The big three and what they've done for us lately

[neorichieb1971]

Irregardless of Sony's faults, I don't want Microsofts model of console or games to become the standard. I'd prefer it if Sega came back in. I don't believe MS is the best thing for the industry as a whole. They might be allowing devs to spread their wares about easily and efficiently, but its the juggernaut corperation that i'm afraid of. Microsoft have offered very little bar online gaming so far and its something i'm not fussed about.

[Kron]

They might be allowing devs to spread their wares about easily and efficiently, but its the juggernaut corperation that i'm afraid of.

So you're happy with the juggernaut corporation that is Sony and its evident lack of games this generation? ok.

[neorichieb1971]

There is always the arcade PCB as a choice of selection. So if you don't want a 360 you can usually get a SG/Cab and PCB combo depending on your budget.

Anyways why am I being attacked here? I'm telling you why I don't want a 360, not why I only own a Sony console. I'm not pushing that decision on you, i'm just iterating why I chose my path. Its free world you know. Your opinions are equally biased no matter what their based on. Screaming 360 this and 360 that hasn't had your desired effect either, i'm no closer to owning one than I was 10 days ago. It saddens me that some devs have chosen 360 exclusively but thats life, I'll live.

For myself its more a case of the situation being a little pain the in ass, having to buy "the other" console. That has nothing else on it that I want. Therefore I bit the bullet. I'm not a hardcore (must own every console) type player anymore.

The fact that this thread exists (as well as a few similar threads) shows that some people are not exactle ecstatic about the position of shmups in the market either. In all of them the general consensus is "buy a import 360 and shut the hell up".. Nice, its harsh, but its the truth and we should accept they we cannot beat the crowd, so you might as well join them.

[njiska]

Anyways why am I being attacked here? I'm telling you why I don't want a 360, not why I only own a Sony console. I'm not pushing that decision on you, i'm just iterating why I chose my path. Its free world you know. Your opinions are equally biased no matter what their based on. Screaming 360 this and 360 that hasn't had your desired effect either, i'm no closer to owning one than I was 10 days ago. It saddens me that some devs have chosen 360 exclusively but thats life, I'll live.

For myself its more a case of the situation being a little pain the in ass, having to buy "the other" console. That has nothing else on it that I want. Therefore I bit the bullet. I'm not a hardcore (must own every console) type player anymore.

The reason everyone is getting on your case is because you're coming off as someone who's grasping at straws to make their argument, rather than relying on good solid fact. You should just acknowledge that the majority of the forum has a different opinion and agree to disagree. Making statements like "its the juggernaut corperation that i'm afraid of" only makes you come off as paranoid and fanboyish. No one here really cares if you go buy a 360, there is no hidden agenda, we just want you to stop making absurd statements because it's really hijacked the purpose of this thread which was to discuss why there's a plethora of shmups on a small market console.

As the statement "Microsoft have offered very little bar online gaming so far", I disagree and could offer you many examples of other contributions they've made to gaming, least of which being large internal storage but i won't because that's not what we're supposed to be talking about.

Now as for the topic at hand I think there are several key reasons why the 360 has become a shmups machine.

Easy of development:
The 360 is an easier system to code for because of both familiar programing structure (as numerous developers have claimed) and strong middleware which reduces the amount of work and therefore the amount of programmers required. As CAVE, Treasure, Success Corp, etc. tend to be small companies with very small dev teams this could make a world of difference to overall development cost. This can't be the only reason though because some of those companies released stuff on the GC so probably could go Wii at minimal cost.

Early digital download service:
I think a lot of developers were lured early on by the prospects of the XBLA. Having nearly a years head start in market and relatively low distribution costs made it an attractive system. Keeping in mind we didn't know about the Playstation store or Wii Shop until close to or after the 360's release it may have been the only option a lot of devs had.

MS Courtship:
Microsoft really did work hard to court Japanese developers and they did give great deals on licensing and dev hardware. Hard offer to turn down.

