Got one question here..?

[Mr.Person]

<div style='font: 14pt Modern; text-align: left; '>Why is everyone thinking the GCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGC is more likely to recieve a delay past this year than the Xbox??


Really, it should be fairly obvious to anyone that the GCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGC parts started being manufactured this January, while the X-box parts started being manufactured around March. The GCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGC parts are being manufactured by NEC+IBM, verse Microsoft on the other end.(so no saying Nintendo is undermanned vs Microsoft in manufacturing power). Using this knowledge, shouldn't it be more likely that the X-box will be delayed rather than the GCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGC?

Also, with their dev kits being shipped around roughly the same time, with Nintendo having a slight lead, you can't say the X-box is going to have more truly *launch-worthy* product available earlier than Nintendo. I mean Nintendo can launch their system just fine, with 5 Nintendo games, and that would probably be 3 or 4 killer apps out at release, and enough Nintendo nuts would buy it. Really, Nintendo doesn't have to worry about software pedigree since their teams are much more experienced than most of what Microsoft has working on the X-box, and most Nintendo games do kick ass.

Seriously, don't mean to sound like a Nintendo nut or anything, but from what I've seen so far, the *early* spaceworld demo's Nintendo showed of their games seem to still be holding up against all the stuff Microsoft showed for the X-Box. That's kind of sad, if you are in Microsoft's shoes, that 6 month old demo's can still hold up to your efforts for a supposedly *superior* console in regards to specs.</div>

[Nemissa]

<div style='font: 9pt system, Modern; text-align: left; '>What the fuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuck isisisisisisis upupupupupupupupup withwithwithwithwithwith allallallallallallallallallallallallall thisthisthisthisthisthisthis repetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetitionrepetition thatthatthatthatthat youyouyouyouyouyouyouyouyouyou peoplepeoplepeoplepeoplepeople keepkeepkeepkeepkeepkeepkeepkeepkeep doingdoingdoing???????? ????????? ????????</div>

[El Kabong]

<div style='font: 12pt Arial, Modern; text-align: left; '>hehe, yeah... it's annoying...</div>

[Mr.Person]

<div style='font: 14pt Modern; text-align: left; '>Erm.., the GCGCGCGCGCGCGCGGC bit isn't supposed to be there, I swear I didn't type that in. Sine or someone with authority.., can you fix it up and put in "GC" rather than that multiple GC thing.</div>

[Don]

<div style='font: 12pt Modern; text-align: left; '>And MS hasn't said anything about delays yet. It's kind of simple.

The first party strength has very little to do with the success of the system. I'd say Sega is at least the 2nd strongest 1st party developer and their system has a history of dying horribly (well, from the Saturn and up era, anyway). Basically, if you got enough games for a system, you can sell the system, and if you got enough systems sold, people will buy your game. That's essentially how Sony manages to sell stuff like Legend of Dragoon. Consider Nintendo's traditionally taken a 'quality over quantity' approach to mask their inability to mass produce games (not necessarily by themselves), whereas Microsoft sort of taken Sony's approach of signing with every 3rd party developer they can out there, I'd say MS is in a much better position versus the Gamecube.</div>

[Gilder]

<div style='font: 12pt Modern; text-align: left; '>The reason is, Nintendo is extremely quiet on the console, everything is done, but a lot of things seam to be confidential, no first or Second Party Companies are commenting on any of the games in development, and it seams only the very obscure 3rd Party companies are commenting on games at all. So the press literally knows little to nothing about about Gamecube Software and their knowledge of Hardware is still limited as Nintendo has not commented on some features. Microsoft on the other hand is showing absolutly everything for their console, we know all the games and we know everything about the hardware, as does the press, they are not quiet. Basicly just how the press is anticipating the situation with the information presant</div>

[Mr.Person]

<div style='font: 14pt Modern; text-align: left; '>MS hasn't been saying anything, but there's been some *rumors*(uncredited), that the X-box could be facing a delay. Of course MS won't be saying anything, they released doctored pics to make Amped look better than it was after all. Microsoft is trying to make sure everything around their system is positive, extremely positive, and extremely *COOL*. Heck, even their affilate fan sites aren't allowed to post *any* article which Microsoft deem's "bad". MS won't let word get out of a delay until the last second. Besides, signing every 3rd party out there still won't get you that killer app game, that everyone will want to buy with their system(Sony was an exception, but they had too much hype going in, that if you didn't get caught up, I wish I were you--->owns a PS2, and only got ZOE so far).

The reason Sony won was they totally trashed Nintendo on every level. All Nintendo had going for them was Nintendo+Rare, and there is no need to go any further into this part of the arguement, as it's something we all know and understand.

