So, I just played xbox360

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: Lucifer

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: HamburgerBoy

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
2) NES
3) SNES
4) Genesis
6) Dreamcast

Fixed.

I suspect you're too young to know about the Atari 7800. Essentially, it's a beefed up 2600. Played the entire 2600 library, plus a couple dozen 7800-only titles. VERY slick looking piece of kit, and it actually still looks at home in a modern entertainment system (cabling it into a modern system, however, borders on nightmare unless you're willing to meet it halfway)

Too young? You're probably 1-2 years older.

Anyways, you forgot Neo Geo on your list.

Have one available, haven't played it. Yet.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Overall: 5/10 (Where PS2 is 5/10)


Comments on PSU: I've only ever seen one other hardware device that required a keyed power cable like that. It was a server drawing more than 10A. More likely this was a case where they just did that to prevent people from using normal cables when they inevitably roll over the one with a chair, but whatever. Also, it's bigger than my PS2 and gamecube combined. And that's just the power adapter.

Comments on controller: Better than the xbox original, better than the xbox S, worse than the Dualshock 2.

Comments on aesthetics: It still looks like an Apple product.

Comments on the graphics (Dead Rising or whatever that Zombie game is, plain 'ol TV, composite input): What in the name of god is everyone so excited about!?!? It looks JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER 3d game in the past few years. Sure, there's more ****** on the screen. Whoopty friggin' do. Even on an HDTV running at 1080p, it's only JUST BARELY drawing more pixels than my PC's video card was drawing in 1998. Thereby, the precision on the vector math can be turned waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down. Also, on a normal TV, the fvcking text is unreadable.

Comments on the game (That damned Zombie game): Unreadable text, somewhat fun, I'd play it through if they stuck it on a REAL gaming platform (PC) and not the bullshit kid's stuff.

Playing XBOX 360 on a standard TV and then bitching about it not looking good is like driving a Honda S2000 only in first gear and then complaining that it is slow as f&^k. If you don't have an HDTV, why the *&#$^ would you even bother?

And Dead Rising looks flippin' fantastic on our 32" HDTV.

As for the controller, it's MILES ahead of the Dual Shock controller and the analog sticks are perfectly placed.

Besides, this rant sounds like some sh!t that a high schooler would come up with. Play one game on a less than optimum TV, then complain like a little *****

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: duragezic

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Comments on controller: Better than the xbox original, better than the xbox S, worse than the Dualshock 2.

Are you ****** kidding me?

1. The analog sticks are better on the Xbox/Xbox 360 controllers
2. They put them in the right place on the Xbox/Xbox 360 controller! Why in the name of Jebus tap dancing christ is Sony STILL putting the analog sticks in a secondary position after 3 generations? For the love of G.O.B. give some love to the left analog stick.

Dualshock is the biggest piece of ****** that ever controlled a video game. Its only saving grace is that the system was popular, so people got used to it. People got used to ****** and learned to like it.

And to save my life I just can't get used to X/Square/Circle/Triangle. My brain has an easier time with ABXY because the letters have a logical connection.

QFT. MS really did good with the Xbox controller IMO. And other than a better game library (though for me it only comes down to a few PS2 exclusives like God of War) the PS2 was way behind the Xbox IMO. 1920x1080 is only barely higher pixels than 1998? 1998.. I was playing Quake mostly, some RTS and other genres, and Half-life came out. Sure I didn't have a top-of-the-line video card like V2 SLI, but I was playing at like 640x480 or 800x600 for current games and maybe 1024x768 on older ones like Q1.

You may not have been playing games at those levels, but I have, sitting in my lap, an in-box Radeon AIW dated from 2000. It supports 2048x1536x32@75 for 2d display, and 1920x1200 (this is key, this is larger than 1920x1080 (1080p))x32@75hz.

Whether the 3d engine and underlying APIs were good enough to support that is a completely different matter (generally speaking, they weren't - but this is MUCH more a software problem than a hardware problem).

Earlier chipsets supported the 1920x resolutions as well - including the classic ATI Rage.