Why not move to the PS3 now?:
Easy answer. It's a niche market. Would any company really see dramatically increased sales by switching to another platform? Doubtful and the cost of buying new dev kits and investing the time and money into learning the new system would probably cost significantly more than the extra profit. Plus there's the fact they already have 50,000 fans holding a copy of Deathsmiles that probably wouldn't like being forced to switch consoles mid-generation.

I think a more interesting question would be, When Shikigami no Shiro III was localized to north America, why the hell didn't the bring over the 360 port?

[elvis]

Easy of development:
The 360 is an easier system to code for because of both familiar programing structure (as numerous developers have claimed) and strong middleware which reduces the amount of work and therefore the amount of programmers required.

I think this sort of thing is thrown around a lot by a vocal minority of developers, but is ultimately not entirely true.

At it's heart, the Cell is a PowerPC core (much like the Xbox 360). For "low end" games (say, Oh I don't know... 2D shooters?) even if you ignored all of the whiz-bang features the Cell processor has, you could treat it as a 3.2GHz PowerPC5 chip. Most of the Linux distros do just that, ignoring the "SPE" parts of the processor entirely.

Yes, if you're a relatively low-end shop with little experience outside of Visual Studio, then squeezing every ounce of oomph out of the PS3 is a challenge. However if you're either:
(a) A competent OpenGL programmer with porting experience outside of x86/Windows/Direct3D or
(b) Not interested in squeezing all 204 GFLOPS out of the console (like most of the PSN game devs out there)
then the PS3 is not the massively difficult system that the vocal minority of developers are claiming.

Now I'm not some blathering fanboy posting on gamefaqs. Ultimately I don't care which console Cave choose (or if they forgo consoles entirely and head for PC). I just think that the "PS3 is too hard to code for" BS needs to stop. If Popcap Games, Hothead Games, Capybara Games and other indie developers can write stuff for it without dramas, I can't see why anyone else should have problems.

So more to the point: I highly doubt the platform itself or the development tools are the deciding factors for Cave and others. My money still rests firmly on vendor arse-kissing and "special deals" as to why any one particular platform is chosen over another, again given my past experiences with Microsoft and what they're willing to do when they want market share in your neck of the woods. (Did I mention I'm a Linux System Admin/Architect? That might put my past experiences in perspective for you. And before anyone tries, no, I'm not "anti-Microsoft". I use plenty of their products and services without hesitation, and my choice of career had nothing to do with "hating" them or any such childish nonsense).

And what Sony fail to realise is that Microsoft are the kings of third party courtship and corporate cocksucking. They've been doing this for a long time, compared to Sony's typical arrogance where they tend to sit back and assume the third party players will come to them just because of their name.

[neorichieb1971]

Firstly, my point of view is just that (some people here agree with some of the things I say and sometimes I say things that cause a surge of flaming). Secondly for your 1st post of the century saying what we should and shouldn't talk about is a little high and mighty to say the least. Any thread that goes beyond 4 or 5 posts is going OT. If I start a thread "why is the sky blue?" and someone says the answer, then going on and on beyond that is pointless. Having a thread go into 30+ pages means the debate has transcended into other avenues. I am not always the culprit of such actions, although I can be to be blamed for this one.

This generation has shown loyalties mainly towards the Microsoft camp for whatever reasons. When they crop up from time to time, its only fair that someone should raise the question of "why?"

I'm not affected by the argument because if I wanted the games I would get them on PCB format. The OP might be affected by having just a Wii or PS3. It is a crying shame Sony don't make an emulator for the Cave stuff. I don't believe for one minute God of War 2 can be emulated at over 200% of the original processing power of the PS2 and something like Futari can't. Thats just ridiculous.

Irregardless of what people say, its likely that nothing we say will change anything. So again, I suspect its a case of join the crowd.

[njiska]

Easy of development:
The 360 is an easier system to code for because of both familiar programing structure (as numerous developers have claimed) and strong middleware which reduces the amount of work and therefore the amount of programmers required.

