we hook up and play roommate monkey boxing.. that is when we have a few grudgematches to work out.. or we play raw on the xbox 4 way.. you can definately tell your roommates are pissed off when they 3team you with chairs

I like how MonkeyBall has different styles of games, and they're all good. If you want fast twitch head-to-head competition, you can do Boxing, or if you want to relax and take turns, you can do Target or Billiards or whatever.

i will definately say that is my fav cube game. Pikmin is fun, but only for about 20 mins.. at least to me.. roguesquad,well it would have been good if it was a little more different then every other xwing, tie fighter game i have ever played , good graphics tho. but mokey ball, oh yes monkey ball...i would stay to discuss it but i think i hear it calling my name now.

I guess I'm biased. I know the state of the graphics industry from the inside, so I laugh at the XBOX. And when it comes to games, give it a little mroe time. They had a terrific launch, but the other manufacturers aren't sleeping. The XBOX is a PC in a plastic noisy box. A home PC still plays better games and in a few months will have titles the XBOX will never be able to run. Both Sony and Nintendo will continue to have some single-platform titles that you won't see elsewhere. And Nintendo has some very strong franchises - you won't be seeing Mario-anything on the other consoles, nor Metroid or Zelda.

I don't have anything against Microsoft. Well, you can mention someone else, but that's not the whole issue with the XB.

And lastly, my company makes a small royalty on every Gamecube sale. So buy buy buy.

Bruno

I got an Xbox for Christmas.... Sorry guys but I think it rocks, and while it might pale in comparison to the PC I have, it's still out specs game cube and ps2 (although you put em side by side and play em, can't really tell the difference). Project Gotham is great, Halo rocks, all in all I have to say I don't know what all the negativity is...

all in all I have to say I don't know what all the negativity is...

Oh, you always get that kind of response when people start discussing religion.

tanstaafl.

are you saying you work for ati? if so what do you do there, i worked for wavo..

as far as your xbox comments, pc graphics and console graphics are totally different things.. there are great xbox games that will enver see a pc, even if the pc is faster.

furthermore pc ports often well.. suck, look at THPS2 that was TERRIBLE on pc.

Don't discount the fact that the xbox will be getting some of it's own killer apps.. and already has at least 1, HALO.. which will probably make it to pc, but not for some time.

also , i don't find the xbox loud in teh least.

the port issue has been worrying me. The ONLY game that is out on console systems now is GTA3. That's all I'm concerned about. So far, the GTA series has gone from PC to console, not vice-versa. Now, it doesn't seem like a game that would suffer the port like Final Fantasy VII did (bugs galore), but I'm still worried. I recently bought GTA2 for PS, and was very dissapointed at the poor graphics. I'm hoping that at the very least, GTA3 will be the same quality as the PS2 version.

Yeah, you're biased all right. Your comments about all XBox games being "Dreamcast ports with not much else added to them" is absurd. After saying something like that do you expect me to attach any credibility to your "insider" perspective?

I don't care how the XBox compares to PC hardware. I want to play my games on a console in my living room while sitting on my couch, watching on my TV and listening through my home theater system. If console vs. PC capability was the only factor than there wouldn't be a console market at all.

Your argument about game franchises amuses me because it's the exact same one I was reading about 5 years ago as an argument against Sony. The debate at that time was between the PSX, Saturn and N64. People like you argued that Sony would never succeed because Sega and Nintendo had exclusive franchises and knew how to make games people liked. Now we all know that the winning factor in that battle was marketing and business strategy, not pre-existing game franchises.

Right now the GC has the least momentum of any of the consoles. Nintendo's future may look a lot like Sega's present. I'm sorry your company bet on the wrong horse.

-Dylan

I'm thinking I follow your reasoning here. We were playing with PS2's when I was still at Metrowerks in 1998. So you can't tell me this hardware is more advanced or less aged than the X-Box.

The Gamecube is doomed. It may be great, but look on the shelves. No games. What games that are there are for children. I see Sega Genesis and Dreamcast all over it's face. May have fun games but I think this is the last song for Nintendo.

