side.) it's not a matter of cash. No one can stand up to $37 billion in cash and zero debt in the gaming industry. There just isn't the will on MS's side to do takeovers under hostile conditions.
I've already outlined the reaons for not doing hostile takeovers in gaming.
Reading comprehension, do you have it motherer?[/QUOTE]
I hate to agree with PAD but here I think he has a point.
I personally think eventually Microsoft will win in the long run. They are going to bite into Sony's market more this time - if they don't take #1 this time they will have it by the time the Xbox 3rd generation or whatever comes out. They have so much money and a good feel for the market Sony has - they will eventually crush Sony into the ground with sheer $$ power.
I mean, the Xbox went from a derided "system of PC ported games and a huge controller" to super-fanboy-supported and rapper-loved #2. Thanks to Microsoft's $$ keeping it afloat. Without all that extra spare cash there is no way it would have been a success - any other company wouldn't have been able to make it, and wouldn't have been able to keep it in the market for a whole cycle of running red.
I think Nintendo is wise to forge their own path. Because in the end: all your base shall belong to Microsoft.
Pfft
Optimized for Console play first, PC version 2nd. The opposite of PC-to-Xbox ports
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Re-read what I wrote wonder tard.
Microsoft could buy any major gaming player in existence with the exception of Sony (They wouldn't want the hardware side.) it's not a matter of cash. No one can stand up to $37 billion in cash and zero debt in the gaming industry. There just isn't the will on MS's side to do takeovers under hostile conditions.
I've already outlined the reaons for not doing hostile takeovers in gaming.
Reading comprehension, do you have it mother
er?[/QUOTE]I hate to agree with PAD but here I think he has a point.
I personally think eventually Microsoft will win in the long run. They are going to bite into Sony's market more this time - if they don't take #1 this time they will have it by the time the Xbox 3rd generation or whatever comes out. They have so much money and a good feel for the market Sony has - they will eventually crush Sony into the ground with sheer $$ power.
I mean, the Xbox went from a derided "system of PC ported games and a huge controller" to super-fanboy-supported and rapper-loved #2. Thanks to Microsoft's $$ keeping it afloat. Without all that extra spare cash there is no way it would have been a success - any other company wouldn't have been able to make it, and wouldn't have been able to keep it in the market for a whole cycle of running red.
I think Nintendo is wise to forge their own path. Because in the end: all your base shall belong to Microsoft.
smellhasreturned
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 9 (100%)
*runs through topic naked*
Dr Mario Kart
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 6 (100%)
[quote name='electrictroy']So why does the gaming media label Xbox = "success" and Cube = "flop"?[/QUOTE]
In todays trendy business world, whichever one loses the most money gets to be called the success.
In todays trendy business world, whichever one loses the most money gets to be called the success.
It's not about how Microsoft is the winner and Nintendo is the loser this gen. It has more to do with the fact that Microsoft made the Xbox mainstream and even more popular than GC. Now that they have their foot in the door they can take control of the market gradually (meaning that they would challenge Sony by the 3rd gen). Slowly but surely building a gaming monopoly.
They might be running in the red now but by 3rd gen they'll be in the green and never look back.
They might be running in the red now but by 3rd gen they'll be in the green and never look back.
willardhaven
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
The Xbox is more popular because there are a lot of stupid consumers in North America.
Photomotoz
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 12 (100%)
[quote name='dental_regurgitation']The Xbox is more popular because there are a lot of stupid consumers in North America.[/QUOTE]
That is partially true. The PS2 had been out for a while now and Microsoft began a heavy marketing campaign to establish that its system is cool and hip. Everybody had a PS2 so an Xbox was the new cool thing to have. With the heavy celebirty endorsement the Xbox became the hip thing to have.
That is partially true. The PS2 had been out for a while now and Microsoft began a heavy marketing campaign to establish that its system is cool and hip. Everybody had a PS2 so an Xbox was the new cool thing to have. With the heavy celebirty endorsement the Xbox became the hip thing to have.
PittsburghAfterDark
CAGiversary!
[quote name='dental_regurgitation']The Xbox is more popular because there are a lot of stupid consumers in North America.[/QUOTE]
I could say that about any of the gaming consoles.
I haven't touched my Game Cube in the past year except to play RE 4. I haven't touched my PS2 except to play PSone games and GOW. In my eyes playing one game per year on a console or using a console to play games that are 6-10 years old makes me one of those stupid consumers.
I could say that about any of the gaming consoles.
I haven't touched my Game Cube in the past year except to play RE 4. I haven't touched my PS2 except to play PSone games and GOW. In my eyes playing one game per year on a console or using a console to play games that are 6-10 years old makes me one of those stupid consumers.
bread's done