I think this sort of thing is thrown around a lot by a vocal minority of developers, but is ultimately not entirely true.

At it's heart, the Cell is a PowerPC core (much like the Xbox 360). For "low end" games (say, Oh I don't know... 2D shooters?) even if you ignored all of the whiz-bang features the Cell processor has, you could treat it as a 3.2GHz PowerPC5 chip. Most of the Linux distros do just that, ignoring the "SPE" parts of the processor entirely.

Yes, if you're a relatively low-end shop with little experience outside of Visual Studio, then squeezing every ounce of oomph out of the PS3 is a challenge. However if you're either:
(a) A competent OpenGL programmer with porting experience outside of x86/Windows/Direct3D or
(b) Not interested in squeezing all 204 GFLOPS out of the console (like most of the PSN game devs out there)
then the PS3 is not the massively difficult system that the vocal minority of developers are claiming.

Now I'm not some blathering fanboy posting on gamefaqs. Ultimately I don't care which console Cave choose (or if they forgo consoles entirely and head for PC). I just think that the "PS3 is too hard to code for" BS needs to stop. If Popcap Games, Hothead Games, Capybara Games and other indie developers can write stuff for it without dramas, I can't see why anyone else should have problems.

So more to the point: I highly doubt the platform itself or the development tools are the deciding factors for Cave and others. My money still rests firmly on vendor arse-kissing and "special deals" as to why any one particular platform is chosen over another, again given my past experiences with Microsoft and what they're willing to do when they want market share in your neck of the woods. (Did I mention I'm a Linux System Admin/Architect? That might put my past experiences in perspective for you. And before anyone tries, no, I'm not "anti-Microsoft". I use plenty of their products and services without hesitation, and my choice of career had nothing to do with "hating" them or any such childish nonsense).

And what Sony fail to realise is that Microsoft are the kings of third party courtship and corporate cocksucking. They've been doing this for a long time, compared to Sony's typical arrogance where they tend to sit back and assume the third party players will come to them just because of their name.

I think you're a little too hung up on "easy to program for" meaning "like programing a pc". I don't mean to imply that. Obviously it's quite different being both PowerPC based and restricted to in-order execution, but that doesn't mean it's hard to code for if you have good middle-ware, good development tools and good developer support. Three things the xbox does have and the main point developers praise.

Ultimately though I think you are right, it's most likely arse-kissing that probably made the difference. Microsoft is the king. But you know what? Good for them because nobody else in the industry seems to be trying. The more help, money, whatever they've given our favourite developers the better if it translates to more accurate ports. That's my primary concern.

[neorichieb1971]

njiska

If your sig is aimed at me, I would politely ask you to take it out. Name calling is uncalled for. You may not agree with my sentiments, but I don't hit below the belt and I expect the same level of courtesy back.

Thank you in advance.

[bcass]

Microsoft have offered very little bar online gaming so far and its something i'm not fussed about.

This is a fairly ill-informed assumption. There's a lot more to Xbox Live than just online play. The whole "Xbox Live" package is this gens true innovation IMO.

[neorichieb1971]

I agree. So what are their other innovations?

Thats my point.

If I could just name one Sony or Nintendo innovation this generation, then surely it would be a tie.

[bcass]

I agree. So what are their other innovations?

Thats my point.

If I could just name one Sony or Nintendo innovation this generation, then surely it would be a tie.

I don't see the Wii tech as an innovation at all. I see it as a total creative dead-end, even Nintendo are struggling to come-up with anything more than crapy mini-game packages that use the tech properly. There's nothing remotely innovative about the PS3. As far as I'm concerned, it's one of the most redundant consoles ever made (and yes, I own one).

What have Microsoft given us with Live?

- online Leaderboards
- XBLA/Indie Games
- cross-game voice/party chat
- downloadable retail games
- Achievements

[njiska]

njiska

If your sig is aimed at me, I would politely ask you to take it out. Name calling is uncalled for. You may not agree with my sentiments, but I don't hit below the belt and I expect the same level of courtesy back.