However there are several games on the PS2 that won't be available elsewhere. Namely Gran Turismo 3. Also probably Tokyo Xtreme Racer: Zero. These are the two biggest games I have an interest in playing. Halo is supposed to be out for PC, and I'd rather play it with my track ball and a GeForce 4 anyway.

I really want the X-Box to succeed, though. The hardware I think is far superior to anything else in the market right now. With Nintendo out the door and Sega long gone, I don't want Sony to be left with the crown and scepter. Technology advances through competition.

I think I'm going with a PS2 at this point. Maybe once there are more games for X-Box that fit my profile and desires I can fight that battle with the wife when the time comes.

But before I settle, I'm definitely going to try out both ... anyone know if Blockbuster Video rents these consoles like they used to do for Playstations?

g

The Gamecube is doomed. It may be great, but look on the shelves. No games. What games that are there are for children.

Which is too bad, because it's really a sweet piece of hardware. Everything about its design impresses me. The controller (already discussed) is a dream, the console itself is terribly compact and portable (the integrated handle actually gets used regularly in our household as my daughter moves it between her bedroom and the bigscreen TV in the living room), and the graphics hardware is just insane. I mean, boy can that thing push the polygons. Rogue Leader is just incredible when you get a lot of ships on the screen.

Okay, for those who haven't played Rogue Leader on the GameCube... Remember the scenes in Return of the Jedi, where the screen just EXPLODES with ships? You actually get to play that scene in Rogue Leader, just like in the movie. Each ship on the screen is really there, and you really interact with them. There are literally clouds of tie fighters among the capital ships. And when you've managed to nail enough tie bombers, your next goal is to take out two stardestroyers, right there in the same scene. It's one of the most insane space dogfights I've ever played, and the GC graphics hardware is what makes it possible.

And although there's already been a handful of games where you get to play the Hoth battle scene, their version in Rogue Leader is awesome because of the hardware. Every soldier running on the ground is a full-poly mo-capped model which casts a dynamic shadow. Each and every laser blast from every ship is a lightsource, and casts a glow onto the objects around it, including the snow. There's nothing like seeing your laser blasts barely miss your target, and watching the light from the bolt cast a glow onto the hull of the ship as it slides past.

Remember the scenes in Return of the Jedi, where the screen just EXPLODES with ships? You actually get to play that scene in Rogue Leader, just like in the movie. Each ship on the screen is really there, and you really interact with them.

I remember a documentary just after Return of the Jedi came out. The effects people behind that scene were talking about it, and explained that there were eighty-five independently moving objects in that scene, each matted against the other eighty-four by hand. They literally had an 85x85 grid on a big piece of paper, with crosses where one object occluded another, and ticks for partial occlusion (requiring painting the outline). They had one of those grids for each frame of the scene.

The lead animator said that the complexity of that scene would never, ever be equalled: it was like the Apollo moon shots, done only to prove it could be done.

And of course eventually (Independence Day, if not before) adding eighty-five independently-matted objects to a scene was just a question of clicking the "Add independently-matted object" button in the software eighty-five times.

And now Space Battle Scene 19 can be rendered on kids' toys. O tempora O mores!

Peter

Yes, I remember that documentary. It was, I believe, the single most complex scene ever to be pushed through an optical printer. As you said, nowadays the compositing is all done digitally, so the old optical printers are now gathering dust and I don't think anyone will ever try to do anything like that again.

The grid was necessary because they needed to know which order the objects had to be placed in the optical printer through its multiple passes.

And, if you'll recall from the documentary, there was actually a glitch in the ordering, where you could see a distant tie fighter group overlaid atop the Falcon. They left it in because it was so tiny and hard to see, and it wasn't worth going through that insane amount of work on the optical printer again.

Funny thing is, up until I'd seen that documentary, I'd always suspected there was something not quite right about that scene, something I couldn't quite put my finger on. I got the impression that some of the smaller distant ships really had passed in front of the Falcon, but I couldn't confirm it just by watching the movie. Another problem is a nearby clip where a group of tie fighters seems to appear out of thin air instead of fading in from a distance. Again, I suspect a slip up at the optical printer stage with lots of complex elements.