And as for monitors, Sony, CTX, NEC, and others were making displays that met those levels in 1998 if not earlier (I have monitors in my inventory which support that)

WTF are you talking about. No PC graphics accelerator in 1998 or 2000 could run a 3D game at 1920x1200 or 1920x1080 so WTF are you talking about?

So to even bring up the point is rather futile, pointless and stupid.

 

[everman]

It's all about the games. I don't have a 360, but Bioshock sure makes it look tempting when it comes out next year. (successor to System Shock 2 essentially)

From what I've seen of Dead Rising, it doesn't really appeal to me much, a lot like GTA which I've done a few times already.

I'm waiting for Wii, Zelda is pre-ordered.

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Overall: 5/10 (Where PS2 is 5/10)


Comments on PSU: I've only ever seen one other hardware device that required a keyed power cable like that. It was a server drawing more than 10A. More likely this was a case where they just did that to prevent people from using normal cables when they inevitably roll over the one with a chair, but whatever. Also, it's bigger than my PS2 and gamecube combined. And that's just the power adapter.

Comments on controller: Better than the xbox original, better than the xbox S, worse than the Dualshock 2.

Comments on aesthetics: It still looks like an Apple product.

Comments on the graphics (Dead Rising or whatever that Zombie game is, plain 'ol TV, composite input): What in the name of god is everyone so excited about!?!? It looks JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER 3d game in the past few years. Sure, there's more ****** on the screen. Whoopty friggin' do. Even on an HDTV running at 1080p, it's only JUST BARELY drawing more pixels than my PC's video card was drawing in 1998. Thereby, the precision on the vector math can be turned waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down. Also, on a normal TV, the fvcking text is unreadable.

Comments on the game (That damned Zombie game): Unreadable text, somewhat fun, I'd play it through if they stuck it on a REAL gaming platform (PC) and not the bullshit kid's stuff.

Playing XBOX 360 on a standard TV and then bitching about it not looking good is like driving a Honda S2000 only in first gear and then complaining that it is slow as f&^k. If you don't have an HDTV, why the *&#$^ would you even bother?

And Dead Rising looks flippin' fantastic on our 32" HDTV.

As for the controller, it's MILES ahead of the Dual Shock controller and the analog sticks are perfectly placed.

Besides, this rant sounds like some sh!t that a high schooler would come up with. Play one game on a less than optimum TV, then complain like a little *****

You guys forget that teenagers and early 20's make up a HUGE segment of the video game market. At HUNDREDS of dollars a unit, plus $60/game, you're already stretching that market's budget thin.

$2000 for a 1080p TV is completely above and beyond being even a part of the equation. $500 for an EDTV is even borderline.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Originally posted by: mugs
N64 controller was bad, but you have to consider the time period. Analog sticks were a new thing. They had to give the D-pad and the analog stick equal prominence. The way they did it worked alright... my main complaint about the N64 controller was the 4 C buttons. They made no sense.

How are you supposed to hold this thing? I could never get all of the buttons within reach and the Z(?) button underneath the controller sucked. Aside from simple games like Mario Party and Star Wars Pod Racing it was impossible for me to do anything on that thing.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
You guys forget that teenagers and early 20's make up a HUGE segment of the video game market. At HUNDREDS of dollars a unit, plus $60/game, you're already stretching that market's budget thin.

$2000 for a 1080p TV is completely above and beyond being even a part of the equation. $500 for an EDTV is even borderline.

AND??? That's my problem because???

If you don't have the hardware to play, then you have no reason to bitch. Same goes for the PS3. Games will probably look like sh!t on it too with a SDTV. This is akin to someone buying Prey for their PC then complaining that the game looks like ass on an Intel GMA950 integrated graphics controller.

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: duragezic

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Comments on controller: Better than the xbox original, better than the xbox S, worse than the Dualshock 2.

Are you ****** kidding me?

1. The analog sticks are better on the Xbox/Xbox 360 controllers
2. They put them in the right place on the Xbox/Xbox 360 controller! Why in the name of Jebus tap dancing christ is Sony STILL putting the analog sticks in a secondary position after 3 generations? For the love of G.O.B. give some love to the left analog stick.

Dualshock is the biggest piece of ****** that ever controlled a video game. Its only saving grace is that the system was popular, so people got used to it. People got used to ****** and learned to like it.

