played with an Xbox today. Spent about half an hour playing it at EB today. Which was enough to beat the Munch's Oddyseey demo about 4 times and watch a bunch of the videos.

The graphics are a tad bit of a dissapointment. True the only full demo was Munch's Oddyseey but its all anyone has to go on. The Gamecube's Luigi's Mansion walks all over Munch's Oddyseey. Still far better than the PS2's sub dreamcast quality it has on most of its titles.

The controller: Oh the microsoft controller is a joy to behold. Never have I felt a more comfortable, inviting, solid controller. While playing Munch's Oddyseey the control felt so natural, I didn't have to think about it. (if you can't tell, I really liked it) The Gamecube's controller is rather "edgey" and toy feeling. The PS2s controller I'm slowly developing a hate relationship with.I much perfer the analog nub to be on the far upper left and lower right that side by side.

The console: It is rather huge. I perfer the ps2's sleak design to the Xboxs' tide effecting mass. The Gamecube is tiny and will be cool for storage.

Over all I have mixed feelings. Right now the PS2 has the strongest library and the Xbox doesn't have that special "something" to pull it ahead. TheGamecube has some neat titles (and wood inducing graphics) but it seems plain compared to the amazing array of PS2 titles or the depth of the Xbox titles. So, I don't know. Still, I'm in love with the controller.

Thanks Rob. So far, you're the first person I've heard from that's actually played the thing. The videos I've seen have looked pretty good, but certainly not much better than some things I've seen (*cough*...*Dreamcast*...*cough*), and CERTAINLY not enough so to justify such a high price. Still, I'm eager to see how some of its games turn out. Keep in mind, this is Microsoft -- they've got the money to put into some really big games.

Murph...just get a DC this year if the prices are bothering you. For $200, you can have a DC (say...the Sports Pack), a second controller, two VMUs and about three or four games at $19.99 each. Good ones too such as Shenmue, Virtua Tennis, Soul Calibur, etc. That's six games and all the fixins for $200.

For the price of an Xbox ($400 in a package), you could have another 10 DC games at $20 each. If you've never played the DC games, you'll be more than satisfied for at least the next year and if you want to re-evaluate the others then, you'll be looking at a lot less money and a lot more games to choose from on all three systems. Plus if one really flops (unlikely, but you never know), you will be pleased you didn't get burned.

Meanwhile, for the next year just play Bargain Bin man with your DC and you'll have a heap of fun.

--Dave

Yeah, I certainly won't be buying any of the big three this time around. IF I buy a console, it will be a Dreamcast -- though I've got my eye on the Gamecube, m'self -- but, really, I don't feel overly motivated to buy (another) console that I'll hardly play. The PC's where it's at, as far as I'm concerned.

So, if they drop the DC to $49, as they've said they would, I won't pass it up at that price. But, really, I just don't think I'll play it enough to justify much more than that.

Like I said, though -- I'm not a big console man, really. I've had every Nintendo system they've made, and am asking for a GBA for Christmas, but, really, I'm not really concerned about owning another console. There'll have to either be a great deal on one, or I'll have to find a game that I can't live without. Until one of those happens, I'll just stick with the PC as my full-time gaming outlet.

Hey, then you can be our GBA guy! heh... I've got a handful of GBA games, but no GBA. woot. I can get you started with 6 games heh.

Cool. Hmmm...Maybe having six games on the way would help off-set the cost...Then I wouldn't have to wait 'til Christmas! :-)

Didn't know you were planning on having GBA games covered. Cool.

>"The videos I've seen have looked pretty good, but certainly not much better than some things I've seen (*cough*...*Dreamcast*...*cough*)"

You know, I just don't buy this. I hear lots of people who talk up the Dreamcast while talking down the PS2 or Xbox in comparison. But it just doesn't track. Granted the output quality of the DC is exceptional, but it's actual graphical prowess doesn't compare to the newer machines. The disparity can be vividly illustrated by comparing NFL 2K2 for the DC and the PS2 side by side. There's a big difference.

I admit to having limited experience with both DC and newer stuff, so I wasn't trying to make a hard statement of fact. My exposure is limited, but based on what I've seen, the new stuff just doesn't look much better -- not enough so to justify the price -- than the Dreamcast. (Virtua Tennis -- come on!!)

I'm not intending to downplay the new stuff. But I just don't have $400 to fork over for a new system. The Dreamcast would suit me just fine, if I decided that I needed a new console -- which I don't.

Speaking as someone who has seen near-complete copies demoed (but not affiliated with any of the companies involved), I strongly urge anyone who thinks the Xbox cannot compete graphically to try Halo on an in-store demo when it's available. It's definitely an eye-opening experience -- MPEG videos don't do it justice.