Thank you in advance.

No problem, but how about in the future you avoid insinuating a user's post count has any thing to do with their familiarity with the forum or the topic at hand? I took that as an uncalled for hit below the belt, hence the sig.

And for the record this discussion has gone off-topic. That doesn't mean this is the kind of thing that belongs in an OT forum, just that the discussion is supposed to be about why the 360 has become the shmups console of this generation and I think your discussion about Microsoft's contributions to this generation of gaming would be better discussed in a separate thread. It's similar yes, but it is a different debate discussion

I will try to answer your question though. Here are the innovations Microsoft has brought to gaming this generation:

- online Leaderboards
- XBLA/Indie Games
- cross-game voice/party chat
- downloadable retail games
- Achievements

They have set the standard for all online gaming. Even the PC is following in their footsteps. Take a look at Steam.

The hard drive: Although introduced last generation and sadly dropped as a standard item this generation, it's still an innovation that has affected this generation. Without the original Xbox there's no telling if the PS3 or Wii would've had any internal storage.

HD Gaming: Sure Sony went HD from the beginning too, but for the longest time Microsoft was the only company that took the extra step of including a Component or HDMI cable in box to guarantee you played in HD. Sadly this practice has been dropped due to the penetration of HD, but it certainly helped with rapid adoption.

Web integration: Early on Microsoft opened up several Xbox Live APIs to allow web developers to build social networks around gaming. I personally love Raptr. Plus you can make changes to your account online, send messages, check your achievements, manage and compare friends. It's a big step forward even if it's not the kind of thing you use.

Integrated Hands-free patching system: Granted there will be a lot of debate over this one, but Xbox live for the first time allowed Developers to patch their faulty releases fixing problems discovered post release and balancing online play. It may have lead to some sloppy coding, but i bet anyone who went for 100% in GT2 would've loved it. Plus it's a hell of a lot nicer/quicker than the PS3 patch system. Took me forever to download and install the last Uncharted 2 patch.

I'd be happy to continue this discussion, but i still think it would be better if a mod split these posts off into a separate thread. Like the region free discussion that popped up in the Espgaluda II thread.

[neorichieb1971]

Blu ray storage - Not used much outside of exclusives due to cross platform code

Now lets talk Sony innovation -

The first console outside of those that flopped to offer official region free gaming

Remote play with PSP and mobile phones - Play or DL games and any mm content you have from PSN or your PS3 to your portable device (games are shabby using this but its a feature nobody else has brought out)

USB and PC friendly peripherals - If you have many PC devices you can use them on your PS3 saving you lots.

I can use wired Saturn USB controllers, Bluetooth keyboards, mouse, hard drives, thumb drives and mics.

PSN is free

For someone like me who only goes online once in while, being free means I can play SF IV once a month if I want and not have to pay some premium to do that.

I think Sony has 7 2nd party studios

And most of them work on content that is truly innovative or groundbreaking in some sort of form, not just mickey mouse budgets, but huge $20 million + budgets. Sony created the Eyetoy (its a gimmick but most things are these days, it can only get better), Modnation racers could be the best thing to happen to racing games since Super Mariokart on the SNES, LBP is another creative tool that demonstrates a commitment to doing something new. GOW3, Heavy Rain, MAG are all coming out soon, exclusively on the PS3. GT5 the worlds best selling racing franchise is coming out in 2010 and looks better than just about any other game to this day sporting 1080p resolutions and over 950 cars. Wipeout HD the worlds first 1080p full HD racing game in the form of DLC. Flower, a game played entirely from motion of the hand and wrist. 2010 marks the year that Sony will release its waggle controller that maps all motions in 3D. Sony PS3 is going to be the first console that allows true 3D blu ray video and gaming capabilities using similar technology to that of the Avatar cinematic 3D experience.