And to save my life I just can't get used to X/Square/Circle/Triangle. My brain has an easier time with ABXY because the letters have a logical connection.

QFT. MS really did good with the Xbox controller IMO. And other than a better game library (though for me it only comes down to a few PS2 exclusives like God of War) the PS2 was way behind the Xbox IMO. 1920x1080 is only barely higher pixels than 1998? 1998.. I was playing Quake mostly, some RTS and other genres, and Half-life came out. Sure I didn't have a top-of-the-line video card like V2 SLI, but I was playing at like 640x480 or 800x600 for current games and maybe 1024x768 on older ones like Q1.

You may not have been playing games at those levels, but I have, sitting in my lap, an in-box Radeon AIW dated from 2000. It supports 2048x1536x32@75 for 2d display, and 1920x1200 (this is key, this is larger than 1920x1080 (1080p))x32@75hz.

Whether the 3d engine and underlying APIs were good enough to support that is a completely different matter (generally speaking, they weren't - but this is MUCH more a software problem than a hardware problem).

Earlier chipsets supported the 1920x resolutions as well - including the classic ATI Rage.

And as for monitors, Sony, CTX, NEC, and others were making displays that met those levels in 1998 if not earlier (I have monitors in my inventory which support that)

WTF are you talking about. No PC graphics accelerator in 1998 or 2000 could run a 3D game at 1920x1200 or 1920x1080 so WTF are you talking about?

So to even bring up the point is rather futile, pointless and stupid.

The capability existed, it's in the damned spec sheets. The fact that nobody wrote software to take advantage of those capabilities comes down to a few things - The APIs available - DirectX and OpenGL weren't exactly the fastest. The sustainable framerate at those resolutions under the currently available APIs and chipset designs was too slow. But nonetheless, the capability existed. It's been refined and sharpened over the years, but I have NO doubts at all that a software title with appreciably nice visuals could be coded to run at 1920x1200 on a Radeon Classic at a constant 60FPS if there were such a demand. It would require farming out much of the processing to the CPU, but it's very much possible. The thing is that situation-specific programming like this would NEVER fly on a PC - but it's what you're GUARANTEED to have the luxury of on a console, because the hardware is always the same. Don't have enough power here? Do it over there.

This is how the xbox could be competitive even though it essentially amounted to a GeForce 2 and a Celeron 600 - because every last one they ever built was like that.

 

[bigdog1218]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Overall: 5/10 (Where PS2 is 5/10)


Comments on PSU: I've only ever seen one other hardware device that required a keyed power cable like that. It was a server drawing more than 10A. More likely this was a case where they just did that to prevent people from using normal cables when they inevitably roll over the one with a chair, but whatever. Also, it's bigger than my PS2 and gamecube combined. And that's just the power adapter.

Comments on controller: Better than the xbox original, better than the xbox S, worse than the Dualshock 2.

Comments on aesthetics: It still looks like an Apple product.

Comments on the graphics (Dead Rising or whatever that Zombie game is, plain 'ol TV, composite input): What in the name of god is everyone so excited about!?!? It looks JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER 3d game in the past few years. Sure, there's more ****** on the screen. Whoopty friggin' do. Even on an HDTV running at 1080p, it's only JUST BARELY drawing more pixels than my PC's video card was drawing in 1998. Thereby, the precision on the vector math can be turned waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down. Also, on a normal TV, the fvcking text is unreadable.

Comments on the game (That damned Zombie game): Unreadable text, somewhat fun, I'd play it through if they stuck it on a REAL gaming platform (PC) and not the bullshit kid's stuff.

Playing XBOX 360 on a standard TV and then bitching about it not looking good is like driving a Honda S2000 only in first gear and then complaining that it is slow as f&^k. If you don't have an HDTV, why the *&#$^ would you even bother?

And Dead Rising looks flippin' fantastic on our 32" HDTV.

As for the controller, it's MILES ahead of the Dual Shock controller and the analog sticks are perfectly placed.

Besides, this rant sounds like some sh!t that a high schooler would come up with. Play one game on a less than optimum TV, then complain like a little *****

So what you're saying is the 85% of American households that don't have HDTV shouldn't bother buying a 360. Sounds like a winning system to me.

