[Satchmo]

Just wondered what your take is on this battlefront, particularly with new consoles due in late 2005 and early 2006 by both companies.

Sony has over 70 million Playstations sold to date and apparently it's revised "slim" PS2 is selling unexpectedly well. xBox on the other hand has roughly 13 million units sold and the one with better hardware specs (not surprisingly as it is a newer product).

Everyone I've spoken to at stores, seem to gravitate towards xBox claiming better graphics and no load times. Sony has a few very strong exclusive titles plus a wealth of older titles.

Rumour has it that xBox2 will not be compatible with first gen games. Something I can't believe MS would even think of doing. If they do, they'll be dead in no time. So who will come out on top? Or is there enough $ to go around for two major (three if you count GameCube) players.

[onlyafterdark]

They will hardly be dead if there is not compatibility with older games. If that was the case, we wouldnt have game consoles today. Wasnt the PS2 the first console to offer compatibility with games made for a previous console?

I hope Sony gets beaten up bad, but unfortunately I think a stalemate is inevitable as both companies have huge pockets and wont give up the battle.

[Quagmire]

I am hoping Sony will crush MS. The last thing we need is another area where MS is dominant. PS3 all the way.

[onlyafterdark]

I think its a matter of two lesser evils here. Im kinda wishing Nintendo or Sega would win but I just dont think that its going to happen.

[Luca]

Originally Posted by Undertaker I am hoping Sony will crush MS. The last thing we need is another area where MS is dominant. PS3 all the way.

On the contrary, I think Sony is even worse than MS. Sure, MS dominates a lot of areas. And that's usually bad. But I think they do a few things correctly, specifically input devices and game consoles. The XBox is a lot better than the PS2 and had a much smoother launch. Even the once-exclusive GTA series runs FAR better on the XBox than on the PS2. Beyond that, it's not like Sony is even that different from MS in many ways.

If anything, I'd rather MS continue making XBoxes than Sony continues making PS2s. I can't think of any reason I'd want a PS2, but the XBox is a really good console. Actually, it and the GameCube are a well-rounded combo, with the GameCube handling many games that the XBox doesn't have and vice versa. I also think Nintendo is awesome because of the GBA and the DS. They own portable gaming and if Sony can't even make enough PSPs to satisfy even a small portion of the demand for them, they will lose. I would like them to lose.

I'd prefer Nintendo or Sega to take over as well. I wish Sega could make a console as good as the Dreamcast again, but have it succeed. Sadly, it looks like Nintendo is falling behind and the new names in gaming are Sony and Microsoft. That's pretty sad.

[Mr. X]

Sony also disgusts me with their new SonyStyle stores found in malls---the concept and layout of these stores were completely stolen from Apple. It makes me sick just walking through one of them.

However, like someone said, it's the lesser of two evils. Therefore, I'd rather see Sony succeed in the console wars (and I certainly think they will, although Microsoft will hang around for a long time because of their deep pockets...but I can't see them EVER dethrowning Playstation..)

My dream scenario would be for Sega to return to making consoles...but, I know that will never happen. I don't play enough games to throw money around on more than one console, so I own a Playstation 2 and am happy with it. When the next generation comes around, PS3 will definitely be my choice.

[CitizenTony]

I own an Xbox, and while I like it, I see myself wanting a PS2 more and more. The amount of games being the reason. I could play older PS1 games and, and any number of new games. Going to Fry's (or like stores) and looking at the 3 shelves of Xbox games and the row of PS2 games really is getting to me.

If Sony can keep up what ever it is that they are doing, I see them winning the next round of console wars, no doubt.

On Sega's note, Up until this current round I have never had anything but Sega. From the Master System up to the DreamCast (which I still play more than my Xbox). I was heartbroken to see them leave the console arena to only make games, but I guess they are finally in the black so that is good. If you are intrested in the Sega story, check out this site... Sega Base ...They offer a lot of insight into each console and the glory days as well as their fall. Good reading if you have nothing to do for a while.