To me, the difference graphically was similar to the gap I felt between accelerated and non-accelerated 3D graphics. The detail is just astounding -- better looking than the PS2 games I have seen, and certainly more than competitive with the Gamecube.

IIRC, the Xbox controller has an analog stick on each side, right? I like that because it might make for a good FPS control scheme: control movement with the d-pad while the other hand controls "mouselook" with one of the analog sticks. There is still a shortage of buttons versus a PC numeric keypad (how do you strafe, etc.), but it might be workable...

"MPEG videos don't do it justice."

Not that I'm in love with the Xbox, but I think this is the problem with the in-store demo machines. It's a bunch of MPEG videos. This is not clear to the average joe. He sees a Xbox being demo'd and says "ewww sucky grainy graphics" not realizing that what he is seeing is bad compression.

I think it was counter-productive of Microsoft to distribute these demo machines sans any actual demos. I've heard more bad-press about these demo machines than any nay-saying before the demo machines appeared. A bad idea all around.

A lot of Xbox press has been less than enthusiastic. This is just feeding the fire.

--Dave

Can we all please wait until the consoles launch before getting too excited about which is best? And can we please stop with the Dreamcast-is-better-than-XBox stuff already?

I don't know about your stores, but the store display at my local Babbages has the monitor set way too dark. It's really hurting the graphics.

Yeah, it's nearly all videos now, besides Munch.

I can see the Dreamcast is taking very little time becoming martyred. Now that it's dead (and it's our fault - collectively we didn't buy it), it's the greatest console ever.

Nobody's saying Dreamcast is better than Xbox. I'm just saying that the DC is more bang for my buck. I'm sure the Xbox is great, and I'd like to own one someday. But I'm not paying $400 for one when I can get a Dreamcast, which is nearly as good in many respects, for $89. It's sorta like the Athlon versus the Pentium, if you ask me -- except the Athlon is arguably faster...

Anyhoo, does this make you happy? While not quite as good, at less than 1/4 the price, the Dreamcast is a better value, and a viable alternative.

Xbox is pricey. No doubt about it. If Sony drops their price a bit, that could really hurt MS in the current economic climate.

Personally, I'm skeptical that this will happen, but you never know.

Bear in mind that consoles are a 5 year game, and MS has built a better mousetrap than anyone else. What's critical is ramping up adoption inside the first 2 years.. I think some of the Xbox features (notably ethernet, and HDD, and 64mb) will seem like VERY good ideas in retrospect, once 2003 rolls around.

"I'm sure the Xbox is great, and I'd like to own one someday. But I'm not paying $400 for one when I can get a Dreamcast, which is nearly as good in many respects, for $89."

How do you know this? The Xbox isn't out yet. It is not possible to know this.

"It's sorta like the Athlon versus the Pentium, if you ask me -- except the Athlon is arguably faster..."

No, it would be like the Pentium versus a chip about which you knew nothing because it had not been released yet.

Mr. Anonymous, you're missing the point. Xbox is $400, Dreamcast is only $80 and there isn't a quantum leap in the games. We know for a fact there are at least 20 games on the Dreamcast that are "classic", some of which started the most demanded franchises for these other "next generation" consoles (Soul Calibur, Shenmue, NFL2K, Skies of Arcadia, Phantasy Star Online, etc.). If one doesn't own a Dreamcast, the value of buying one now next to an Xbox/PS2 or even a Gamecube is unmatched. You'll have more games of equal play value for less money.

Wumpus, the better mousetrap rarely wins. SNES was a better mousetrap than the Genesis. Sega won the 16-bit wars. Sega Master System was far more advanced than the NES, Nintendo crushed it. Game Gear was a much better handheld in all respects but battery life and it was murdered by Gameboy. The only time the better system has won (and this is arguable since N64 is probably more advanced technically) is Playstation. Sony had the right thing at the right time; solid, fast 3D. Microsoft really isn't offering anything so revolutionary as to guarantee success. Actually, none of the console makers are offering that except maybe Sony with DVD playback for the price of the system (no remote goofiness).

No, it's highly unlikely that Xbox will ultimately be the most successful of the three systems that will be looking for consumer dollars for the next three years. As much as I hate to say it, my money is on Sony. The momentum of PS2 is going to be really hard to stop.

---

Quote:

I can see the Dreamcast is taking very little time becoming martyred. Now that it's dead (and it's our fault - collectively we didn't buy it), it's the greatest console ever.