Uncharted 2 - Game of the year 2009


In 3 years Sony has tried to break new ground in many ways. Its just that nobody appreciates what they are trying to do on this site. Microsoft could have done all of this and more, but they didn't. I applaud Sony for trying to innovate and bring new things to the table, but apparently 2D shooters and achivements and party chat is more important. Horses for courses. Even if Sony are stuck up their own arses, I still applaud them for trying.

I think in a way, progress is what your scared of. As it was said Nintendo are at a dead end. You are right about one thing though, Microsoft did everything right at the begining. They made the console dev friendly and the online capabilities are 2nd to none. But outside of online, they have done little since imo. Its just my opinion.

Sorry If I offended you in any way. Debates are a good thing. I swear to God I am not a fanboy, I just don't look through the same 3D glasses you do

[Ghegs]

Feel free to continue the discussion here. And change the thread's title to something better if you want to.

[njiska]

Feel free to continue the discussion here. And change the thread's title to something better if you want to.

Thanks Ghegs.

neorichieb1971 I'll happily respond to you, short once I finish some work. Looks like we're on solid ground for a good debate now.

[louisg]

- XBLA is definitely an example of what's *right* with this generation. I don't have a 360, but that's the best argument for it.

- Talking half-uninformed, half from-a-user's-point-of-view, it really does kind of seem like "hard to program" really does translate to "does not work like a PC" or "needs clever workarounds". Since we have little control over what devs do, the question is more what it means for the player having a selection of underperforming titles to choose from. I haven't played the PS3 a whole lot, so I can't say whether this argument really applies to it or not.
As an aside, I have noticed that historically European and Japanese devs do much better with oddball architectures, whether it's the C64 or N64... I'm not sure if this continues to be a pattern in current gens or not. At any rate, a console working dramatically differently is going to probably be a bit of work for a high level multiplatform shotgun approach, right?

- Wii has some very interesting things about it. I think the way Mario Galaxy controls is a good proof of concept, even more-so than Wii sports. It just feels so free and natural to me, compared to playing with a normal controller. The Conduit, even though the game was lacking imo, is also a great demonstration. I think the controls on that are a huge leap past other console FPS games-- I've been wanting good threshold-based aim/turn control in FPSses ever since Doom.

- I don't want to hear the word innovation ever again.. whenever it comes up, it's always attached to some ultra-derivative concept.

[neorichieb1971]

EA are now working with PS3 as the lead platform on some of their games. Apparently if the 360 is the lead console the PS3 suffers dramatically because the code cannot be ported. However, the other way around the 360 does manage to port PS3 code quite well. The only problem from PS3 owners point of view is that in this scenario the 360 holds back the PS3 version of the game. FF13 was apparently going to be a much bigger game, but lack of disc space on the DVD's used by 360 caused a compromise for PS3.

Examples - Burnout Paradise is one, I think Dantes Inferno and Dead Space 2 might be others.

Sony have a team they call the doctors or something like that. They go in and help teams get the most of the PS3.

The biggest problem for the PS3 right now is that development costs are going up and its a recession time. As for the arrogance of Sony towards people like Cave, I can only imagine the demographic doesn't appeal to Sony.

If the 360 is holding back PS3 development, then exclusive PS3 software coming this year should squish Microsofts efforts.

Online - MAG has 256 online players per game all at the same time.

Graphics - GT5 and GOW3 are 2 of the most anticipated games in 2010 with years of development gone into both. Both might sport 1080p.

Only time will tell.

[Vexorg]

I'm still relatively new to the PS3, but the main problem that I've had with Sony over the years is that there seems to be something of a "we know what's best for you" attitude behind them, regardless of whether this is actually the case or not. This has diminished greatly since they yanked Kaz and Ken's egos off the stage, but lately it's begun to slip back in again. To be honest, part of this is that much of the PS3 platform's core library of games (stuff like MGS4, SOCOM, FFXIII, Killzone, Resistance, etc) just simply doesn't appeal to me, and most of the Xbox 360's equivalents don't either. I did thoroughly enjoy Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction though, and although I though Uncharted started to get tedious to play through about halfway through, I can definitely see why it's considered one of the best games on the platform. And with rare exceptions, there's little reason to choose one platform over the other for multiplatform games. In my case I'll just stick to 360 for those since the vast majority of people I play with only have 360s.

