quote:

---

>
> http://cube.ign.com/mail.html
>
>
> Zelda, Revolution, Xbox 2
>
> "i have a quick question with revolution coming next year why would

quote:

---

> release a zelda game for gamecube?wouldn't make more sense for it to come
> out on the new system?also what is the make of the plasma screen you
> brought?thanks"
>
> Matt responds: "Well, Revolution isn't coming out in 2005. It's scheduled

quote:

---

> release in 2006 alongside Sony's PlayStation 3. Microsoft will release the
> successor to Xbox in 2005. And by the way, if there is still any doubt

quote:

---

> this happening, now's the time to put it to rest. I've seen some holiday
> 2005 plans from publishers and several of them have major Xbox 2 titles
> scheduled for next November. I could name specific franchises and brand

quote:

---

> IPs. It's really happening. And from the looks of it, there are going to

quote:

---

> some pretty impressive launch titles."
>
>
> so that's almost confirmed. Xbox 2 in 2005, Nintendo Revolution (their
> next console) in 2006. nothing new, but nice to have things solidifing,

quote:

---

> least somewhat.
>
> as far as ATI graphics, we could now assume that Xbox 2 is going to have
> R500 or R5XX graphics and that Nintendo Revolution will most likely have
> somewhat more advance graphics, maybe of R600 calibur. that is not to say
> that Revolution is getting an R600. it is likely to be something custom to
> Nintendo, but probably roughly on par with R600, more or less, and

quote:

---

> probably more powerful than Xbox 2, just going on timetable alone.
>
>
>
>

quote:

---

> Mmmm, don't you think 4 years is a pretty short lifespan for a conosle
> system..?

quote:

---

> Mmmm, don't you think 4 years is a pretty short lifespan for a conosle
> system..?
>

quote:

---

>
> http://cube.ign.com/mail.html
>
>
> Zelda, Revolution, Xbox 2
>
> "i have a quick question with revolution coming next year why would
> nintendo
> release a zelda game for gamecube?wouldn't make more sense for it to come
> out on the new system?also what is the make of the plasma screen you
> brought?thanks"
>

quote:

---

> Ice Wipe Inc. wrote:
>
>
> Yeah, but MS knows that the only way they can gain significant ground on
> Sony (they don't care about Nintendo, and neither does Sony) in the next
> generation is to 1) launch first, 2) have better hardware and 3) have a
> killer app launch title and some killer exclusives. I think the chances of
> all these things coming to pass are slim indeed, and launching early can

quote:

---

> a huge disadvantage if it's done wrong (eg. Dreamcast).
>
> IMO launching early also puts a lot more pressure on MS to make the Xbox 2
> backwards compatible, which is also pretty unlikely. A lot of factors will
> have to come together for Xbox 2 to grab any real market share away from
> Sony. Fall 2005 to fall 2006 is going to be a *very* interesting time.
>
> -Z-
>
>

quote:

---

>
> "Ice Wipe Inc." <birdworm12@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:_qimd.37858$K7.10093@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> But it will not be a 4 year lifespan. They will still continue to make
> games for probably 2-3 years after that.
>
>

quote:

---

>
> "Xenon" <xenonxbox2@xboxnext.com> wrote in message
> news:L9ydnV82R4zr7wTcRVn-uQ@comcast.com...
come[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Zelda? Another for GC? When?
>
> I NEED another Zelda fix!
>
> Scott
>
>

quote:

---

> The thing is, Halo 2 was only just relesaed so what will be their main
> launch title? Rare isn't that reliable ever since they started losing
> people
> from the N64 era. If they don't get a great looking Perfect Dark 2, then
> Xbox 2 is be a bigger flop then the DC.

quote:

---

> "Ice Wipe Inc." <birdworm12@hotmail.com> wrote
>
> Isn't that last comment taking things a little too far? One game isn't
> going to make or break any console nowadays IMO.
>
> Anyway, the DC had plenty of great looking games with great playability ...
> didn't exactly help much overall in the scheme of things.
>
> Seb

quote:

---

> Zelda? Another for GC? When?
>
> I NEED another Zelda fix!
>

quote:

---

> "Ice Wipe Inc." <birdworm12@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:_qimd.37858$K7.10093@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>
>
> But it will not be a 4 year lifespan. They will still continue to make
> games for probably 2-3 years after that.
>

quote:

---

> http://cube.ign.com/mail.html
>
>
> Zelda, Revolution, Xbox 2
>

quote:

---

> "Ice Wipe Inc." <birdworm12@hotmail.com> wrote:

quote:

---

>
> Isn't that last comment taking things a little too far? One game
> isn't going to make or break any console nowadays IMO.

quote:

---

> On 16/11/04 12:25 pm, in article 2vu9f0F2p8gkpU1@uni-berlin.de, "Sebastian
> Kinnaird" <essdeekay.nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
then[vbcol=seagreen]
....[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Exactly. Although often it can feel like one game makes a machine. I

quote:

---

> what the situation would be like now if MS or Nintendo had exclusive

quote:

---

> to GTA. How good it is is irrelevant, as the DC shows.
>
> Zo
>

quote:

---

> Xenon wrote:
>
>
> xbox 2 out early? microsoft is obviously hoping to have the advantage
> the ps2 had when it came out (im ignoring the failure that was the DC).
>
> however if microsoft releases 3 different versions of the xbox 2 a year
> before any of the competition then perhaps they will realize what a
> mistake it is before the ps3 and revolution begin to eat into the next
> gen market share...
>
> if nintendo pull their finger out and get the revolution out before the
> ps3 this could go well for them. the ps2 has dominated this current
> generation of consoles. lets hope that in the next generation things are
> a bit more even - this would be a great thing for gamers across the

quote:

---

> Mmmm, don't you think 4 years is a pretty short lifespan for a conosle
> system..?

quote:

---

> It would be foolish of Nintendo to launch along side of Sony's new system.
> In the US Nintendo has lost interest in the gaming sector due to it not
> following in Sony's steps(ie: not embracing violance and gore). It would
> have a better chance in Japan though, but still...
>
> The Big N needs to release months ahead of Sony to get any real Market
> penetration. This time around they have to launch without any other system
> near, or only the hardcore gamers will care about their systems while the
> general gamer will only buy Sony and its system selling titles.
>

quote:

---

> Nintendo is something else though. It seems like they care about
> their gamers more than M$ and Sony, but that's not necessarily a good
> thing for their wallets. If they could outsell Xbox 2 (and even
> Sony?) in the next generation by bringing it out earlier, then that's
> what they should be doing. They want to continue supporting the GC
> though, and they always have the GBA to fall back on. It's good in
> the short term (again with game sales), but in the long term, we'll
> have to wait and see. They've got the best first-party games
> hands-down, and that's enough to keep them in the console business.
> Perhaps with this move they are trying to keep their current (and
> create some new) loyalists.

quote:

---

> MS on the other hand has no room to fail,
> though they have endless mounttains of money, that means nothing if no-one
> buys its system.

quote:

---

> Do you really believe that MS will put any of of its 1st party temas on
> the
> original Xbox after it launches the newer model?
>
> Very wishful dreaming

quote:

---

> Americans
> love those type of games to death, and Halo and Halo 2 are the best
> selling games ont he Xbox.

quote:

---

> MS on the other hand has no
> room to fail, though they have endless mounttains of money, that
> means nothing if no-one buys its system.

quote:

---

> I'm just being realistic here.

quote:

---

> I personally don't care in the long
> run if MS pulls it off or not in the US

quote:

---

> seeing as Sony will always
> have a strangle hold on the industry

quote:

---

> You MS fangirls can squeal all you want in joy with your Halos and
> other lame-XXX American gaming plots and pretty pictures...

quote:

---

> Mmmm, don't you think 4 years is a pretty short lifespan for a conosle
> system..?
>
> "Xenon" <xenonxbox2@xboxnext.com> wrote in message
> news:L9ydnV82R4zr7wTcRVn-uQ@comcast.com...
> nintendo
come[vbcol=seagreen]
scheduled[vbcol=seagreen]
> to
the[vbcol=seagreen]
> about
> new
> be
solidifing,[vbcol=seagreen]
> at
say[vbcol=seagreen]
to[vbcol=seagreen]
> therefore
>
>

quote:

---

> i think MS has already proven itself to be dedicated to console gaming
> with the xbox. i was never a fan of the xbox

quote:

---

>
> But it will not be a 4 year lifespan. They will still continue to make
> games for probably 2-3 years after that.
>

quote:

---

>
> http://cube.ign.com/mail.html
>
>
> Zelda, Revolution, Xbox 2
>

quote:

---

>
> And you can go back to playing brooding hermaphrodites in Japanese RPGs with
> more cutscenes than gameplay. I'll take Jade Empire any day, thanks.
>
> -Z-

quote:

---

> Isn't that last comment taking things a little too far? One game isn't
> going to make or break any console nowadays IMO.