---

I will admit the PS2 library is getting pretty damn good, FINALLY.

As far as the cheapskate market goes-- the PS1 is the real competition for the Dreamcast. I agree that logically the DC is a better bang for the buck, but.. do consumers always think that way when it comes to games? People think with their joysticks, not their brains. And as old as the PS1 is, it has a brighter future than the DC, and a wider library. I'm not so sure it's the no-brainer you make it out to be. Plus it's hard to find, isn't it?

On the new console front. There is no question that the Xbox* has a better initial lineup of games than the GameCube. Many of the Xbox titles have me intrigued-- they seem fresh and original compared to the typical console fare. Maybe that's just the crossover pc developer factor? Whether this will help the big ol' black box be successful this Xmas, I have no idea. I'm sure both companies will sell everything they can make just on initial hard-core audience alone.

All it takes is one or two killer titles to make or break a console. The XBox has a few titles that could do that, MAYBE. On the other hand, I'm fairly sure the GameCube has none of those types of games in its lineup. The Japanese launch sucked! Clearly not on par with the N64 which had the wonderful and groundbreaking Mario 64, as well as the outstanding (at the time) Wave Race.

* official Jason Cross approved spelling

>"SNES was a better mousetrap than the Genesis. Sega won the 16-bit wars."

Well, this is debateable at best. The Genesis outsold the SNES for the first couple years, then the SNES outsold the Sega for the next few. Ultimately the SNES sold more units total.

>"The only time the better system has won (and this is arguable since N64 is probably more advanced technically) is Playstation."

That's the thing about talking consoles. Everything turns into a debate! Personally, I don't think the N64 offered anything more then filtered textures over the PSX. The Playstation's CD drive, MDEC chip and GTE chip had a far greater impact on the industry then blurry colors. ;^)

>"As much as I hate to say it, my money is on Sony. The momentum of PS2 is going to be really hard to stop."

Agreed. It's hard for even the whiniest developer to argue with a 20 million unit installed base. And publishers are going to follow the customers.

Brad Grenz

"On the other hand, I'm fairly sure the GameCube has none of those types of games in its lineup."

I dunno. I'm looking forward to Pikmin -- a lot. Call me crazy. Monkey Ball is amazing. Super Smash Brothers Melee is obviosuly a system seller for the Nintendo-obsessed. Eternal Darkness looks interesting (and is not targeted at kids), and before too long the Rare titles will be here -- Star Fox, the racing games, the next Perfect Dark game (talk about a system seller).

Next year we have a lot to look forward to: Kameo, Zelda, Mario Kart, Mario Sunshine, Metroid Prime, etc. The movies of Mario Sunshine -- if there is a God they will change the name before release -- are amazing. I cannot tell you how many hours I spent playing Mario 64. If it's anything like that, my initial $199 will be justified 100 times over.

You -- especially you, wumpus -- can always find reasons NOT to buy a console. But for many of us, you don't need a whole lot of convincing to take home the Gamecube hardware -- and that controller! -- for $199. I enjoyed my N64 more each year I had it. Hell, I *loved* Paper Mario. Practically everyone I know has had to run to the bathroom while playing Mario Tennis to avoid having an accident.

Luigi's Mansion isn't going to change my life. Will it be worth 10 hours gawking at the special effects before I sell it on eBay? Absolutely. Just like Rogue Squadron. My wife isn't going to play Counterstrike with me, or Commandos 2. Will she race my white ass on the Gamecube? Absolutely. Before long, the *good stuff* will start appearing. Just as it has on the PS2.

I wonder if anyone at Microsoft has considered making the X-Box backwards-compatible for Dreamcast?

By the way, I was at my local Toys R Us yesterday and they had plenty of Dreamcast sports bundles (NFL, NBA and MLB games) for $99. I didn't see any of the other bundles available. They had some 'bare' consoles too for $79 - obviously the bundle sounds better.

Strangely, many of the DC games still seemed to be $40 - a minority were $20.

"But I'm not paying $400 for one when I can get a Dreamcast, which is nearly as good in many respects, for $89."

In what strange, alternate universe is the Xbox $400? I thought it was $299. Which is still a lot more than the Dreamcast, but you get the added bonus of having a platform that is not effectively dead.

Since I've been scouring the Dreamcast games just about anywhere I can think of, I ran across that Toys R Us fact two weeks ago. They haven't marked down much of their stock and that's consistent with how they handled Saturn too. They were still selling full price Sega Saturn games long after the console had disappeared. They're not that good at discounting anything. (Though I got Rayman 2 there four months ago for $15.) TRU does often end up as a good last resort for games you'll never find anywhere else though.