But I have to say, that moment in the Rogue game is rather cool. You get the order to pull out, and you turn with all the other fighters and capital ships to see that blanket of stardestroyers waiting for you... too cool!

The PS2 controller buttons are pressure sensitve, so jamming on the controller really will help.

I don't have an Xbox, GameCube, or PS2. But I do have an Atari. And I say Combat is the best game ever made.

How come the console industry likes to rate graphics performance by polygons per second, but the graphics card industry doesn't? Is there any place that benchmarks the Xbox performance against existing PC hardware ?

Calvin

This is the best article I've seen on the hardware of the XBox.

http://www4.tomshardware.com/consumer/02q1/020204/index.html

-Dylan

Uh, oh, you spake the Name of the Dentist. Thou shalt bring the Wrath of Bruno upon thyself.

did you really expect the majority of people here to even consider the xbox? There is so much MS hatred on this board there is no way.

I dislike the XBox for real reasons, much like the real reasons I have for disliking other MS products. Plain hatred never factored into it for me.

1. I do despise the controller quite a bit. Why is there 2 memory card slots on it when the console has a hard drive to save to? Just put one or two slots on the console it's self for the copying to a friend feature. And it is a bit hefty for no real reason.

2. Even with a hard drive, the games load slow. DoA3 is a good example on this one.

3. Halo sucks on that console. Seeing it at E3 2000, then on the XBox at 2001 was disappointing. Even the developers had problems using the controllers better then a keyboard and mouse. (And I made one upset by rolling the jeep and killing the team )

4. It really has no exclusive titles worth getting. PS2 has FFX, Gamecube will have Metroid and Zelda, and the PC will have Halo.

5. It forces too much hardware into a box. Why make the console more expensive with ethernet when 90% of the owners will never use it. And why port the PC to a console? The Gamecube design is much better. (CPU, Big ArtX^H^H^H^H ATI chip and memory)

6. It's going to see an influx of buggy games. Why? Well PC developers simply port their patch ridden games to it with no major effort. Thus it copies over the bad design inherent in PC games today. Other consoles have games that start from the ground up targeted at one or two different interfaces and realize patches are not possible.

7. Every XBox fan keeps pushing specs at me. They don't matter. Who cares if the XBox has a 733mHz Intel proc (known for inefficiency, thus the need to push clock speeds) vs a 405 mHz G3 in the GC and a 295 mHz custom one in the PS2 (both geared for efficiency over clock speed). And the polygon peformance numbers are crap. All that indicates is how well they can push raw triangles with no textures, something worthless for games. Instead push some quality games at me. If specs matter, the GameBoy would have been long dead, the PSOne would have never taken off, and Atari would have ruled.

And as far as everyone saying the Game Cube is kiddy, I have to disagree. Sure they target that market, but thats a smart thing to do to sell hardware. They also market to other areas as well. Just take a look at the game listing here here.

Zelda...I'll let you know after I play it at this years E3. Until then I won't judge it, just like I didn't judge the Xbox until I saw it.

</rant>

what do you mean about the console having two memory slots on it? the controller has 1, is that what you mean? they had to do that to allow people to save games to take with friends.

The statement about 90% of the owners playing on line couldn't be more wrong. There are already tons of people playing with the gamespy tunnel software. Let alon when the network launches. I think that is a typical response from a gamecube owner.. honestly.. i have seen that arguement a lot, and well it isn't true.

As far as the intel being inefficient.. well... i don't totally disagree, but the gamcube with the modified g3 certainly isn't any faster. I workd for abpple for 2 years, so it isn't an anti apple technology statement, it is however true that too many people buy into the hype that the g series processors are that much faster then say an athlon or pentium... they are faster, but not double, and not on very much.

PC port issue is not really a problem.. i think ms realizes that they must have quality control, they are not just allowing every crap pc game to be ported, if they were, you would see a lot more games out now, and on launch.

Halo is a great game.. it took me a long time to get used to the controller... but i DID get used to it.. yes i would probably still be faster with a keyboard and mouse.. but i also like getting away from my pc to play games.