quote:

---

> Anyway, the DC had plenty of great looking games with great playability ...
> didn't exactly help much overall in the scheme of things.

quote:

---

> Yes I do believe they will. There is no way they will want to piss off
> people with the original xbox because they know full well that not everybody
> is going to buy the new one.

quote:

---

> Ice Wipe Inc. wrote:
>
>
> Yeah, but MS knows that the only way they can gain significant ground on
> Sony (they don't care about Nintendo, and neither does Sony) in the next
> generation is to 1) launch first, 2) have better hardware and 3) have a
> killer app launch title and some killer exclusives. I think the chances of

quote:

---

> This is certainly not a support for the ultimate Nintendo fanboy there
> in any way....., but just how do you take a game that doesn't exist?
> I'm just curious.

quote:

---

> Jimmery <not@chance> writes:
>
> I think it's more accurate to say that they're dedicated to dominating
> as many markets as they can get away with which are vaguely related to
> computers. They don't give a toss about "console gaming" except as a
> means to that end.
>
> -Miles
> --
> `...the Soviet Union was sliding in to an economic collapse so

quote:

---

> that in the end its factories produced not goods but bads: finished

quote:

---

> less valuable than the raw materials they were made from.' [The

quote:

---

> "Zackman" <zackman@SPAMISEVILearthling.net> wrote in message

quote:

---

with[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> This is certainly not a support for the ultimate Nintendo fanboy there
> in any way....., but just how do you take a game that doesn't exist?
> I'm just curious.

quote:

---

> perhaps you can explain how it's possible to accomplish 1) and 2) at
> the same time?

quote:

---

> "Beck" <my_bulkmail@REMOVEbtopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:cncihl$7e5$1@titan.btinternet.com...
>
>
> Very true. When the Playstation 2 came out, new games didn't suddenly

quote:

---

> coming out for the original Playstation. Another strike against Xbox 2 is
> that it probably won't be backwards compatible with the original Xbox,

quote:

---

> means there will be only a small number of games available for it at

quote:

---

> Meanwhile, the original Xbox has established a firm foothold and if

quote:

---

> money to be made by developing games for it, they will be made. I also
> expect new games will continue to come out for the original Xbox for at
> least two years following the release of Xbox 2 while Xbox 2 establishes a
> solid user base.
>
>

quote:

---

> Heh, I always roll my eyes when guys here use the word 'fanboy' all the
> time. I may enjoy Nintendo franchises the most but I don't let gaming

quote:

---

> my life like a lot of people I know.
>
> Its not my fault I enjoy games that don't require killing...

quote:

---

> Its not my fault I enjoy games that don't require killing.

quote:

---

> Eiji Hayashi wrote:
>
>
> Xbox 2 and PS3 will be such wildly different machines from the CPUs through
> the GPUs that it's conceivable Xbox 2 could launch first and still be more
> powerful in some respects, or (and this is pretty much a given) be less

quote:

---

> powerful on paper but much easier to program for, and thus much easier for
> developers to use the hardware to its potential. But you're right, what I

quote:

---

> should have said was launch first with hardware that's still competitive
> when the PS3 comes out.

quote:

---

> In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 Sebastian Kinnaird
> <essdeekay.nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Metal Gear Solid 2. The promise of this game alone helped drive PS2 sales
> early on even when its released library really wasn't all that great. I
> can
> remember SSX being one of the best games for the console almost a year
> after
> it was released...

quote:

---

> Then again, Sega was already on the ropes even before they released the
> DC. They'd already burned their customers with the Sega Saturn - which
> I would argue was a better platform AND had some killer games for it even
> with its short time on the market.

quote:

---

> No, but if one of Sony or MSFT's first-party developers created a game
> in which you played a dingo mauling babies by using your sphincter to
> manipulate a digeridoo peripheral, you'd be camped out the night
> before it was released.

quote:

---

> being easy to develop for isn't all positive, because it means that it
> will more likely hit its graphical ceiling before the one that's hard
> to develop for, since there's a higher learning curve for developers
> would only be using a portion of its capabilities at the beginning.

quote:

---

> depends then on the subjective definition of "competative". Would you
> consider the PS2, which came out over 1 year before the XBOX to have
> "competative" graphics to XBOX?

quote:

---

> My opinion is that the Xbox will die as quickly as the N64 did if the
> Xbox 2 can't play Xbox 1 games.

quote:

---

> Sony and Nintendo also has the advanteage of having access to 3 large
> markets to Microsoft's 2.

quote:

---

> No matter how good the system goes in the
> US, it still won't get any serious support from Japanese developers

quote:

---

> Eiji Hayashi wrote:
>
> Given a choice, I'd rather have a console with games that are maxing out its
> power from day one than have early games that are only using 50% of the
> console's capabilities. It would be like buying a DVD player that starts out
> playing movies at VHS quality and only achieves DVD quality after you've
> owned it for three years.

quote:

---

> And besides, the Xbox is accepted to be much easier to code for than the PS2
> and so should have theoritically hit its ceiling already, and yet the PS2 is
> nearly at the end of its life cycle and its games still don't look any
> better than Xbox games. If PS2 developers have all the machine's secrets
> well in hand now, then Killzone should look at least as good as Halo 2, if
> not better. (Well, it looks good in static screens. The framerates are
> pretty brutal though.)

quote:

---

> Good question. Competitive, yes, but not superior. The PS2's only real
> advantage is its library, period -- despite processors which are
> theoretically more powerful than the Xbox's off the shelf Pentium 3 and
> GeForce 3, the PS2 still can't overtake the Xbox graphically (and that's not
> even taking into consideration that most Xbox games are 480P, while most PS2
> games are not.) Which is why I'm not convinced the theoretically more
> powerful Cell processors will result in a real-world advantage over the
> Xbox's PowerPC and ATI chips. Have to wait and see.

quote:

---

> But I'm also not convinced that launching first will ensure the Xbox 2 has a
> better library than the PS3, ultimately. The Playstation brand is just too
> powerful for developers to ignore, and Sony is too smart to be outfoxed by a
> competitor that tips its hand too early.

quote:

---

>
> http://cube.ign.com/mail.html
>
>
> Zelda, Revolution, Xbox 2
>
> "i have a quick question with revolution coming next year why would
> nintendo
> release a zelda game for gamecube?wouldn't make more sense for it to come
> out on the new system?also what is the make of the plasma screen you
> brought?thanks"
>
> Matt responds: "Well, Revolution isn't coming out in 2005. It's scheduled
> to
> release in 2006 alongside Sony's PlayStation 3. Microsoft will release the
> successor to Xbox in 2005. And by the way, if there is still any doubt
> about
> this happening, now's the time to put it to rest. I've seen some holiday
> 2005 plans from publishers and several of them have major Xbox 2 titles
> scheduled for next November. I could name specific franchises and brand
> new
> IPs. It's really happening. And from the looks of it, there are going to
> be
> some pretty impressive launch titles."
>
>
> so that's almost confirmed. Xbox 2 in 2005, Nintendo Revolution (their
> next console) in 2006. nothing new, but nice to have things solidifing,
> at
> least somewhat.
>
> as far as ATI graphics, we could now assume that Xbox 2 is going to have
> R500 or R5XX graphics and that Nintendo Revolution will most likely have
> somewhat more advance graphics, maybe of R600 calibur. that is not to say
> that Revolution is getting an R600. it is likely to be something custom to
> Nintendo, but probably roughly on par with R600, more or less, and
> therefore
> probably more powerful than Xbox 2, just going on timetable alone.
>
>
>
>

quote:

---

> Once a new console has a year's worth of solid titles under its belt,
> backwards compatibility is a practically non-issue. Take a straw poll of
> PS2 owners and you'd be hard pressed to find a single one who has played a
> PSX game on his machine any time in the last three years.

quote:

---

> Wonder how the new nintendo will stack up to PS3 and Xbox2. Gamecube was a
> flop but mabye with a way different look and a better system nintendo

quote:

---

> be back in the race.
>

quote:

---

>
> "Ice Wipe Inc." <birdworm12@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:_qimd.37858$K7.10093@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> But it will not be a 4 year lifespan. They will still continue to make
> games for probably 2-3 years after that.
>

quote:

---

> I actually believe with the increases in technology in recent years that
> after 4 years the box is getting long in the tooth & ready for an upgrade.
> Yes people will buy Xbox 2! Innovation drives the gaming marketplace.
>
> "Beck" <my_bulkmail@REMOVEbtopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:cncihl$7e5$1@titan.btinternet.com...
>
>
>

quote:

---

>I actually believe with the increases in technology in recent years that
>after 4 years the box is getting long in the tooth & ready for an upgrade.
>Yes people will buy Xbox 2! Innovation drives the gaming marketplace.
>
> "Beck" <my_bulkmail@REMOVEbtopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:cncihl$7e5$1@titan.btinternet.com...
>
>
>