The best spots to look right now are Circuit City where you'll find a lot of stuff other places no longer have and some of it is now down to $19.99 or less. Electronics Boutique for Pre-Owned games and the best price on a new Ultimate Fighting Championship ($19.99). Occasionally Best Buy for the odd mark down to ridiculously low $9.99 pricing (VOOT awhile back). Wal-Mart are doing markdowns regularly on different titles. Target pulled their DC stock and I'm not sure what was done with it. Rumor has it they did this before with Saturn and about a month after pulling all the stock, they had huge blowouts in all their stores of what was left. If I happen upon that info, I'll post it here. It's still kinda goofy that they pulled the stock and replaced it with...signs. *sigh* I was on my way to get Seaman there when I found this out.

Online there are a number of good deals by title. If you use CNet Shopper and their MySimon powered price comparison lookup, you'll find some super deals. CD Universe has a number of titles for less than $20 now including gems like Cannon Spike, Looney Tunes Space Race (might now be sold out) and Street Fighter III Third Strike among others. It was the place with the best price on San Francisco Rush 2049 too. I also just ordered and received Tony Hawk Pro Skater 2 (It's Godly!) for $9.95 from Outpost.com. They had a few other super low priced games too.

Some games are getting hard to find as I've noted in other threads. Specifically certain imports and Marvel vs. Capcom 2 (even Capcom's store doesn't have it but they sell everything else), Giga Wing 2, Tokyo Xtreme Racer 2 and Rush 2049 among the US games. So if you're considering any of these, it might be worth paying full price to be certain you don't miss out. TXR2 is fantastic. A gorgeous game by anyone's standards with great gameplay. The cars are so pretty that I'm sure you could tell someone it's a PS2/Gamecube/Xbox game they're playing and they wouldn't question.

One other thing of note for any potential Dreamcast hunters, VMUs are $9.99 new now so don't pay more. Controllers are $14.99 new so once again, don't pay more than that. If anyone sees the Sega humongo memory card (without the screen, size of 4 VMUs in one) for $20 somewhere, I'd love to know about it. They're still $40 everywhere I can find them.

--Dave

---

Quote:

In what strange, alternate universe is the Xbox $400? I thought it was $299. Which is still a lot more than the Dreamcast, but you get the added bonus of having a platform that is not effectively dead.

---

So you're going to buy your $89 Dreamcast with no games? It's still not a fair comparison.

And also, no store is PRE-selling it without a bundle. All the stores that I know of are going to be selling standalone units at launch time.

"And also, no store is PRE-selling it without a bundle. All the stores that I know of are going to be selling standalone units at launch time."

Absolutely. And, in spite of all the online hoopla about the GC selling out, they will have 700,000 units available total on launch day. If the Japanese launch is any indication, you should be able to find one without going too crazy.

PS. Let me be the first to say that the DC controller was pretty lame.

One could argue that you could get a Dreamcast and one $9.99 new or used game for $89. No matter how you spin it, the DC with a couple games and a memory card and extra controller are going to cost you less than half what it does for an Xbox with a second controller and a couple games.

For what Murph wants (not to pay a lot, get some quality console games), the DC is a good fit. For someone that expects to buy a lot of $50 console games over the next three years, then sure the Xbox/Gamecube/PS2 is a good buy.

We'll see how many retailers allow you to buy "just a console" when they get to the shelves. It was the single biggest complaint last year with the PS2 launch (people bought the system and nothing else, presumably to gouge on Ebay) and they quickly demanded you buy games or peripherals with your PS2 or you don't get one.

But why even argue that point? What good is a $300 Xbox with no games?. You can't even watch movies on it without buying a remote?!

--Dave

Amazon just sold out of the Gamecube pre-orders in 4-5 minutes again. Next opportunity to pre-order: 11/12 (!)

The last time I pre-ordered with Amazon (a few months in advance of the publication date), I was totally screwed. They opened the book up for general sales and shipped it out to thousands of people without getting around to sending my pre-order. People on the mailing list I was on kept posting "I just ordered the book yesterday and got it today via Fed-Ex, yahoo!" Meanwhile, when I called up, they said I had to wait for a re-order because they had run out of copies. I asked them why all of these people who ordered the day before were able to get copies before Mr. PreOrder Months In Advance, and the lady just said "that's out of my control, sir."

Should have sent her some anthrax.

It sounds like they just made a mistake. I've ordered from them at least 15 times a year for 4 years, and there have been maybe 2 mistakes. In fact, they are the only retail outfit I have ever felt actual affection for. The site is marvelously designed and CS is great.

