XBOX 360?

[JB0]

I have my doubts about Microsoft overtaking Sony this generation, but it will happen eventually. Microsoft will eventually throw enough money and eventually get things "good enough" to dominate the console industry. Sony is egotistical and has stopped innovating, their days are numbered. The exact same thing happened with Nintendo.

Ugh, that would be a nightmare if craposoft dominates the console market. If my gaming console crashes, somebody is going to DIE.

You said if yourself Sony is egotistical, I doubt they're just going to give up their bragging rights and ability to say they're at the top. It's not like microsoft is a great innovator either.

I don't want to see ANYONE dominating.

I think a healthy tug-of-war is best. When the companies are roughly tied and all fighting for supremacy, the consumer benefits the most.

It's the diffrence between the SNES and the GameBoy.

SNES had to actually FIGHT the Genesis. And towards that end every last hardware trick was pulled out, coprocessors were stuffed in carts to boost the power, and a lot of darn good games were churned out.

GameBoy... was totally unopposed for most of a decade. It rapidly crushed the GameGear on size, price, and battery life. The Lynx and TurboExpress, while respectable systems, were never really relevant(and suffered from the same problems as the GameGear).

By the end of the original GB's reign, it was really suffering for it. Most developers had abandoned the system because it was too limited, but since nothing else was competing, the GameBoy continued to rule supreme.

It took the Wonderswan and NeoGeo Pocket to shake Nintendo out of their handheld stupor. Which they did, and for that SNK and Bandai have my enternal gratitude, even if neither one is still in the game.

Anyways, I want to see someone rough Sony up good next generation. Not enough to take 'em out of the game, but at least enough that second place is closer to first than it is to third.

I wold PREFER it be Nintendo, just because I'd rather see a game company on top of the market, and Nintendo is the only game company that's got hardware coming next gen.

[mikeszekely]

I wold PREFER it be Nintendo, just because I'd rather see a game company on top of the market, and Nintendo is the only game company that's got hardware coming next gen.

Well, Sony and Microsoft might not be known for games themselves, but some of studios owned by Microsoft and Sony are starting to come out with some really good stuff. Take God of War, for example. Their only real problem is that games like that are obviously aimed at a more mature audience. So, they don't have the kind of across the board appeal. I mean, gamers agree that God of War was an excellent game, but even non-gamers know Mario.

[JB0]

I wold PREFER it be Nintendo, just because I'd rather see a game company on top of the market, and Nintendo is the only game company that's got hardware coming next gen.

Well, Sony and Microsoft might not be known for games themselves, but some of studios owned by Microsoft and Sony are starting to come out with some really good stuff. Take God of War, for example. Their only real problem is that games like that are obviously aimed at a more mature audience. So, they don't have the kind of across the board appeal. I mean, gamers agree that God of War was an excellent game, but even non-gamers know Mario.

Oh yah, I'm not saying neither company MAKES games.

Just that Nintendo's the only one where it's their ONLY business.

I realize it's not a very good reason to want one company to win over another, but it's as good as any other.

None of them are great philanthropists in it for the gamers. They're all in it for the dollars/yen/euros/rupees*/whatevers.

One's just a bit more concerned about it than the others, because they have no hollywood studios, record labels, PC OSes, etc to fall back on.

*I thought it was so freaking awesome when I was a kid and learnd that the rupee was an ACTUAL CURRENCY.

[CoryHolmes]

I wold PREFER it be Nintendo, just because I'd rather see a game company on top of the market, and Nintendo is the only game company that's got hardware coming next gen.

Well, Sony and Microsoft might not be known for games themselves, but some of studios owned by Microsoft and Sony are starting to come out with some really good stuff. Take God of War, for example. Their only real problem is that games like that are obviously aimed at a more mature audience. So, they don't have the kind of across the board appeal. I mean, gamers agree that God of War was an excellent game, but even non-gamers know Mario.

Indeed, especially when you consider that Bungie is wholly owned by MS. They do good games, especially Marathon. That just rocked.

[Radd]

Same here just PS3, I`ve retired from Nintendo I lost so many games to play cuz of them, even I`m thing to sell my GBA-SP.

Eh? Did the Nintendo Yakuza break into your home and take your games? Cause...they do that.

[JB0]

Same here just PS3, I`ve retired from Nintendo I lost so many games to play cuz of them, even I`m thing to sell my GBA-SP.