I may be a bit biased in this because Xbox is, in some sense, the "home team" around here, but I've been trying to be as objective as possible, and I do now have all five of the current platforms (360, PS3, Wii, PSP, DS Lite) in my collection. My 360 gets the most use by far since I play a lot on XBL with my brothers, and the others vary greatly depending on what I happen to be playing at the moment. On the PS3 I'm catching up on older releases I've missed, but don't have a whole lot on my list. The Wii gets occasional use, but mostly just sits around. Same for the DS, which I used to use all the time but only bought two new games for last year. In spite of that, I'd say the PSP is the one that I've found the least interesting games for. Sure, I've used mine a lot, but I'd say that Disgaea and Disgaea 2 have accounted for probably 97% of my PSP use for the past couple of years since I got it.

[Ed Oscuro]

I'm still relatively new to the PS3

Ha, perhaps that's another reason why they aren't ready to get the next gen going in general - they're still waiting to reach a number of game units shipped. In Sony's case, they might want to wait a while longer for people just to get into the system (seeing how the price was extraordinarily high at start). They won't want to put off revving their console long if Microsoft does theirs, though.

[jkoch]

They might be allowing devs to spread their wares about easily and efficiently, but its the juggernaut corperation that i'm afraid of.

So you're happy with the juggernaut corporation that is Sony and its evident lack of games this generation? ok.

Loack of games? It's not 2006 anymore. In fact, as of last month the PS3 and 360 both had exactly 35 exclusive games rated higher than 80 on metacritic.

[njiska]

Blu ray storage - Not used much outside of exclusives due to cross platform code

Definitely an aid to large movie heavy games like Final Fantasy, but I don't think blu-ray is having that big an affect on game development. It will undoubtedly become more hand towards the end of the generation, but with the rise of downloadable full titles, it's anyone's guess.

The first console outside of those that flopped to offer official region free gaming

Technically it's no more regoin free than any other console. Companies can lock games if they really want to, however Sony does not encourage the practice and almost no one does. Still i have to give this own to you, Sony did good here.

Remote play with PSP and mobile phones - Play or DL games and any mm content you have from PSN or your PS3 to your portable device (games are shabby using this but its a feature nobody else has brought out)

Remote play is extremely over rated. I was more impressed by VMUs. Microsoft doesn't have a protable so you can't compare it to their developments and nintendo just doesn't seem to care about consumers these days so no shit they didn't.

USB and PC friendly peripherals - If you have many PC devices you can use them on your PS3 saving you lots.

I can use wired Saturn USB controllers, Bluetooth keyboards, mouse, hard drives, thumb drives and mics.

Many Xbox accessories can be used on your PC, in fact all of them can because Microsoft had a controller driver in place from day one. A bigger move if you ask me because i own more gaming accessories for my 360 than my PC.

PSN is free

Yeah but it's just not as good. This is an entirely subjective debate and really a point on innovation. I mean hell Nintendo Wifi Connection is free and older than PSN.

I think Sony has 7 2nd party studios

And most of them work on content that is truly innovative or groundbreaking in some sort of form, not just mickey mouse budgets, but huge $20 million + budgets. Sony created the Eyetoy (its a gimmick but most things are these days, it can only get better), Modnation racers could be the best thing to happen to racing games since Super Mariokart on the SNES, LBP is another creative tool that demonstrates a commitment to doing something new. GOW3, Heavy Rain, MAG are all coming out soon, exclusively on the PS3. GT5 the worlds best selling racing franchise is coming out in 2010 and looks better than just about any other game to this day sporting 1080p resolutions and over 950 cars. Wipeout HD the worlds first 1080p full HD racing game in the form of DLC. Flower, a game played entirely from motion of the hand and wrist. 2010 marks the year that Sony will release its waggle controller that maps all motions in 3D. Sony PS3 is going to be the first console that allows true 3D blu ray video and gaming capabilities using similar technology to that of the Avatar cinematic 3D experience.