>But why even argue that point? What good is a $300 Xbox with no games?

And what good is an $89 Dreamcast in three months when there isn't a SINGLE software release for it? Okay, so you buy slightly older games...how long are you gonna keep that up?

At least with the $300 Xbox (or PS2, or $200 GC) they'll be release big new games in 2003 and 2004.

I mean, if we want to talk about bang for the buck, I think I can find a SNES at a garage sale or on Ebay for like $10 and buy a bunch of $5 used games at my local Babbages. Whoopdedoo.

X-Box in the UK is going to cost 299 POUNDS. That's $480 to you Yanks.

Cor.

-> I mean, if we want to talk about bang for the buck, I think I can find a SNES at a garage sale or on Ebay for like $10 and buy a bunch of $5 used games at my local Babbages. Whoopdedoo. <-

Exactly. And by the sound of it, Dave buys pretty much every game for every system -- albeit only at a discount. All these "great deals" Dave have made -- spending $800 a year on software at $9 a pop -- seem weird to me.

*sigh* Except technologically, the Dreamcast is hardly that far removed from an Xbox to warrant your nutty SNES comparison.

We both own a Dreamcast Jason. We've played the games longer than someone like Murph who doesn't even own a console. To someone that has had a DC since September of 1999, the games may seem "old". But for someone that hasn't even touched one or just wants to play some good console games, the DC is a fine buy...and it'll cost you $100 to get one with three games (Sports Pack).

Also...by 2003/2004, the new consoles are going to look like junk next to a PC. So we'll all be back to the old standby again. Those "big new games" won't be so big then for a cutting edge PC owner like those on this board.

--Dave

---

Quote:

Exactly. And by the sound of it, Dave buys pretty much every game for every system -- albeit only at a discount. All these "great deals" Dave have made -- spending $800 a year on software at $9 a pop -- seem weird to me.

---

>"And also, no store is PRE-selling it without a bundle. All the stores that I know of are going to be selling standalone units at launch time."

Well, MS is instructing retailers that half their allotment of systems should not be pre-sold so people can get one the day of launch without a pre order, provided they line up early enough (I actually think this policy is basically designed to increase the number of people who wait in line for launch day). But they haven't said anything about whether these first-come, first-serve units can be sold in bundles, as far as I know. So I doubt you will be able to get an Xbox seperately this year. I think bundles, presold or not, are the only way they'll be offered.

I just realized I forgot to set up my new console/Ebay price-gouging scam! And now it's too late to make a bunch of pre-orders under psuedonymhs. D'oh!

Brad Grenz
(or James Hallifax
or Mr. I. M. Groovy
or Sandra Macduff...)

"You -- especially you, wumpus -- can always find reasons NOT to buy a console. But for many of us, you don't need a whole lot of convincing to take home the Gamecube hardware -- and that controller! -- for $199. I enjoyed my N64 more each year I had it. Hell, I *loved* Paper Mario. Practically everyone I know has had to run to the bathroom while playing Mario Tennis to avoid having an accident."

Hey, I'm with you. I _loved_ Mario 64. And Goldeneye. And Wave Race. The first two are all-time gaming classics! But I just don't see those kinds of games for the GameCube at launch. Shrug.

For what it's worth, my money is on Halo. I think the Xbox lineup is underrated, particularly by certain Japanese-obsessed gamers *cough*loonyboi*cough*. Who knows? It could surprise some people.

I'm thinking of buying an Xbox so I can play Morrowind without getting a whole new PC. Plus Project Ego looks cool, although that's still in the early stages.

The downside is I just bought a DVD player, which removes one excuse I would have had for getting an Xbox...

Thanks for defending my case Dave, but I DO have a console! Actually, I've owned everything Nintendo's ever made 'cept the GBA, which I'll be getting soon, and, of course, the GameCube, which I'll probably have eventually...I just feel like the Dreamcast is a good step, because, while I'm far from poor, I'm also far from rich, and just can't justify the kind of money we're talking about a console, no more than I'll play it due to my love of my PC. Really, I probably won't buy the Dreamcast either -- the next purchase will probably be the GameCube in about a year...But, the Dreamcast DOES seem like a good deal, and I might surprise myself.

Anyway, those of you that have the cash to fork over on an Xbox on launch day, or the $400 bundles that you pre-ordered, good for you. I hope you enjoy them. I'll pick one up in a year or so at 1/3 of the price. I'm all about value, baby!!

Really, here's what it boils down to: Owning a console is pretty low on my priority list. I could do a lot to my computer for $400, and I would consider the money far better spent that way.