Eh? Did the Nintendo Yakuza break into your home and take your games? Cause...they do that.

Nah. He bought a PS, and they sent assault combat cyborg ninjas to crush his NES collection.

[Black Valkyrie]

In the end it`s games that will judge/support the system.

[mikeszekely]

In the end it`s games that will judge/support the system.

Absolutely. That's one of the reasons why I was really looking forward to the DS, but find it so dissapointing today. So much potential squandered on a handful of gimmicky puzzlers.

But as previously mentioned, I do have fairly high expectations for Perfect Dark Zero, and Halo 3 is a given. DoA 5 has also been announced for the Xbox 360. That's enough to get me started.

[Abombz!!]

Funny thing, after playing games for so many years, I have no reason to look foward to the next generation

[chrono]

In the end it`s games that will judge/support the system.

That's not really true anymore given the fact that most games are now multi-consoled and few medium to large game studios solely make single console games.

In the generation after this upcoming one(post PS3) Mircosoft will have bought up most of the console industry and have started to reduce japanese and euro gaming to a individual niche markets.

[JB0]

In the end it`s games that will judge/support the system.

That's not really true anymore given the fact that most games are now multi-consoled and few medium to large game studios solely make single console games.

In the generation after this upcoming one(post PS3) Mircosoft will have bought up most of the console industry and have started to reduce japanese and euro gaming to a individual niche markets.

You're delusional on both counts.

I'd say roughly 66-75% of games are exclusive to one of the 3 major consoles.

And MS taking the market over through buyouts is just absurd. They just can't afford it.

...

Euro gaming is ALREADY a niche market, BTW.

[Black Valkyrie]

Funny thing, after playing games for so many years, I have no reason to look foward to the next generation

Same here but a little interest.

[Black Valkyrie]

From magicbox :

http://www.the-magicbox.com/0505/game050512e.shtml

[bandit29]

Funny thing, after playing games for so many years, I have no reason to look foward to the next generation 

Same here but a little interest.

Ya I'm kinda the sameway. I've been a gamer since the early 80's. If anything I think the X-BOX 360 is coming too early.

[zeo-mare]

apearently they are going to show the system on MTV tonight you guys may want to check it out. it is on at 9:30 Pm

chris

[CoryHolmes]

Funny thing, after playing games for so many years, I have no reason to look foward to the next generation 

Same here but a little interest.

Ya I'm kinda the sameway. I've been a gamer since the early 80's. If anything I think the X-BOX 360 is coming too early.

They're rushing ahead with this because Sony is coming out with the PS3 soon. MS learned the hard way that being second or third out of the gate just sucks. Sony's PS2 had sole claim to "advanced gaming platform" for too long by the time the XBox had come out.

They have no intentions of repeating that mistake.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Yeah I see this as a necessary evil.

The next gen will have to come early because as the ps2 (which dominates now) ages in graphics performance; with sony getting ready for a new system, MS will need to counter early to prevent a repeat victory in the mindset of the masses. Hopefully this does not anger late adopters (who may be on a budget) to the current xbox who might in some way feel forced to upgrade earlier than usual. It is still profit. (it is still amazes how you can still buy ps1s to this day. Ordinarily I would have thought that by now, it should not be available anymore)

I also think backwards compatibility will be an important factor since developers will want thier games to be ale to be sold to as big and widereaching a userbase as possible. What you don't want is games you develop on your next gen system (Xbox360, ps3) actually competing with games you make on your current gen system (xbox, ps2) as rival platforms. This will cuase another split and fragment things further. Better to have a next gen system that can play older games and also newer games still devloped for the old platform, as well as next gen titles made for the next gen system, rather than punishing people still happy with the games on an older gen.

Take for example sombody who is quite happy to play a simple old 2d one-on-one fighter which does not really gain any advantage on cutting edge hardware. Gameplay doesn't automatically evolve with the advancement of more impressive specs. It's mainly those massive epic GOTY titles with enormous budget using the latest technology and the beefiest graphics and physics engines that will benefit - and even these take time to be made to tap into the hardware's max potential. But a game with the most realistic and impressive graphics, sound, detailed environments, physics etc DO make a difference on the early adopter. It gives a good excuse to upgrade and justifies the expense. The early adopting crowd kind of paves the way for the more casual games crowd to make the system eventually affordable. First impressions will be everything which is why the title must be AAA on launches or close to launch as a first gen title as a demonstration of system power, as well as a guage to see how close it matches or doesn't match up to the mass media/propaganda hype.