The gamecube is OK, but it has done nothing to amaze me , at all, talk about weak release titles, gamecube takes the cake imho. I don't think you can broadly assume that any next gen console will not have some killer games for it.. but to me the future of the xbox is brighter.

what do you mean about the console having two memory slots on it? the controller has 1, is that what you mean? they had to do that to allow people to save games to take with friends.

I understand the need for them. My point is why are they on every controller, just adding to the bulk when it could have easially had them on the console it's self. Who here owns an XBox and actually needs the convience of 8 possible memory slots?

The statement about 90% of the owners playing on line couldn't be more wrong. There are already tons of people playing with the gamespy tunnel software. Let alon when the network launches. I think that is a typical response from a gamecube owner.. honestly.. i have seen that arguement a lot, and well it isn't true.

No, it's the truth. Not many homes have broadband, thus no way to play online with the XBox. Sure many people are playing Halo online now, but most of the initial owners are tech people like ourselves who have the knowhow to have broadband and be able to install software onto a computer. And so I still stnad by the fact that I see no reason to include ethernet in the box. Let the few people buy an adaptor and lower the console price.

As far as the intel being inefficient.. well... i don't totally disagree, but the gamcube with the modified g3 certainly isn't any faster. I workd for abpple for 2 years, so it isn't an anti apple technology statement, it is however true that too many people buy into the hype that the g series processors are that much faster then say an athlon or pentium... they are faster, but not double, and not on very much.

Again this type of thing dosen't matter. When was the last time you compaired tech specs down to processor and memory of a satelite reciever? People simply expect a console to work and look good. The 4 next gen consoles all do this well when factoring in when they were released. Who cares if one has a better processor then the other one. Tech wars have never worked in the console market, so don't point me to the specs as a selling point of the XBox.

PC port issue is not really a problem.. i think ms realizes that they must have quality control, they are not just allowing every crap pc game to be ported, if they were, you would see a lot more games out now, and on launch.

We shall see. I just see way too many game houses saying they plan on porting PC stuff over.

Halo is a great game.. it took me a long time to get used to the controller... but i DID get used to it.. yes i would probably still be faster with a keyboard and mouse.. but i also like getting away from my pc to play games.

Any control mechinism you use that constantly reminds you it's there is a bad one. I can play Halo decently on the controller, but I am constantly reminded it's there. I played Half Life and got so involved it made me jump at certain times. The controls simply melted away.

The gamecube is OK, but it has done nothing to amaze me , at all, talk about weak release titles, gamecube takes the cake imho. I don't think you can broadly assume that any next gen console will not have some killer games for it.. but to me the future of the xbox is brighter.

The popular Gamecube titles outsell the Xbox titles. Both had weak launches in the software department, but not as bad as the PS2. I see the PS2 and GC excelling in games this uear due to licenses like Zelda, Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, etc... Microsoft has no past games to pull new ones from, thus they have to do better then the competition now to get their names out. So far they are not doing this well. (Unless you count the huge number of crappy Bloodwake commercials I have seen recently). Also keep in mind the number of games dosen't equate to quality. The PS2 only has a handful of really successful games. Thats all Nintendo needs, and so far they are doing well with Smash Brothers, Star Wars, and Pikmin. XBox can really only count Halo. (I haven't seen Oddworld on the top 10 XBox games recently, suprising as it was being marked as a system seller.)

The above comment is based off both top 10 sales figures for all 3 systems, and the top 20 when it's combined.

I have a friend who really likes the XBox. But nothing on it has impressed me much yet. Nothing that says to me that it will be better then the PS2 or Game Cube. He's probably even logged more hours on his Game Cube

well i am not going to debate any further with you on this..

we obviously have different opionions, which is fine.

I enjoy some ps2 games i enjoy 1 gamecube game.. that is about it.. all i am saying is thexbox is a choice, and quite frankly the slack that it is taking is not fair..

all i am saying is thexbox is a choice, and quite frankly the slack that it is taking is not fair..

Agreed. I dislike all the negativity towards it with no reason. You now know some reasons I dislike it, but I will probably own one when it hits $200 and has more games out. Sega is a big factor there, with them developing for all 3.

But after seeing MS at E3 with the XBox, it just seemed they wern't going about it the right way. Hell, they wern't even in the "console" area of E3 last year, and there was plenty of room due to Sega skrinking their booth to just meeting rooms.