"..and this is a bad thing? Should I be bankrupting my family to buy games? ... What the hell is wrong with getting more top quality entertainment for my dollars?"

*sigh* You're missing the point as usual, Dave.

There's nothing wrong with buying $9 games. It's just that acting as if buying 85 nine-dollar games every year is some sign of frugality is a bit comical. I mean, from the sound of your posts, you pretty much own every Dreamcast title published in English. You can pat yourself on the back all you want, but it sounds like you spend at least as much as everyone else around here, if not more. I don't buy in quantity, like you do.

"Also...by 2003/2004, the new consoles are going to look like junk next to a PC."

That I can't argue with.

And don't get me wrong--I'm not arguing against buying a Dreamcast. I love the Dreamcast. Hell, for the price it's at now, it's worth buying it JUST to use as a Soul Calibur machine.

But for someone looking to "get into" console gaming, it's not what I'd recommend. Games for the DC are going to get harder to find, and the new releases are going to stop altogether. And it wasn't around for very long before they axed it, so even the games available now are more limited than, say, the PlayStation collection.

How am I missing the point? You seem to think that by buying more games at lower prices I'm somehow diluting the quality of those games. That's just plain wrong. If you could play three games that get five stars in reviews for $50 or one game that gets a five star review for the same $50, the only thing that makes up your mind is the content of the game and how that agrees with your own preferences.

For example...I love turn-based strategy games, CivIII is coming out for $50. I also love 2D fighters, console racing games and shooters. I could get Mars Matrix, Capcom vs. SNK and Ferrari F355 Challenge for Dreamcast, or I can get Civ III for the PC for the same $50. All four are very highly rated and agree with my preferences. So I choose the three over the one knowing that in a few weeks or months or a year I can get Civ III for just $30 or less.

I think it bothers people that someone isn't buying games day and date with their release. A lot of gamers have a prejudice against that and it sure seems like you're one of them. As if it's wrong to be enjoying X-Com all these years later because I could be buying some other newer tactical game like Fallout Tactics? For someone that loves games, owning a collection of the best of them is simply an enjoyable pastime in itself. I'm one of those people.

I'm using the info I've gathered on Dreamcast prices to prove that for someone who doesn't want to spend a lot on a console, they can get lots of top notch entertainment for less money. That doesn't reflect in any way on me or my spending habits. I know how much I've spent on games and I'm comfortable with it. Then again, I'm not quite sure why I have to justify it with you...

--Dave

"So I choose the three over the one knowing that in a few weeks or months or a year I can get Civ III for just $30 or less."

Trick question. I'll spend more time playing Civ III than I'll spend playing all those other games combined, so it's obviously the better choice for the money.

That's why I threw this in.

---

Quote:

All four are very highly rated and agree with my preferences.

---

"The controller: Oh the microsoft controller is a joy to behold. Never have I felt a more comfortable, inviting, solid controller."

Ran across an Xbox in a sparsely populated Target tonight, and I must concur on the controller. It is the first controller that fits my big meathooks, and it was much, much more comfortable than anything Sony, Nintendo, and their doll-handed engineers have ever built. I've got a MadCatz controller for my Dreamcast that is pretty good, but the hand position is too parallel on it, unlike the Xbox controller. Buttons and joysticks are both a pleasure to use - precise and easy to hit.

Graphically, who can tell the difference? There was a demo of Spy Hunter running on the same kiosk, and I didn't see an appreciable difference between that and the Munch demo. They both are on a TV, after all.

My only beef with the controller is the "squashed cross' configuration of the buttons--that takes some getting used to, and feels a bit clumsy. Otherwise it's probably the most comfortable gamepad I've used.

Hopping into this thread a little late...

I picked up a PS2 at launch and while the initial games weren't horrible, it really has taken them a year to hit their stride and start churning out classics (Ico, Devil May Cry, GT3, etc)

In fact, I pretty much traded in most of the PS2 games I had as of August and used the credit to get the latest batch of killer games.

I did just pick up a DC about a month ago, and I am so glad I did. I now spend about equal time playing the classic DC games as I do playing the new PS2 ones coming down the pike. And when compared to the new consoles coming out, the DC and a whole wack of games was a much better deal than selling my first-born for an Xbox. I do want a Gamecube, but likely won't get it till after Zelda comes out for it.

My take on the whole thing is that if you have a PS2 and a decent PC, why would you need an Xbox? Most of the games will be ported, or are already ports, and while it does have some nice built in hardware (HD and ethernet adapter) the PS2 will soon have the 40 gig HD/BBA for it... and honestly, I do my surfing on the PC, thank you very much.