The people who buy the most games and spend the most money, will obviously be looking at these specs and comparing, but for the masses: hype will be an equally-as-important a factor in thier decision-making. Which is why in my earlier post I point out the DC failure since it had great AAA titles but sony's very brand image and announcement of thier next system (PS2 at the time) was enough to make the masses hold onto thier money for a bit longer and wait. People will not automatically support the system which can live up to the expectations of its hype but "go with what they know" (even if that means they are forced to except a technologically disapointing system which is inferior in some key aspects the developers and supporters of those systems themselves have already publicly admitted to.)

Edited May 13, 2005 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[yellowlightman]

They're rushing ahead with this because Sony is coming out with the PS3 soon. MS learned the hard way that being second or third out of the gate just sucks.

Which is why Saturn was #1 with the Saturn and Dreamcast...

...

First release does not equal the #1 spot, the PS2 was put into that situation because of the breakthrough of the DVD player and the backwards compatibility.

[zeo-mare]

true i was going to mention the Dreamcast before but you beat me to it, being first out may not be the best idea always, they will get there foot in the door first but come next year the only thing we may be talking about is the PS3. and i think that is pretty much what happend to the Dreamcast, i do not care what people say i thought it was a great system games like Soul Caliber, Sonic, Jet Grind Radio and Ikaruga were awesome. but once the next big thing came out, it was all the hype and a great system ended up taking the back seat.

chris

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

First release does not equal the #1 spot, the PS2 was put into that situation because of the breakthrough of the DVD player and the backwards compatibility.

But with a company like sony, it can mean you give them an easy start. (easy start meaning "no competition to fight against")

MS being the second place here, need to match the timing with sony to at least keep them busy and to turn attention away from the next playstation which, as a brand, is more recognised.

While the introduction of the Xbox was microsoft's introduction into the console games industry and merely getting their foot in the door to the hardcore gamers, this next xbox will hopefully be what sega was to nintendo during the 16 bit console era where it was 50/50 split and developers were about equal in loyalty to the competition and there was incentive by devlopers or consumers to not make one system too good or too all-powerful and have too much leverage over us by limiting our choices and overall crap treatment. (well that's what I'm hoping for anyway. It's not like we can rely on nintendo since as many have said, they tend to be stubborn and want to do things thier own way rather than listening/adapting to thier fans, the developers, and critics.)

Timing did make a difference in the PS1 days which is (later on down the line after it's dominance of n64 and saturn) what helped in mass gamer suport of ps2 in the early days of its infancy due to the "go with what you know succeeded in the past" mindset of the masses.

Yes it is true that some were excited about using for a dvd movie player, but this timing of release/announcment is I believe an important factor as well. Timing does make a difference which is why I think many people see the nintendo DS as a kneejerk reaction to PSP to stop sony from invading thier market. They need *something* (anything) to at least compete against psp to keep sony busy in the mindshare of public. And the timing of DS was probably their (nintendo's) way of saying "we are still here" and will try to compete with you.

If sony were able to take the next gen userbase early on, developers might start to treat that platform with more loyalty and anounce thier titles exclusive to it. At least by matching the timing by being there when they do, you got a better chance of preventing an early start for them again. This is why I call it a "necessary evil" because although a lot of xbox gamers are happy with this generation of hardware continuing on uninterrupted with new hardware, the PS2 is now aging and sony will want to make thier move soon, so MS will need to match the timing with announcments and hype of some sort. (hopefully not of the vaporware kind)

Edited May 13, 2005 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[JB0]

They're rushing ahead with this because Sony is coming out with the PS3 soon.  MS learned the hard way that being second or third out of the gate just sucks.

Which is why Saturn was #1 with the Saturn and Dreamcast...

...

First release does not equal the #1 spot, the PS2 was put into that situation because of the breakthrough of the DVD player and the backwards compatibility.

Saturn came after PS, at least in America.

...

Wait... I don't remember if the rushed "advance release" was before or after PS launch.

Either way, there were so many things wrong with the Saturn's US launch that it isn't even funny.

Always makes me cry to think about it.

And the PS2's DVD player was a joke. You could spend half as much and get a standalone DVD player that worked better anyways. I did.