Again these aren't innovations but subjective statements based on tastes. Good games for sure but hardly innovative. And if you think 3D is going to be a win, you've obviously never used Shutter glasses.

Uncharted 2 - Game of the year 2009

No real argument here. Phenomenal exclusive, something the Xbox lacked this year.

I think in a way, progress is what your scared of. As it was said Nintendo are at a dead end.

I'm not afraid of innovation, I just don't believe that most of what Sony has done will have a major impact on the industry outside of their own brands. There's nothing you or I can say or do to prove this either way. Only time will tell.

We have differing opinions, but i don't think any of them are wrong.

Sorry If I offended you in any way. Debates are a good thing. I swear to God I am not a fanboy, I just don't look through the same 3D glasses you do

Exactly my point. Different prespectives.

[Ed Oscuro]

I've read that we're already at the point where one level's data can reach 4.7 GB uncompressed. While I think that most of the improvements I'd like to see in the next gen have more to do with lighting, textures are also looking notably weaker on the consoles than on a powerful PC.

[ColonelFatso]

I've been under a rock for a while - can consoles do anti-aliasing yet? If not, why not? It's been possible in real-time rendering for at least ten years now.

EDIT: Also, with the textures - that's a problem that could be solved very easily by just plugging some more RAM into the video card of their next console gen.

[Pixel_Outlaw]

What really makes me angry is how temporary consoles are expected to be. Why are people wasting hundreds of dollars on games and accounts that will not fully work after the consoles looses some popularity or the company forces them to "upgrade"? I don't like the notion of "account" based services either. This means that the company has full control over everything you may do with your console thanks to an extra layer of security. I really am sickened by the sheer amount of people gobbeling up games that will loose part or all of their functionality thanks to server dependent game elements. Look, I play consoles that are older than I am (Vectrex and Atari) I play them years after 1981. It it depressing that in 10 years from now many servers will be taken down and games will loose a good chunk of functionality. The other lovely thing about account systems is that it makes it MUCH easier for the company to force you to upgrade. Oh sure they can transfer your account to the new console but they will no longer support the current one as it is no longer of interest as a cash cow. All these accounts and virtual transactions work great now but with time they may become less appealing than their tangible media counterparts.

What happens when you rely on a dead and outdated server to get all your information back after a system compromising problem 10 years from now? Sure you can back up locally, but this is just a small example that a less informed person might face once a system falls out of popularity.

[Skykid]

Uncharted 2 - Game of the year 2009

No real argument here. Phenomenal exclusive, something the Xbox lacked this year.

Nah, it's bloody overrated. It's kind of like Dragon's Lair with flashy 3D graphics. Kind of.

[kengou]

Microsoft is trying to do for the games industry what it did for the operating system industry. They make a really developer-friendly platform with very little thought for the actual end-users. Both windows and the xbox have proven to be unreliable and unstable, poorly designed platforms in general. But, MS is really good at buying off/courting developers with good middleware and relatively easy architecture. Once MS has all the big developers working on THEIR platform, the users (in this case the gamers) have little choice but to say "well, it has the software I want to use/games I want to play, so I'll put up with its faults". The faults of the xbox would include the hardware instability along with the pay-for online service, the things people put up with because they want to play the games on the platform and don't have much choice. Sure, they might rationalize it by saying xbox live gold is worth the money. But honestly, the PC has JUST as good (better, I'd argue) online services for no cost. The PS3 has a comparable online service for free. MS tried Games for Windows Live, with the same pay model as xbox live gold. Guess what, nobody used it, people decried paying for a service on the PC they already get for free, and MS made the service free (and it STILL sucks!).