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
You guys forget that teenagers and early 20's make up a HUGE segment of the video game market. At HUNDREDS of dollars a unit, plus $60/game, you're already stretching that market's budget thin.

$2000 for a 1080p TV is completely above and beyond being even a part of the equation. $500 for an EDTV is even borderline.

AND??? That's my problem because???

If you don't have the hardware to play, then you have no reason to bitch. Same goes for the PS3. Games will probably look like sh!t on it too with a SDTV. This is akin to someone buying Prey for their PC then complaining that the game looks like ass on an Intel GMA950 integrated graphics controller.

It's not your problem, because you're not in that market. I, however, am. And I can afford neither an xbox 360, nor any TV other than this 2004-vintage Magnavox. Hell, right now, I don't even think I can afford a single game.

And people with IGP's can fix that problem for $50. That's a damn sight from $500 or $2000.

 

[Kaervak]

Originally posted by: SophalotJack
When you can post on ATOT with a console... call me.

The Dreamcast, released on September 9th 1999 can.

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: bigdog1218

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
Overall: 5/10 (Where PS2 is 5/10)


Comments on PSU: I've only ever seen one other hardware device that required a keyed power cable like that. It was a server drawing more than 10A. More likely this was a case where they just did that to prevent people from using normal cables when they inevitably roll over the one with a chair, but whatever. Also, it's bigger than my PS2 and gamecube combined. And that's just the power adapter.

Comments on controller: Better than the xbox original, better than the xbox S, worse than the Dualshock 2.

Comments on aesthetics: It still looks like an Apple product.

Comments on the graphics (Dead Rising or whatever that Zombie game is, plain 'ol TV, composite input): What in the name of god is everyone so excited about!?!? It looks JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER 3d game in the past few years. Sure, there's more ****** on the screen. Whoopty friggin' do. Even on an HDTV running at 1080p, it's only JUST BARELY drawing more pixels than my PC's video card was drawing in 1998. Thereby, the precision on the vector math can be turned waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down. Also, on a normal TV, the fvcking text is unreadable.

Comments on the game (That damned Zombie game): Unreadable text, somewhat fun, I'd play it through if they stuck it on a REAL gaming platform (PC) and not the bullshit kid's stuff.

Playing XBOX 360 on a standard TV and then bitching about it not looking good is like driving a Honda S2000 only in first gear and then complaining that it is slow as f&^k. If you don't have an HDTV, why the *&#$^ would you even bother?

And Dead Rising looks flippin' fantastic on our 32" HDTV.

As for the controller, it's MILES ahead of the Dual Shock controller and the analog sticks are perfectly placed.

Besides, this rant sounds like some sh!t that a high schooler would come up with. Play one game on a less than optimum TV, then complain like a little *****

So what you're saying is the 85% of American households that don't have HDTV shouldn't bother buying a 360. Sounds like a winning system to me.

People with HD will say all kinds of stupid crap to justify their purchase.

"It's necessary for the enjoyment of TV!"
"You can't play games without it!"
"Everybody has one!"

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: bigdog1218
So what you're saying is the 85% of American households that don't have HDTV shouldn't bother buying a 360. Sounds like a winning system to me.

What I'm saying is, that the Xbox 360 looks BEST on an HDTV. That's what the machine was built for. THAT IS OPTIMUM. Same goes for the PlayStation 3. This is next generation stuff people.

But don't expect to get HDTV quality graphics from your sh!tty standard definition TV with an Xbox 360 or PS3. So my contention is, if you don't have the goods to take advantage of the console, why waste your money?

Hell, all I see when I walk into CC or BB these days are HDTVs anyway. You want the best looking games possible? Have an HDTV...otherwise, you have no reason to bitch.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Originally posted by: Kaervak
The Dreamcast, released on September 9th 1999 can.

What a shame that it sold as bad as it did.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing
People with HD will say all kinds of stupid crap to justify their purchase.

"It's necessary for the enjoyment of TV!"
"You can't play games without it!"
"Everybody has one!"

You don't seem to understand.

The Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 were designed with HD gaming in mind. Hence they look best with newer HDTVs. Sure, you can play it on old standard definition televisions, but it's not going to look as good.

How hard is that to understand?

Play Dead Rising on an standard defintion TV, then play it on an HDTV. The difference is night and day. There's really nothing else to say. I don't know how else to explain it.

It's like driving around in Chevy Cobalt, then getting the chance to drive a Corvette.

 

[mwtgg]

Originally posted by: HamburgerBoy

Originally posted by: Kaervak
The Dreamcast, released on September 9th 1999 can.

What a shame that it sold as bad as it did.

The Sony hype machine crushed it.

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: bigdog1218
So what you're saying is the 85% of American households that don't have HDTV shouldn't bother buying a 360. Sounds like a winning system to me.

What I'm saying is, that the Xbox 360 looks BEST on an HDTV. That's what the machine was built for. THAT IS OPTIMUM. Same goes for the PlayStation 3. This is next generation stuff people.

But don't expect to get HDTV quality graphics from your sh!tty standard definition TV with an Xbox 360 or PS3. So my contention is, if you don't have the goods to take advantage of the console, why waste your money?

Hell, all I see when I walk into CC or BB these days are HDTVs anyway. You want the best looking games possible? Have an HDTV...otherwise, you have no reason to bitch.

I'm FVCKING SICK of that term. There's nothing "next generation" about the ****** anymore. It's here. It's NOW. Actually, it's LAST FVCKING YEAR! It's the CURRENT generation.

And if you want legacy users to stop "bitching", tell Sony and Microsoft to knock off the damned Composite video cables they're shipping everything with, because that only enables us. Kill S-Video, too. If the hardware vendors are going to give us the capability to use it, it's the RESPONSIBILITY of the software vendor to give us basic usability (using a font of sufficient size to be readable would be a good start, or voice-overing that text, or SOMETHING)

It doesn't have to look as pretty, but generally speaking, we'd like to have access to plot and gameplay critical information.

 

[Goosemaster]

There seems to be some confusion here..did you or didn't you play that game on a 1080p television using component, dvi, vga, or HDMI?

 

[NFS4]

**SIGH**

I don't know what else to say. My head hurts.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster
There seems to be some confusion here..did you or didn't you play that game on a 1080p television using component, dvi, vga, or HDMI?

He was using a regular non-HDTV television

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster
There seems to be some confusion here..did you or didn't you play that game on a 1080p television using component, dvi, vga, or HDMI?

I played the game on an SDTV using COMPOSITE

Which is a standard, Microsoft-supported output which the Dead Rising developers decided to completely ignore and leave incapable of reading gameplay critical text.

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: Goosemaster
There seems to be some confusion here..did you or didn't you play that game on a 1080p television using component, dvi, vga, or HDMI?

He was using a regular non-HDTV television

so why in the helll did he bitch about 1080p?!

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: Goosemaster
There seems to be some confusion here..did you or didn't you play that game on a 1080p television using component, dvi, vga, or HDMI?

I played the game on an SDTV using COMPOSITE

Which is a standard, Microsoft-supported output which the Dead Rising developers decided to completely ignore and leave incapable of reading gameplay critical text.

LOFL.....you're joking right?

..and I thought you were cool dude...

*walks away laughing*

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: NFS4
**SIGH**

I don't know what else to say. My head hurts.

Other than "go buy an HDTV" or "go play it on an HDTV", I'm not sure what you've said to start with.

The console supports SDTV, the game doesn't, and doesn't tell you such - potentially alienating a large portion of the purchasers of the game (statistically, 80-some% - that's the likelihood you don't have an HDTV if you're an American citizen)

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: HamburgerBoy
How are you supposed to hold this thing? I could never get all of the buttons within reach and the Z(?) button underneath the controller sucked. Aside from simple games like Mario Party and Star Wars Pod Racing it was impossible for me to do anything on that thing.

It wasn't designed to use the D-pad and the analog stick at the same time, it was designed to use one or the other. So developers could choose which to use. It was a transition controller.

Admittedly it sucks. But I still think it's better than or equal to the DualShock controller. And compared to the competitors' options at the time... it was the only one that even HAD an analog stick.