I realize it was a selling point in Japan, where there weren't any cheap DVD players at the time, but I don't believe for a moment that it was really a relevant feature anywhere else.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

but once the next big thing came out, it was all the hype and a great system ended up taking the back seat.

That's very true. So many original, fresh titles, often beautiful (I loved Ecco) and well crafted software. (take Project Gotham Racing - the prequel was called MSR on dc - for example this was the true Gran turismo killer imo since the street racing aspect added more fun gameplay and more interesting settings to drive cars in as well as more realistic physics and damage modelling. Too bad it was a sega dreamcast game which nobody wanted to buy)

The thing about sega and nintendo was they got taken by surprise by sony in the n64,ps1,saturn era. This was what allowed them to dominate to this day as the hype machine is good enough to scare competitors.

Now that sega is gone, and nintendo are happy enough not necessarily competing in the same adult market, (they tend to structure systems and peripherals around thier own games rather than the other way around) it's really about MS and Sony. But there are no surprises (n64 and saturn era) or head starts (ps2 era) this time. And if the competitors aim to release systems around roughly the same time they will be challenging each other on equal footing.

*note I believe sega dc lost its own fanbase partially to its own fault with saturn,32x and platforms that fragmented thier own userbase and pissed off thier own fans who lost trust and faith in sega from the series of failures before the DC came about. IT WASNT just sony that helped kill them, but a sense that whenever you bought a sega console, you felt kind of cheated like the GBA owners who felt cheated after the announcment of a new GBA, GBA SP. Almost like a punishment for being an early adoptor. The company would make a system to get money off you in desperation, then quickly supercede that system with something better making you feel like you wasted your money because all the developers would abandon the older system quickly to make games on the newer system.

Saturn came after PS, at least in America.

But the criticism of the saturn lies more in that it was designed poorly. When sega found out sony's machine was focusing more on 3d games (take the arcade games like tekken and ridge racer which were apealing to the masses at the time) sega chucked in another chip which complicated how the developers would make saturn games. It was a last minute decision to make the system (which was originally focused more on 2d power) seem artificialy more powerful as a way to compete with the ps1. It didn't work though because this made it a headache for third parties to make 3d games for the saturn (I won't go into too much detail) and all the developers went to the ps1 because it had user-friendly libraries to make 3d games that made making games easier and quicker. (this is why many early generation 1 software for ps1 all had the same 'feel' to them. You didn't need to be that skilled to create good looking games.)

When you think back to the Saturn, don't just think of the system itself, but also how much sega fragmented their own userbase by making so many different machines like the mega cd and 32x and all that nonsense which pissed people off. (I'll refer to this as the "Hardware Stepping Stone syndrome")

Upgrading is a headache for people on a budget who just want one solid platform with a dedicated support of developers who make consistantly high quality software. When sega decided to make the DC which had an equivalent in the arcades at the time, people were too tired to risk thier money on another sega platform and so sega, (even though thier software was AAA quality compared to the equivalent sony stuff at the time) was doomed from the begining. Sony did squash them, but not necessarily only because they were giant, but also because sega were incompetant at the time and had management problems. Fortunately for nintendo, they didn't have this problem of changing systems and pissing off thier existing userbase because they are generally slow-moving to change unless they want to do something innovative or gimmicky. (Virtual boy, power glove peripheral etc)

Edited May 13, 2005 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[chrono]

In the end it`s games that will judge/support the system.

That's not really true anymore given the fact that most games are now multi-consoled and few medium to large game studios solely make single console games.

In the generation after this upcoming one(post PS3) Mircosoft will have bought up most of the console industry and have started to reduce japanese and euro gaming to a individual niche markets.

You're delusional on both counts.

I'd say roughly 66-75% of games are exclusive to one of the 3 major consoles.

And MS taking the market over through buyouts is just absurd. They just can't afford it.

...

Euro gaming is ALREADY a niche market, BTW.

Not at all, because many of the studios that your talking about are studios that are parts of the consoles corp holdings. The independant med-large studios know that the money is made with thier game going out to many consoles and not just one. The small studios stay with a single console mainly because thier games just don't sell well enough to afford more employees to make the conversions.

As for the Microsoft buying it's way to domination. Well history has already should what M$ will do to get what it wants. They spent billions getting where they're at today in the computer arena and they've spent quite alot(last quote I hear was over 2 billion) just getting into the console arena. What's a few dozen billion more towards concole domination or further console/computer hybridization?