However, if you don't have a PS2, and your PC isn't that great, then sure... the Xbox doesn't look like that bad a deal. Just hope you weren't hoping to play MGS2 :)

Anyway, that's my take. I'm not a rabid Xbox hater, but I'm not terribly impressed by it either, and the absurd price tag (I'm Canadian, and it's about $699 Canadian to start for just a basic bundle) is definately not wooing me over.

And at least with the PS2 you have the entire library of PS1 games to play. Mmmm...

"I did just pick up a DC about a month ago, and I am so glad I did. I now spend about equal time playing the classic DC games as I do playing the new PS2 ones coming down the pike. And when compared to the new consoles coming out, the DC and a whole wack of games was a much better deal than selling my first-born for an Xbox. I do want a Gamecube, but likely won't get it till after Zelda comes out for it."

Spigot, are you trying to write porn for Dave Long, or does it just come naturally? ;)

I think Xbox will surprise people, but it's just a hunch on my part. I'm rooting for it for three reasons--

A) it's the most future-looking console hardware platform I can ever recall (ethernet, hdd, uma). Extremely powerful.

B) The games are not typical console fare (eg, fighters and rpgs). Let's seize the day with some friggin' originality for once.

C) it's American, dammit! As Gord says, Sega is Japanese for "compulsive liar".

This is not to say that Xbox will be a success, but I think it will do far better than the "industry insiders" predict.

Hee hee... well put Wumpus.

I just think that the Xbox isn't for me, personally. I don't think that purchasing one is a one way ticket to hell, like some people have let on... It just isn't terribly interesting to me.

And you're right. Most of the games are NOT typical console fare... this is both a good thing and a bad thing. It's nice to see some originality on a console, but this same thing can hurt it. A console is not a PC, no matter how you try to turn it into one. Look at FPS's... sure, they work on a console, but I have yet to play one on a console that was superior in control than a PC FPS.

It seems to me that most of the Xbox games are very PC-ish (likely because of MS's buying up of a lot of PC developers to make games for Der Box). I just don't know if this will fly in the console arena. Sure, some people will like it, and I do think the Xbox will be a great PC alternative for those with older systems who are looking to just play games and maybe do a bit of surfing. However, I doubt that most people who play console games a la the variety put out by Sega and Sony and Nintendo will be as impressed by some of the more PC-style games.

Remember Summoner on the PS2? I enjoyed it and found it to be a very decent RPG apart from some technical issues (ie. Draw-in starting at 3" from your characters). However, it had a very PC style feel to it, rather than your typical console RPG. This wasn't a bad thing, but I also know that the PS2 version was not accepted with as much enthusiasm as other RPG's.

Ah well. To each his own. I'm happy with my PS2 and DC, and maybe a few years from now I'll grab an Xbox.

But at the moment, I will continue to stay where the games are. To me, that's the most important criteria for which system will win. Better games = better system, hands down. Tech specs are nice, but it doesn't matter how many polygons you can cram down the A/V cable if the game plays like a rusty shopping cart (unless it's the rusty shopping cart sim being developed by Sid Meier.)

The 'console' games for me are on the X-Box: Medal of Honor: Allied Assault, Shenmue II, Morrowind, Halo and Bounty Hunter among others.

Most of these will be PC too but I prefer couch potatoing it with a big screen and surround sound. The price is right and I won't have to worry about incompatible titles, constant driver updates or quirky components. Plug and play, baby. Just like it should be.

My big problem is that Microsoft seems to be screwing up in some big ways marketing and the PR with this thing. It's like watching Sega's saga with the Dreamcast all over again. Do I want to gamble? Am I feeling lucky, punk?

Bounty Hunter does look nifty, don't it? But you've kinda hit the nail on the head with your list, only 1 of the 5 there never was and never will be on the PC. And of those remaining 4 there's nary a one that I wouldn't prefer to play using a mouse and keyboard. It's the crux of Microsoft's problem, you go out and secure some great games but force them onto a platform that's not suited to them. It's PC developers making PC games being published on a console. That's trouble.

Brad Grenz

OK, stepping back a bit and looking at the big picture, does anyone really think that Microsoft isn't going to win this in the long run? History has shown that when they see a product as strategically important they are relentless, pouring resources into it until they wear down the competition. Granted, the console market is difficult and Sony is certainly no Netscape, but I think they see XBox as just the first battle in a long war. Personally, I see XBox taking a solid 2nd place over the next few years and setting the stage for them to dominate the next generation of console/home entertainment server.

In any case, it's going to be fun to watch this play out.