Nintendo also isn't Sega, in that they know how to market and sell a system for the most part. They made some profit off the N64, they have a niche market, which will swear up and down by their systems, and only buy them. Heck, I've met some Nintendo fans who say, "MGS is the worst game I ever played, and if it were only made by Nintendo it would have been good".(plz note I think MGS is great). That makes most other console fans look rather mellow in comparision</div>

[Mr.Person]

<div style='font: 14pt Modern; text-align: left; '>I used spellcheck *rofl*.</div>

[Eric]

<div style='font: 11pt Modern; text-align: left; '>Who are you and what the hell have you done with Seeker?!</div>

[Don]

<div style='font: 12pt Modern; text-align: left; '>All the million sellers for N64 did not help it overcome the Playstation. There was never a title on PS that you just 'have to get'. If we go by sales I think Tony Hawk probably outsold (or at least it close to) MGS or anything else. Killer aps will have you jump start by getting the 2-3 million people who bought the system just for that game, but you need more than 2-3 million systems sold to win. This is even more pronounced in the NA market where not even killer aps can just sell 3 million like Final Fantasy/Dragon Quest in Japan. There just isn't enough people who'd buy a system just for that one killer aps to make a system survive like that.

And the fact still remains that GC is delayed, while XBox hasn't announced any delays.</div>

[Mr.Person]

<div style='font: 14pt Modern; text-align: left; '>FF was a huge killer app for Sony. It helped convince more developers in Japan to put their AAA list titles for it, or keep them there. If it had come out for the Saturn instead, we would be playing RE2 and MGS on it, and since Tony Hawk was released later on, the main version of the game would probably be on the Saturn too. Square bringing FF to the PSX was the day Sony won the war, they brought soo much mind-share with them, that in fact, Square decided the last console war. The pre-rendered graphics behind the FF games totally blew out anything the N64 had, and since America was still kind of graphic intensive back then, it more than helped Sony win the crucial 1997 holiday season.

Besides just because a delay isn't announced doesn't mean it's coming. Microsoft is very experienced at playing the game, rather slick in the way they play. Also, Microsoft did in fact delay the system's launch in Europe to next year. Also, how many times they delayed certain Window's releases? :).</div>

[Don]

<div style='font: 12pt Modern; text-align: left; '>The Japanese market is pretty strange, they've some insane devotion to RPGs. I mean you can probably make up an imaginery system and if you get Enix to say Dragon Quest 8 is coming out on that, people'll buy your system just waiting for the game! And remember, though FF7 sold close to 3 million, that's still only 3 million people who went out and got a PSX for that. I think Square's influence is a bit overestimated. Look at the Wonderswan Color. Square's presence didn't really make it viable versus the Gameboy (or GBA).

And how do you explain Sony's success in America, where Square certainly does not exert this kind of influence? Not to say they're not successful, but certainly company like EA pumping out sports clones sold a bit more than the Square's RPGs on PSX. Most of the big developers are multiplatform, and I don't see how Square's decision to develop for PSX will make the small developer suddenly want to develop for PSX. It's certainly not working for the WonderSwan Color. Another example would be Capcom's relatively large # of titles on the Dreamcast certainly didn't bring more 3rd party support in.

And I think you'd be hardpressed to beat Nintendo's killer apps. Their homepage claims '126 games sold more than a million'. That's got to be a lot of killer apps. It seems like every game Nintendo released on N64 sold a million, but it didn't change the outcome of N64 vs PSX.</div>

[Mr.Person]

<div style='font: 14pt Modern; text-align: left; '>Anyway, besides if you are measuring a killer app by how much a title sells, then that means games like FF,MGS,the original RE, etc, which were exclusive to the PS for a long time were killer apps, since they sold a bucket-wad. Double standards are always a no-no :). That list by Nintendo probably was across all consoles. If they had 126 games selling a million copies on the N64, they WOULD HAVE won the console war.


To explain the wonderswan situation, Square's influence is much less now, than it was at the start of the PSX. Sincerely, releasing that binge of FF games in the psx era, has resulted in lower sales for each of them, for the most part. Going all out in all the genre's has also hurt Square, as each game released started to get less individual care. Square is no longer synomymous with quality, you can recieve a *shit* product from them sometimes.

Anyway, Nintendo's loss can also be credited to lingering damage due to Sega's campaigns insulting them, back in the 16-bit days, and during the release of the 64. They further helped solidify Nintendo's kiddy image, and helped it "carry over". Funny how Sega was a contributor to the success of Sony in more ways than one(creating a mess of a console with next to no 3d capabilities to speak of was their first blunder to let Sony in).

EA, well I knew you were going to bring that card up.., but once again look at the 16-bit era. The Nintendo and Sega battle was fought to a stand still, with the big edge for Sega being *blood* in Mortal Kombat, and some smooth marketing. EA supported the Sega Genesis almost exclusively, and they were good enough to be a big factor in keeping them in a tie with Nintendo, only because if you wanted vintage EA sports title's you had to buy them on the Genesis. However, come the next-generation, you could get *vintage* EA games on other systems too, which pretty much eliminated any killer app edge EA had.</div>

[SineSwiper]

<div style='font: 11pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light", Modern; text-align: left; '>Grrr...what the hell is causing that problem?</div>

[SineSwiper]

<div style='font: 11pt "EngraversGothic BT", "Copperplate Gothic Light", Modern; text-align: left; '>Found it. Very bizzare regular expression bug.</div>

[Gilder]

<div style='font: 12pt Modern; text-align: left; '>*double-Kicks Eric in the sternum and face*</div>

[Corak]

<div style='font: 12pt Modern; text-align: left; '>I think the Wonderswan situation has more to do with that it wasn't really original content. I think they are as strong a pull as they have ever been.</div>