...

Yeah may bad on the Euro gaming remark! Ubersoft is doing really well with government protection now.

[JB0]

Saturn came after PS, at least in America.

But the criticism of the saturn lies more in that it was designed poorly. When sega found out sony's machine was focusing more on 3d games (take the arcade games like tekken and ridge racer which were apealing to the masses at the time) sega chucked in another chip which complicated how the developers would make saturn games. It was a last minute decision to make the system (which was originally focused more on 2d power) seem artificialy more powerful as a way to compete with the ps1. It didn't work though because this made it a headache for third parties to make 3d games for the saturn (I won't go into too much detail)

Saturn was a pain to develop for, true.

Multi-proccessor, multi-GPU, and the dev kit was assembly-only.

and all the developers went to the ps1 because it had user-friendly libraries to make 3d games that made making games easier and quicker. (this is why many early generation 1 software for ps1 all had the same 'feel' to them. You didn't need to be that skilled to create good looking games.)

True. One of the PS1's big selling points to developers WAS the C++ dev kit.

Another was that Sony was being nice about licenses.

A lot of developers jumped at the chance for a system where they wouldn't get raped on the licensing as Nintendo and Sega had both done.

When you think back to the Saturn, don't just think of the system itself, but also how much sega fragmented their own userbase by making so many different machines like the mega cd and 32x and all that nonsense which pissed people off. (I'll refer to this as the "Hardware Stepping Stone syndrome")

I'm a defender of the SegaCD, actually.

And if you look back closely you'll find that it was NINTENDO that took flak in that period, and it was for NOT offering a CD-ROM expansion like NEC, Sega, and Atari did.

The 32x, however, was indefensible.

Upgrading is a headache for people on a budget who just want one solid platform with a dedicated support of developers who make consistantly high quality software.

A lot of people actually saw it as getting a next-gen system for a fraction of the cost, regardless of how much it actually cost.

When sega decided to make the DC which had an equivalent in the arcades at the time, people were too tired to risk thier money on another sega platform and so sega, (even though thier software was AAA quality compared to the equivalent sony stuff at the time) was doomed from the begining.

The argument I usually heard was "Don't buy a Dreamcast, because hte PS2 is gonna come out in a year or 2 and it'll blow the Dreamcast away."

It was a raw power argument. And one that was wrong.

Fortunately for nintendo, they didn't have this problem of changing systems and pissing off thier existing userbase because they are generally slow-moving to change unless they want to do something innovative or gimmicky. (Virtual boy, power glove peripheral etc)

Nintendo LOST most of their userbase because they were too slow. They had 90% of the market for the NES. 50 for the SNES. N64 was... somewhat less than 50.

And NINTENDO DID NOT MAKE THE POWER GLOVE.

chrono: You've gone from being a delusional idiot to an incoherent idiot.

[bandit29]

Funny thing, after playing games for so many years, I have no reason to look foward to the next generation 

Same here but a little interest.

Ya I'm kinda the sameway. I've been a gamer since the early 80's. If anything I think the X-BOX 360 is coming too early.

They're rushing ahead with this because Sony is coming out with the PS3 soon. MS learned the hard way that being second or third out of the gate just sucks. Sony's PS2 had sole claim to "advanced gaming platform" for too long by the time the XBox had come out.

They have no intentions of repeating that mistake.

I realize that but the PS3 is rumored to be coming out late 2006. I still think its a tad early in the cycle(November 2005) but its timed right for the holiday season of course.

and that XBOX 360 special sucked in typical MTV fashion. More lame games from EA..yawn

Edited May 13, 2005 by dejr8bud

[bandit29]

They're rushing ahead with this because Sony is coming out with the PS3 soon.  MS learned the hard way that being second or third out of the gate just sucks.

Which is why Saturn was #1 with the Saturn and Dreamcast...

...

First release does not equal the #1 spot, the PS2 was put into that situation because of the breakthrough of the DVD player and the backwards compatibility.

Saturn came after PS, at least in America.

...

Wait... I don't remember if the rushed "advance release" was before or after PS launch.

Either way, there were so many things wrong with the Saturn's US launch that it isn't even funny.

Always makes me cry to think about it.

And the PS2's DVD player was a joke. You could spend half as much and get a standalone DVD player that worked better anyways. I did.