I just personally can't justify $300 on the XBox right now. I'm still waiting on the PS2 to drop to $200 (Since it's definitly not worth $300 with no extra features beyond a crappy DVD player. I'll use my true progressive scan setup any day.) The game cube launched at $200, so it was an easy choice knowing what is to come.

1. I do despise the controller quite a bit. Why is there 2 memory card slots on it when the console has a hard drive to save to? Just put one or two slots on the console it's self for the copying to a friend feature. And it is a bit hefty for no real reason.

The slots are for accessories in addition to memory cards. The one that MS keeps mentioning is a headset/mic for when they launch the online service. I suppose they could have put memory card slots in the console itself and left just 1 on the controller but I don't think this is the reason the controller is so hefty. For whatever reason, MS decided that it wanted a controller that large. I think it was a mistake but it's not the end of the world. You get used to it after a while and there are aftermarket controllers to suit different hand sizes. Thrustmaster makes a great XBox controller that has become my primary. I find it hard to believe that this would be the decisive factor in what console you choose.

2. Even with a hard drive, the games load slow. DoA3 is a good example on this one.

Yeah, I hoped the HDD would improve load times. Maybe future games will be designed to use it better. It's no worse than any other console.

3. Halo sucks on that console. Seeing it at E3 2000, then on the XBox at 2001 was disappointing. Even the developers had problems using the controllers better then a keyboard and mouse.

Then I guess you won't be playing FPS games on a console. I like to play my games on a console in my living room so whether or not the PC has a better control scheme is irrelevant to me. It's too bad you're not able to get past learning a new controller and enjoy what is almost universally considered a great game.

4. It really has no exclusive titles worth getting. PS2 has FFX, Gamecube will have Metroid and Zelda, and the PC will have Halo.

Again, I like to play my games in my living room so comparisons to PC gaming are irrelevant to me. I would speculate that the majority of console buyers feel as I do.

Geez, you've got to give the thing a chance on the software catalog. It's only been out a couple of months and it had a stronger launch lineup than the PS2 or Gamecube. Halo is exclusive to the console world. Project Gotham Racing is a fantastic game (my favorite). Wreckless is exclusive and a lot of fun. Jet Set Radio Future and Rallisport Racing are two exclusive games about to be released that look very promising. Right now the XBox is playing catch up to the PS2 but I believe by this point next year the software catalogs won't be a major advantage for either unless you have a strong affinity for a particular game.

5. It forces too much hardware into a box.

I couldn't disagree more. I want all that I can get for my money. Let's look at the hardware advantages:

a) There is no denying that the hard drive is a valuable benefit.

b) The real time Dolby Digital encoding makes an enormous difference in the immersion factor of the games. In PGR I can hear where the other cars are relative to me. And the DD encoding is essentially free for the developer as long as they implement positional audio using the API's. The DD encoding doesn't have to be implemented by the developer and doesn't steal hardware resources.

c) Best graphics engine. Do you not want this?

d) Ethernet. We all know that ethernet adds a negligible cost these days, especially since the XBox is a PC based architecture and ethernet is built into the chipset. Ethernet is absolutely key to MS's XBox strategy. They have stated that they expect online to be the next revolution in console gaming. Yeah, this is marketing hyperbole but it is a significant differentiator for the XBox. I think it'll be successful.

It was critical that the ethernet be in every XBox if MS wanted to get support from the developers. Console add-ons have historically failed. Also, I'm sure the percentage of XBox owners with broadband is much greater than the general population.

If MS had priced the XBox at $400 or 500 than I could understand your sentiment about overloading the hardware. But they priced it competitively. When you factor in not needing memory cards, the XBox is cheaper than the PS2 and not that far from the GC.

And why port the PC to a console?

Why not? They can take advantage of commodity hardware, proven design, sunken R&D cost and pre-existing development tools.

6. It's going to see an influx of buggy games.

This is speculation. I disagree. We'll see how it turns out.

7. Every XBox fan keeps pushing specs at me. They don't matter. [...] If specs matter, the GameBoy would have been long dead, the PSOne would have never taken off, and Atari would have ruled.