[Tuttle]

"Upcoming game console war - Sony vs. MS"

Huh???

Microsoft is the last place player in a three way race this generation. They've had to burn through sickening amounts of cash just to stay close behind second place Nintendo.

To characterize the next console cycle as a 'war' between Sony and MS is just silly.

[onlyafterdark]

I find it interesting that there is a positive outlook on Sega here. I was always a Sega person from day one (dont have a Sega CD but do have a 32X and a Saturn) and I loved the Dreamcast. It is still plugged into my tv to date and while the XBOX is far better than PS2 IMO, its still not a Dreamcast.

If Sony hadnt brainwashed everyone into thinking that it was superior to the Dreamcast, Sega might still be making consoles (one can dream anyway). I dont know how Sony did it, but my hat is off to them. Sega not only had a jump on release dates, but they also had better graphics and the games were far superior to PS2 games (and PS1 games).

Like I said in a previous post, the new console war is like picking the lesser of two evils. Nintendo will always be around making great games and doing what they do best, but the real battle will be between Sony and M$ as they try to outpace eachother in what will become the battle for the livingroom.

[IonYz]

Originally Posted by Tuttle Microsoft is the last place player in a three way race this generation. They've had to burn through sickening amounts of cash just to stay close behind second place Nintendo. To characterize the next console cycle as a 'war' between Sony and MS is just silly.

Yeah. I have all three, but haven't invested well in them evenly.

If the Xbox were owned by an average company it wouldn't make it to another generation. In global sales its the last place console. It has plenty of things going for it (powerful, best memory management, Xbox Live) but I suppose their library just isn't up to snuff. The majority of my Xbox library are Sega games which isn't surprising as I bought the system for Panzer Dragoon.

My slim PS2 has been wonderful compared with the lumbering, noisy, glitchy unit I had before. Although size wise Nintendo had it right from the start and Microsoft needs to send Xbox to fat camp.

If I had to own one I couldn't. $150 for a PS2 and $100 for GameCube. Both make a great combination for myself. Other then Sega titles and ports I never found the Xbox library had much to offer.

Plus Xbox could never match the heritage of Nintendo. Its fun to play Metroid Prime 2, then Super Metroid, then the original Metroid all in the same month. Finally beat Metroid without cheating, it only took about 15 years! I'm an old school gamer so Nintendo will always have a place with me. Something that will never happen with Halo or Grand Theft Auto.

Halo has never interested me though, and I'd rather play through Metroid Prime 2.

[BenRoethig]

MS doesn't get console users at all. They figure their tastes are similar to PC gamers and the title selection reflects that. Xbox is the only console since the pre 8-bit days to not have a single turn based or strategy RPG. No wonder it's bombing completely in Japan and coming in a distant second here. Hardware wise, I can't say enough good things about the Xbox. However, since most of the games they've delivered for it I'd much rather play with a keyboard and mouse, it doesn't get turned on much.

[Mr. X]

My all-time favorite system is the Sega Genesis. (Sega's NFL series; Phantasy Star II, III & IV; Herzog Zwei; I could go on...) The biggest reason I have no interest in Gamecube is because Sega stopped making their sports games for the console.

To me, picking a console is all about picking the one that is closest to what Sega's would be if they had one today. It needs to be the one that has the most Sega games and the one that makes their games look the best. I get real irritated knowing that their sports games are far superior on the XBOX. The fact that Panzer and Shemnue are only found on XBOX makes me wonder if that is their console of choice. There was a time when they ONLY made World Series Baseball for XBOX. I get frustrated every time I play NFL 2K5, knowing all the extra features I'm missing from the XBOX version (importing music, real highlights at halftime...) Although I just recently got the slim PS2, I must admit sometimes I consider trading it for an XBOX. (Sony truly is the company that killed Sega, and that kind of angers me...but, yet, the other choice is M$!!!)