On the PC side of things MS is known for buying out the competition, bullying smaller companies around with patent trolling or FUD, and generally making the software industry hell for anyone who isn't a fan of windows. And windows itself has always been buggy, insecure and generally crappy. It's something 90% of computer users put up with because it has software they need, or because OEMs just ship everything with windows because they're being paid by MS to do so. They've faced repeated legal issues for anticompetitive practices. They dominate the industry not because they care about users or make good products, but because they are masters of business. I'm sure one could write entire books about how evil Microsoft is, so I'll just stop now, but there are ample examples. When MS entered the gaming industry I recognized what they wanted to do and dreaded the outcome. The very name "xbox" and "xbox 360" are so blatantly appealing to the "xtreme" demographic it sickens me. I'm still not happy with the direction MS is taking the industry and the things they've influenced. If they have their way, they will monopolize the game industry and it will all go to hell.

Things MS is responsible for (directly or indirectly) that I really hate in the modern game industry:
-Shifting of the FPS genre over to consoles and away from the PC where they belong
-As a result of above, the overall dumbing down of FPS genre
-The rise of pay-for online service as an acceptable concept
-DLC and micro-expansions
-Games being developed for xbox first and then ported (poorly) to every other platform
-Timed exclusives (done intentionally, not just the regular time it takes to write a port)

There's more, I'm sure, but I can't really think of anything else right now.

NOTICE, I am not speaking at all about Sony or Nintendo. I'm not a fanboy. Really, I'm just an anti-fanboy. I just really hate Microsoft. Sony's done some things I don't like, and so has Nintendo. But in my view, neither is NEARLY as bad as Microsoft is or hopes to be. I won't support them, and they won't get my money.

[Udderdude]

Title of this thread is driving me nuts, mostly because it sounds like "The big three" are entitled to do anything for anyone.

http://www.epicure.demon.co.uk/whattheromans.html

[EinhanderZwei]

Things MS is responsible for (directly or indirectly) that I really hate in the modern game industry:
-Shifting of the FPS genre over to consoles and away from the PC where they belong
-As a result of above, the overall dumbing down of FPS genre

Ironically enough, there is a X360-exclusive official remake of Marathon 2: Durandal, one of the most intelligent FPSes I've ever played. On the bad side, it's the ONLY exception that I know

I'd love to get a used 360, honestly. But for shmups, the M2 remake and Halos only. It's a kind of funny to see people's eyes popping out when I'm saying that I don't give a shit about the other 360 games. The usual response I get is 'Why??? But this is XBOX 360!!!', and I'm like 'So?', and the reply is 'All the best games ever are released on this console!!', to what I counterattack: 'Sorry dude, but Super Metroid was a SNES exclusive'

Conclusion: X360 is like a modern Atari Jaguar. Similarities are obvious: aggressive marketing, the most interesting games belong to FPS and shmup (Tempest 2000) genres, while the rest is suitable only for gamers that have no taste

Sorry if I offended 360 fans, but I'm rooting for Sony. They're the least worst of them all

[elvis]

Ultimately though I think you are right, it's most likely arse-kissing that probably made the difference. Microsoft is the king. But you know what? Good for them because nobody else in the industry seems to be trying. The more help, money, whatever they've given our favourite developers the better if it translates to more accurate ports. That's my primary concern.

Yeah, I have to acknowledge the positive there too, I guess. Clearly it benefits Microsoft, but as long as they're also benefiting the developers then it's win-win.

And as long as there's some sort of competition to keep Microsoft (or any big corp) semi-honest, it will stay that way. So I'll attempt to withdraw some of the negativity to my original statements.

[neorichieb1971]

Microsoft are in a predicament right now. Their next offering must (should) offer some kind of storage other than DVD. Even Nintendo are toying with Blu ray either for their next console or the next Wii whatever it may be. That leaves 360 or 360 2 in a tight spot.