And every PS2/GC fan pushes the exclusive titles at me. If pre-existing franchises were all that mattered then Sony would have been stomped by Nintendo and Sega in the 90's.

-Dylan

Yeah, I hoped the HDD would improve load times. Maybe future games will be designed to use it better. It's no worse than any other console.

Oh yeah, that's one thing I forgot to mention about the GameCube that I liked. Fast load times. Compared to the PS2, it's lightning-quick. Haven't seen the Xbox load times yet.

The slots are for accessories in addition to memory cards

Wny not a little USB plug then for those accessories on the controller. The DC used them for rumble and memory. The XBox has that built in, and a microphone is the only other accessory that I can think of that has ever used that type of slot.

I find it hard to believe that this would be the decisive factor in what console you choose

It's one factor, and a somewhat important one. I am using this controller for hours on end, so I don't want to be annoyed by it. Sure consoles come with one controller only, but I still don't want to have to buy a 3rd party controller from the get go. I never have bought one in the past for any console.

It's no worse than any other console.
It's worse then the GameCube. Like Tony said, it's rather quick for a disc based system. I avoided the PSOne for it's slow load times. (Though the XBox is faster then it here)

It's too bad you're not able to get past learning a new controller and enjoy what is almost universally considered a great game.

If the controls suck, it's not a wonderful game. And looking at Halo (and not considering the controller issues), it's a good game, but not the second coming. Plus when Halo does come out for the PC, I'll be playing it on the same high resolution 27 inch monitor that I would be using the XBox on. But without the need for an HDTV converter box.

but I believe by this point next year the software catalogs won't be a major advantage for either unless you have a strong affinity for a particular game.

And by then I should be able to pick one up cheaper. Right now the average cost per game is just too high for me after adding up the total cost for the console and equipment.

And about the equipment part:

a) There is no denying that the hard drive is a valuable benefit.

Nope, no denying it. Now if developers would use it right

b) The real time Dolby Digital encoding ...

While it has the best DD out there, both the PS2 and GC can do it, though not quite as easially for the programmers by what I understand.

c) Best graphics engine. Do you not want this?

Sure a good one is nice. But it's not the end all be all factor.

d) Ethernet. We all know that ethernet adds a negligible cost these days, especially since the XBox is a PC based architecture and ethernet is built into the chipset. Ethernet is absolutely key to MS's XBox strategy

Just add the expansion slot, and developers will use it. Sure it's nice having it there, but I just find it pointless to include it on all the boxes out there when not many people will use it. Give me the option to buy the right adaptor, like how Nintendo is doing it with the Game Cube. (For me, the Dreamcast also had it wrong since I had to pay for a modem when I needed ethernet). Of course since it's in the chipset, it was easy. But I have complaints about the chipset and hardware design anyhow.

When you factor in not needing memory cards, the XBox is cheaper than the PS2 and not that far from the GC.

And factoring in the fact that I have to buy a decent controller, plus a DVD module to get it to the PS2 level, well there goes the cost advantage at $300.

And why port the PC to a console?

Why not? They can take advantage of commodity hardware, proven design, sunken R&D cost and pre-existing development tools.

Except they didn't There is not a single normal PC part in it. The hard drive comes close, but has some weird custom protocals to prevent easially changing or hacking it. The DVD drive is also modified, the CPU from Intel is a custom one based off the PIII core, and the graphics/chipset is a custom design from NVidia loosly based on the NForce. And as far as efficiency in design, it's definitly not there. Like I said earlier, compare the XBox to the Gamecube motherboard. They both have the same basic technical abilities, but one is way more complex, thus driving up pricing. Why NVidia didn't put slightly more effor into building a more integrated chipset is beyond me. That Hypertransport can't be cheap to implement. If ArtX could design a decent chipset/graphics solution, so could NVidia.

And every PS2/GC fan pushes the exclusive titles at me. If pre-existing franchises were all that mattered then Sony would have been stomped by Nintendo and Sega in the 90's.

The Playstation didn't take off until it managed to grab an exclusive game called Final Fantasy 7. That became the branding most people associated with Sony. MS still dosen't have something like this, and unless they get it soon, they will be flattened by Nintendo and Sony. MS really should have pushed for Sonic on the XBox.