So what do you other Sega fans think? Which console is most Sega-like, has the most Sega games, and is the one that Sega prefers?

[Satchmo]

Originally Posted by Mr. X I get real irritated knowing that their sports games are far superior on the XBOX. The fact that Panzer and Shemnue are only found on XBOX makes me wonder if that is their console of choice. There was a time when they ONLY made World Series Baseball for XBOX. I get frustrated every time I play NFL 2K5, knowing all the extra features I'm missing from the XBOX version (importing music, real highlights at halftime...) Although I just recently got the slim PS2, I must admit sometimes I consider trading it for an XBOX. (Sony truly is the company that killed Sega, and that kind of angers me...but, yet, the other choice is M$!!!)

I'm puzzled. You prefer Sega games that appear best on XBox, and dislike Sony for killing Sega, but you recently got a slim PS2?

Unless you have a XBox as well.

I'm interested as I received an XBox for xmas, but not sure if I'm going to keep it. The slim PS2 looks way cooler and from what I've read, the load times "appear" to be better than the fatter model. Many more games on PS2 although, technically the XBOX does seem to be better.

[Kickaha]

Performance-wise, the PS2 is hard to beat. The problem is that the architecture makes it almost impossible for programmers to unlock it. Those that do, produce kick ass games... and usually end up in a loony bin soon thereafter.

The PS3 looks to be stunning *and* have the clean architecture one would expect from a PPC derived core CPU and auxiliary units.

XBox2 is going to have be absolutely incredible to keep up. (And who knows, between a PPC CPU and nVidia, maybe it will be.)

[ast3r3x]

Anyone who hates the xbox just because MS makes it has problems. Mod your xbox and stick a giant (I have >300GB) HD in it and you won't find a better system.

[scratt]

Originally Posted by ast3r3x Anyone who hates the xbox just because MS makes it has problems. Mod your xbox and stick a giant (I have >300GB) HD in it and you won't find a better system.

I hate the xbox just because MS makes it.

[mama's left eye]

I don't know if I hate the xbox... I won't buy it because M$ makes it

I have a PS2 and a GC. I play the GC a lot more and it's the only place for the Nintendo exclusives.

I don't think I will buy another sony gaming system either. They hype them up to be something they are not, and then put out a buggy product. PS1, PS2, and the PSP are all perfect examples. I like my sony vid camera, but their gaming department sucks.

As for any console being Sega like, I think that has to go to Nintendo. They have the GBA input to the GC. Sega has quite a few titles out on the GC and the ones I have played have a very distinct Sega/DC feel and look to them. I think a lot of developers could take a page from Sega's book when it comes to graphics.

[mama's left eye]

Originally Posted by BenRoethig MS doesn't get console users at all. They figure their tastes are similar to PC gamers and the title selection reflects that. Xbox is the only console since the pre 8-bit days to not have a single turn based or strategy RPG. No wonder it's bombing completely in Japan and coming in a distant second here. Hardware wise, I can't say enough good things about the Xbox. However, since most of the games they've delivered for it I'd much rather play with a keyboard and mouse, it doesn't get turned on much.

Exactly. Except I thought it was a close 3rd instead of distant second
I don't play much of the console rpgs any more, because I think they are getting entirely to linear.(If I wanted to watch a movie I would go to Blockbuster.) But if xbox could match the PS2 as far as decent rpg offerings, I think it would do a lot better. Xbox has halo and a lot of fps, but who want's to play with a gamepad when they are so much better with a mouse?

[Luca]

Really Kickaha? I was under the impression that all the choppy, crappy looking PS2 games was just because it is the oldest of the current round of consoles and therefore the least powerful. From what I've seen and played, the PS2 is by far the worst performer in the bunch. GameCube games seem to run smoother than XBox games, but that's probably because XBox game designers try their hardest to eek out extra visual effects where GameCube games simply aren't as visually complex.