I realize it was a selling point in Japan, where there weren't any cheap DVD players at the time, but I don't believe for a moment that it was really a relevant feature anywhere else.

IIRC the Saturn came out few months before the PS in America. I think it was 400.00 when it came out. IIRC it came out with little to no advertising. It suddenly showed up at Babbages and Toys R Us.

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

I missed the special did they show off any of the games or just system specs and then play a cut off music video?

[bandit29]

I missed the special did they show off any of the games or just system specs and then play a cut off music video?

A few clips of the new Madden, Tiger Woods, Tony Hawk and some other games. While graphically impressive they are nothing I'd buy or rent.

[JB0]

They're rushing ahead with this because Sony is coming out with the PS3 soon.  MS learned the hard way that being second or third out of the gate just sucks.

Which is why Saturn was #1 with the Saturn and Dreamcast...

...

First release does not equal the #1 spot, the PS2 was put into that situation because of the breakthrough of the DVD player and the backwards compatibility.

Saturn came after PS, at least in America.

...

Wait... I don't remember if the rushed "advance release" was before or after PS launch.

Either way, there were so many things wrong with the Saturn's US launch that it isn't even funny.

Always makes me cry to think about it.

And the PS2's DVD player was a joke. You could spend half as much and get a standalone DVD player that worked better anyways. I did.

I realize it was a selling point in Japan, where there weren't any cheap DVD players at the time, but I don't believe for a moment that it was really a relevant feature anywhere else.

IIRC the Saturn came out few months before the PS in America. I think it was 400.00 when it came out. IIRC it came out with little to no advertising. It suddenly showed up at Babbages and Toys R Us.

Okay, that's how it worked.

They jumped it up for a "pre-release" that was before the PS1's launch, and left the "real" launch date the same.

That way they were on shelves first, but since it wasn't a "real" launch, they couldn't be dinged for their poor software lineup and extended delay before the next titles came out.

...

I'm sure it worked in Sega's mind.

Of course, once hte PS hit shelves, they had the price war to deal with, which they couldn't afford since the Saturn was more expensive hardware. The PS was CHEAP, and Sony could make a profit at levels where teh Saturn was spraying red ink everywhere.

Got so bad that Sega actually asked retailers to sell systems at a slight loss at one point. Diodn't go over well with retailers.

...

Again, I'm sure it worked in Sega's mind.

[Gaijin]

Ths Saturn was a "surprise launch" which was supposed to work tactically for them against the PSX. What it wound up doing, was upset retailers across the nation, dooming the console to half of it's market on the first day of launch. KB Toys, at the time carried everything, and refused to carry it after the surprise launch and never did. Same for a few other retailers not in the exclusive loop on "Saturnday".

I remember reading a few years after that Tom Kalinske admitted it may have been premature...he was right!

[ogami]

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/608/608394p1.html

Will Xbox 360 be backwards compatible?

The problem with backwards compatibility is that the original Xbox ran on an nVIDIA graphics processor. When software makes calls to a chipset to produce visuals it uses code specific to that hardware. Xbox 360 runs on an ATI graphics chip meaning that code from last generation games will need to be recompiled or emulated in order to work on the system. Does this mean that consumers will have to chuck their beloved Xbox libraries? Not necessarily. There is a chance that Xbox 360 will have the ability to emulate the old system, though nothing has been announced as of yet.

------------------------

ouch... This make me less want to buy X360.

100% Xbox Emulation??? It is like emulate Windows XP on Mac Mini Spec... It will be hard and some graphic intensive games like ninja gaiden, will never can be 100% emulated.

[JB0]

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/608/608394p1.html

Will Xbox 360 be backwards compatible?

The problem with backwards compatibility is that the original Xbox ran on an nVIDIA graphics processor. When software makes calls to a chipset to produce visuals it uses code specific to that hardware. Xbox 360 runs on an ATI graphics chip meaning that code from last generation games will need to be recompiled or emulated in order to work on the system. Does this mean that consumers will have to chuck their beloved Xbox libraries? Not necessarily. There is a chance that Xbox 360 will have the ability to emulate the old system, though nothing has been announced as of yet.

Nice missing the obvious, IGN.

The video chipset isn't NEAR the biggest problem.

THE FREAKING CPU ISN'T EVEN THE SAME DESIGN PHILOSOPHY!

There's big problems before you ever get to the video chipset.

------------------------

ouch...  This make me less want to buy X360.