Mostly we'll just have to agree to disagree but one thing you say is incorrect.

While it has the best DD out there, both the PS2 and GC can do it, though not quite as easially for the programmers by what I understand.

The GC doesn't have a digital audio output so it is not physically capable of outputing Dolby Digital.

The PS2 has no hardware capabilities for DD encoding. EA has implemented DTS encoding in software for a few games. The other 99% are 2 channel.

I think DD makes a big difference in the overall experience. Other differences aside, PGR is a more immersive and viscerally involving game than GT3 because of the well implemented discrete surround. I do play on a 100" screen with a 7.1 surround system. Immersion is important to me.

-Dylan

Just add the expansion slot, and developers will use it.

Yeah, just look at all those network-ready games on other consoles! Ehhh. Put it in the box, provide easy to implement APIs, and developers will use it. Nobody understands this better than Microsoft.

FWIW not a single currently shipping game supports Broadband play, just LAN (and I know a number of people using it that way). That is why playing over the Internet requires software on a PC. Essentially a VPN is being used to fool the X-Boxen into thinking they are on the same physical network segment. It's a neat hack while we wait for Microsoft to launch their online service and monetize that $3 worth of hardware they added to each box.

DVD playback? Who cares, I want games! DVD playback in firmware licenses at like $20/unit, Ethernet seems like a much more prudent investment.

Controllers? Hard-core PC FPS people aren't the target audience (I like Halo's controls, my computer is for computing, surfing, and MP3 encoding). Size isn't a problem. What gets me after a long session is that the buttons are curved: the tip of my right thumb gets sore from the uneven pressure. Hopefully a third-party will get this right before I develop some sort of permanent injury.

The hardware platform itself? Everyone seems to overlook a very significant feature from the development perspective: Unified Memory Architecture. Forget the PC connotations of crappy unified chipsets from Intel, think more like SGI. This is a closed architecture with a kick-ass graphics sub-system and an optimized API. Developers don't have to worry about limited memory available for textures, polygons, sprites, whatever. System memory and bandwidth are the only limitations that developers have to worry about, meaning that they can concentrate more on making great games. This is the most important factor in the graphics superiority of the X-Box's release titles compared to the PS2 and GC.

Of course, to each their own. I'm convinced that the X-Box will have the most games that I will enjoy (I picked up three games at the same time as my X-Box, I can't think of three PS2 or GC games that entice me). I like that the X-Box breaks away from the legacy platform titles -- I got bored of Mario, Zelda, Metroid, and FF long ago. I like that the majority of X-Box games are aimed squarely at adults with big hands.

Most of all I like the X-Box's odds of survival. Since the modern console boom began with the original NES, the market has only been willing to support two consoles (with one heavily dominant). NEC's TurboGrafx variations. Various fringe platforms like CD-I, 3DO, Pippin. Sega's numerous CD attempts. I predict that Nintendo or Sony will be out of the console hardware business within three years, and whichever remains will have Microsoft on top.

-Bryce

Yeah, just look at all those network-ready games on other consoles! Ehhh. Put it in the box, provide easy to implement APIs, and developers will use it. Nobody understands this better than Microsoft.

Except for one little problem. The API for network play on the X-box is the DirectPlay API.

Every single postmortem I read in GameDeveloper magazine, every single one, without fail, always lists DirectPlay somewhere in their "what went wrong" section.

The text is almost boilerplate. Every single time, it says:

"When we first designed <<gamename>>, we wanted to go with the DirectX API's all the way. So we assumed that network play would be easy, using the DirectPlay API's. As a result, we didn't start working on the network play aspect of <<gamename>> until late in the development cycle. When we finally got there, we discovered that the DirectPlay API's are horribly broken, and network play using this system only barely functioned on a LAN and died completely when used on any kind of a public network. As a result we had to <<scrap network play altogether | | scramble to implement our own network code>>."

I had to dig up this thread when I read this article about the original XBox controller today.

https://www.engadget.com/2018/03/23/xbox-controller-retrospective-hyperkin-duke-gamepad/