I admit that I wanted an XBox once, but since I already have a gaming PC, I wouldn't be getting anything new. Excellent point, BenRoethig. The most popular XBox games are similar to those on PCs, except they run better and have better means of control if you're using a PC.

[Mr. X]

Originally Posted by Satchmo I'm puzzled. You prefer Sega games that appear best on XBox, and dislike Sony for killing Sega, but you recently got a slim PS2? Unless you have a XBox as well. I'm interested as I received an XBox for xmas, but not sure if I'm going to keep it. The slim PS2 looks way cooler and from what I've read, the load times "appear" to be better than the fatter model. Many more games on PS2 although, technically the XBOX does seem to be better.

Hmm..we're kind of in the exact opposite situation. I got the slim PS2 for XMAS and am trying to decide if I should exchange it for an XBOX, and it's vice versa for you. The loading time on the new slim system is much closer to XBOX's (HUGE speed improvement); with the huge library of games available for PS2, I question how good most of those titles really are. As for Gamecube, my interest in Mario/Nintendo games faded away with my childhood; Sega Sports games have always dominated 90% of my playing time, so the hell with Nintendo (for me).

Space Channel 5 is a guilty pleasure for me; a Sega game from the Dreamcast days that is only available for PS2. The Sega classics compilation will also be PS2-exclusive, as was Virtua Tennis and Virtua Fighter. Yet, XBOX has Phantasy Star Online (always wanted to try it), PDO, and Sega Sports games with MANY more features and details than the PS2 versions (which feel like ports).

I wish Sega would either make all games for both systems (in which case XBOX would be the easy choice for Sega fans), or stick to one, making it easy for those dedicated to Sega to choose a single console. I like playing games, but I'm not obsessed with them where I would ever want more than one console.

[Kickaha]

Yup. The PS2 hardware is pretty slick - but programming it is a NIGHTMARE. Sony created a system that is almost impossible to program effectively, sadly enough. Each individual piece is a nice bit of work, but the overall design and system integration team should be shot.

Put it this way - there are multiple vector processors in there - but the programmer has to *manually* set up the instruction queues to take advantage of them. This falls under the WTF? category.

[Tuttle]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Yup. The PS2 hardware is pretty slick - but programming it is a NIGHTMARE. Sony created a system that is almost impossible to program effectively, sadly enough. Each individual piece is a nice bit of work, but the overall design and system integration team should be shot. Put it this way - there are multiple vector processors in there - but the programmer has to *manually* set up the instruction queues to take advantage of them. This falls under the WTF? category.

I take it from your two posts that you have never actually seen the inside of a console development house, but have read a bunch of stuff on the Internet...

[Kickaha]

No, just personal friends with the president of E***, the CTO of *** (game engine company) and about a half dozen R**s**** developers, almost all of whom I met in grad school doing graphics at UNC. Thems my sources, like it or leave it.

You?

[Tuttle]

Originally Posted by Kickaha No, just personal friends with the president of E***, the CTO of *** (game engine company) and about a half dozen R**s**** developers, almost all of whom I met in grad school doing graphics at UNC. Thems my sources, like it or leave it. You?

I write console code for a living and have been doing so for over a decade on just about every platform that has been sold in the console market.

You don't know shit.

[Kickaha]

*shrug* Whatever dude. If you have a dissenting opinion, please present it in a factual form. Just questioning my veracity makes you look, well... you know.

[The Return of the 'nut]

Originally Posted by Tuttle I write console code for a living and have been doing so for over a decade on just about every platform that has been sold in the console market. You don't know shit.

you should probably back up your knowledge of shit

[Luca]

Come on people, just calm down.

[The Return of the 'nut]

why was my post deleted for no reason?

[stoo]

The PS2 hardware is pretty slick - but programming it is a NIGHTMARE

Then it isn't slick.

[onlyafterdark]

Originally Posted by The Return of the 'nut why was my post deleted for no reason?

Ya, that was a little weird.