As a side note, I plan on buying an XBox, but then again I'm notoriously frivolous with my money and have bought nearly every console since the Genesis. Did anyone else just give up and epoxy the Tempest2K cartridge into their Jaguar?

Microsoft does have a LOT of money, but Sony has an extremely devoted fan-base, and they're far from broke, too. I don't know...

I do agree that the fact that Microsoft is making and marketing this will cause it to live a lot longer than most consoles. They've got more expendable cash than anyone -- they can certainly afford to lose a little...

---

Quote:

Spigot, are you trying to write porn for Dave Long, or does it just come naturally? ;)

---

I dunno how committed Microsoft really is. The latest Wired article focused mainly on production and such but there was a mention on how this fits into MS's strategy - basically the main thing that sells faster PCs, at this point, is games. The main thing that moves more units of Windows are faster, new, computer sales.

The idea seems to be that the X-Box will provide a platform that can sell units of games in numbers comperable to console sales but that these games can also be turned around and sold as PC products. This, in theory, will drive new PC sales as the PC will also be enabled with keyboards and more sophisticated internet tools as well as the usual smorgasbord of applications.

I may be missing something here. But if the X-Box is aimed at improving the number and quality of computer-style games to in turn increase PC sales why would a gamer ever buy a new (as opposed to older) PC if they already have the X-Box?

And if the games are complex PC-style games that are 'slimmed down' a bit (like Morrowind shipping without the world editor) why would a gamer get an X-Box if they'd rather play with more options and access to a keyboard on the PC?

Could be I misunderstood the article or that I'm drawing the wrong conclusions here but it seems to me, based on the really weak marketing MS is doing for the X-BOX outside the existing console/PC community, that I do have reason to wonder how committed Microsoft will be if the X-Box doesn't quickly start showing results. In this economy, and given the considerations I've noted above, I'd like someone to give me good news about this system because I need a positive word before I sink bucks into yet another console.

"I may be missing something here. But if the X-Box is aimed at improving the number and quality of computer-style games to in turn increase PC sales why would a gamer ever buy a new (as opposed to older) PC if they already have the X-Box?"

I don't see this big overlap between console gamers and PC gamers. Sure, for the teeny-tiny hardcore market.. but for most folks, they get a PC to do internet/work and maybe some light minesweeper or myst style gaming. If they want to really _play_, they get a console. That's the untapped market for Microsoft.

Hell, most over the counter computers still sell with TNT2-class video cards, for chrissakes. Good luck playing any modern 3D game on that crap. It's not even an option.

Actually you would be surprised about the TNT2. My wife runs DAOC in 1024x768 on a 900 Mhz Tbird with a TNT2 Ultra and it moves right along. Not as smooth as my 1.4 and GeForce3 mind you but definitely playable.

-- Xaroc

I said "TNT2 class", not "TNT2 ultra". We're talking TNT2 with cheap 64-bit memory interfaces, which puts performance right in the toilet. Don't believe me? Do this. The next time you go to OfficeDepot, CompUSA, or any place that sells computers.. walk down the aisle of computers and go to control panel, device manager, video for each one. If you are a gamer, you'll practically be crying by the time you reach the end of the aisle. It really is that bad, EVEN TODAY. The price pressure is enormous, and video card isn't high on manufacturer's list of items.. next to "CD-R!" or high numbers for mhz, gb, mb, it hardly rates at all. So they put in crap.

These cheap computers are lucky to actually achieve "real" TNT2 performance, much less TNT2 ultra. I'm talking on-board integrated, and many of the high-volume inexpensive models don't even have an AGP slot..

Nevertheless, the sidebar called "The Empire Strikes Back" by 'J.M.O.' in the November Wired seems to posit the idea that the Xbox exists to serve as a profitable incubator for potential PC games.

Excerpts:
"But here's another aspect of the strategy that Microsoft is less keen to publicize: The unveiling of the Xbox is also a defensive move, aimed at shoring up a weakened PC home market."

"PC penetration has reached saturation in most of the developed world and there are few must have applications that demand a more powerful replacement. The one exception is games."

Analysis follows. Buy a copy of Wired for the gist.

Conclusion:
"Microsoft's main goal is to make Xbox a hit. But the hidden hope is that developers who write games for the Xbox will use the same DirectX tools to create even more ambitious games for next-generation PCs. That, in turn, will give users a solid reason to upgrade."

Ironically, it seems we underappreciated gamers may be the saviours of Microsoft's fortunes which, in turn, shores up the tech sector as a whole which, in turn, is crucial to the entire economy of the nation.

Be a patriot. Buy a game and turn your friends on too. ;)