100% Xbox Emulation??? It is like emulate Windows XP on Mac Mini Spec...  It will be hard and some graphic intensive games like ninja gaiden, will never can be 100% emulated. 

XBox 360 is fairly powerful last I heard.

Was supposed to be 3 3 GHz PowerPC chips last I heard. That's a lot of power for emulation.

Mac Mini has a 1.42 GHz G4(which is PowerPC-based too).

Xbox has a 800MHz Pentium 3.

And the PowerPC family tends to perform better than the x86 family.

Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if you could emulate a MacMini on a XBox360.

...

I lie. I would be. Bit TOO close spec-wise. But XBox on XBox2? I'd take that bet.

[mikeszekely]

A few clips of the new Madden, Tiger Woods, Tony Hawk and some other games. While graphically impressive they are nothing I'd buy or rent.

Shelling out the money for a console is hard enough, considering how many good games come out around the holidays and will still be coming out for the current-gen consoles. And I happen to really enjoy Tiger Woods golf, so that and Perfect Dark Zero will probably be my launch games.

XBox 360 is fairly powerful last I heard.

Was supposed to be 3 3 GHz PowerPC chips last I heard. That's a lot of power for emulation.

Mac Mini has a 1.42 GHz G4(which is PowerPC-based too).

Xbox has a 800MHz Pentium 3.

To be more specific, they're saying that the Xbox 360 will have three 3.2GHz, for a grand total of over 9 and a half gigs of processing power. Not to mention that the technology they're licensing from NEC is supposed to all but eliminate the frontside bus so it doesn't get slowed up there. If it means that I can get rid of my current Xbox, I'll take the emulation.

Oh, and IIRC, the original Xbox was actually 733MHz.

[JB0]

XBox 360 is fairly powerful last I heard.

Was supposed to be 3 3 GHz PowerPC chips last I heard. That's a lot of power for emulation.

Mac Mini has a 1.42 GHz G4(which is PowerPC-based too).

Xbox has a 800MHz Pentium 3.

To be more specific, they're saying that the Xbox 360 will have three 3.2GHz, for a grand total of over 9 and a half gigs of processing power. Not to mention that the technology they're licensing from NEC is supposed to all but eliminate the frontside bus so it doesn't get slowed up there. If it means that I can get rid of my current Xbox, I'll take the emulation.

Oh, and IIRC, the original Xbox was actually 733MHz.

Ooops.

I've got a bad tendancy to round things to whatever's convenient.

*puts dentures in*

In my day we didn't have all this multi-processor multi-gigahertz stuff!

It was all a single 1Mhz 6502. Maybe a 4MHz Z80 if we were lucky!

And we had to walk uphill through boiling snow to put the cartridge in!

[mikeszekely]

XBox 360 is fairly powerful last I heard.

Was supposed to be 3 3 GHz PowerPC chips last I heard. That's a lot of power for emulation.

Mac Mini has a 1.42 GHz G4(which is PowerPC-based too).

Xbox has a 800MHz Pentium 3.

To be more specific, they're saying that the Xbox 360 will have three 3.2GHz, for a grand total of over 9 and a half gigs of processing power. Not to mention that the technology they're licensing from NEC is supposed to all but eliminate the frontside bus so it doesn't get slowed up there. If it means that I can get rid of my current Xbox, I'll take the emulation.

Oh, and IIRC, the original Xbox was actually 733MHz.

Ooops.

I've got a bad tendancy to round things to whatever's convenient.

*puts dentures in*

In my day we didn't have all this multi-processor multi-gigahertz stuff!

It was all a single 1Mhz 6502. Maybe a 4MHz Z80 if we were lucky!

And we had to walk uphill through boiling snow to put the cartridge in!

Oh, it's cool, JB0. I just think that the exact numbers help to further show the leap in processing power between the 360 and the original. I mean, that .2GHz might not seem like much, but multiply that by the three total processors, and you've rounded off 600MHz... which is just 133MHz shy of the total processing power of the original.

Seriously, at the end of the day... I'm no fanboy of any particular console. I'm very curious about what all the players will bring to the table. If it seems like I'm showing a little preference toward Microsoft right now, it's just because the 360 is coming out first. I'm sure this time next year, I'll have PS3 fever. (I'm still curious about the Revolution, but also skeptical.)

It'll be kind of weird though... for the first time, I'll have a console that kicks my PC's ass.