[TacticalS! runs for cover!]
When are you boys getting an XBox 360?
-
:FI:TacticalS!
- Post Maniac General
- Posts: 2513
- Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 10:05 pm
- Location: Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada
When are you boys getting an XBox 360?
July 11, 2006 - Only one year after Call of Duty 2 released for Xbox 360 and PC, World War 2 shooter fans will get yet another chance to dive into the action with a console-only sequel. Currently being developed by Treyarch, Call of Duty 3 is scheduled for a fall 2006 release on Xbox 360, PS3, Nintendo Wii, Xbox, and PS2. That's right, no PC version this year. Activision wasn't ready to discuss PC plans either, so we're still in the dark. We're told every version will be feature identical in terms of gameplay, though graphical differences will exist. With only a year separating CoD3 and CoD2, there are still a number of changes to the frantic action sequences the Call of Duty series has become known for.
[TacticalS! runs for cover!]
[TacticalS! runs for cover!]
-
:FI:Sneaky_Russian
- Post Maniac General
- Posts: 3118
- Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 4:02 am
- Location: London SE. Untied Kingdom
- Contact:
-
:FI:Falcon
- Full Metal Ferret
- Posts: 5572
- Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 6:32 am
- Location: New Orleans
- Contact:
...
I'll get a flippin X-Box when you can pry my cold dead hands from my PC!
Get'em men!
I'll get a flippin X-Box when you can pry my cold dead hands from my PC!
Get'em men!
"He who warned, uh, the British that they weren't gonna be takin' away our arms, uh, by ringing those bells, and um, makin' sure as he's riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed."
- The history of Paul Revere's midnight ride, by Sarah Palin.
-
:FI:Macca
- The North Pole
- Posts: 3012
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 10:55 am
- Location: Solar System
- Contact:
Re: When are you boys getting an XBox 360?
NEVER 
Or I will follow Sneaky's way.
But at the time XBox will be cheap piece of junk , just like today's PCs;)
S!
Mac( I do not fancy consoles)ca
Or I will follow Sneaky's way.
But at the time XBox will be cheap piece of junk , just like today's PCs;)
S!
Mac( I do not fancy consoles)ca
-
:FI:Genosse
- Post Maniac General
- Posts: 4562
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 6:26 pm
- Location: Neuss, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
- Contact:
Re: When are you boys getting an XBox 360?
I second that, Tactical ... me hates all these consoles ...:FI:Macca wrote:NEVER
Or I will follow Sneaky's way.
But at the time XBox will be cheap piece of junk , just like today's PCs;)
S!
Mac( I do not fancy consoles)ca
Nunc est bibendum - Let's start to drink!
-
:FI:TacticalS!
- Post Maniac General
- Posts: 2513
- Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 10:05 pm
- Location: Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada
Loved the responses folks! 
I was only half kiddin' though. I wonder if this is a sign of things to come? I mean such a successful series as this leaving the PC arena, at least for the next release, is rather unnerving even for a sell out like me. Of course while sales have been great on the PC, they cannot compare to the console market. I think also companies want to tap into these paid addons, which are probably more secure on a console (though a small percentage is hacked nonetheless).
Just as long as I can play my upcoming Medieval 2 (Total War) on my PC (plus IL-2 of course!) I will be a happy camper. I did fly a WW2 fighter game on the Xbox 360 the other day (Blazing Angels), and while it was complete arcade nonsense the atmosphere was fantastic! If only a certain sterile Russian chap would spice up his flight sim.
Then there was a certain RTS (Battle for Middle Earth 2) that my son played on the console the week before that actually wasn't half bad. An RTS that works on a console? 
TS!
I was only half kiddin' though. I wonder if this is a sign of things to come? I mean such a successful series as this leaving the PC arena, at least for the next release, is rather unnerving even for a sell out like me.
Of course while sales have been great on the PC, they cannot compare to the console market. I think also companies want to tap into these paid addons, which are probably more secure on a console (though a small percentage is hacked nonetheless).Just as long as I can play my upcoming Medieval 2 (Total War) on my PC (plus IL-2 of course!) I will be a happy camper. I did fly a WW2 fighter game on the Xbox 360 the other day (Blazing Angels), and while it was complete arcade nonsense the atmosphere was fantastic! If only a certain sterile Russian chap would spice up his flight sim.
Then there was a certain RTS (Battle for Middle Earth 2) that my son played on the console the week before that actually wasn't half bad. An RTS that works on a console? TS!
-
:FI:Sneaky_Russian
- Post Maniac General
- Posts: 3118
- Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 4:02 am
- Location: London SE. Untied Kingdom
- Contact:
Moog puts his ranting cap on...
CoD2 was a clear indication of the malaise affecting computer game franchises these days... chiefly that the early title(s) in a good series struck gold in terms of gameplay and (at the time) graphics but the developers then got so pent up trying to work the franchise across several platforms that they invariably neglected the game's core competency in favour of unit sales. The publishers are likewise resposible.
CoD2 was nothing more than a console game, even on the PC. Good riddance to CoD3, I'm glad that it'll lurk solely in the XBox domain.
Take the Battlefield series as another example... BF1942 was ahead of its time in terms of multiplayer scope. Unfortunately it demanded a very high-powered PC and by the time most punters possessed a rig decent enough to run the game, the genre had moved on. The bugs associated with early incarnations of BF1942 were due largely to its ambitious scale and not necessarily to a rushed development cycle as is typically the case these days.
BF:Vietnam and BF2 improved on the original title only by 'borrowing' the best features from the two most popular third-party BF1942 mods whilst adding whatever eye candy the latest and most expensive video cards could churn out. The developer's cross-platform focus divided its resources and led to a PC game which is still bug-ridden up to the latest patch. Payware add-ons simply compound compatibility issues and increase economic pressures for the end-user. And these are not strictly content booster packs; each of the three add-ons released thus far for BF2 has been little more than a thinly veiled attempt on the developer's part to address problems which should have been solved before the game ever hit the shelves.
There's a good reason behind the fact that Counterstrike, Medal of Honor, and Call of Duty remain the most popular multiplayer FPS's years after their original release dates... gameplay!!! These games work as they're supposed to, have a large third-party mod community supported by the games' developers, and stand head and shoulders above their better-looking, newer FPS counterparts.
CoD3 isn't a game, it's just another marketing opportunity in a now-homogenised gaming franchise. Of course any developer with business acumen will exploit the advantages of an initial success, but there is a wide gulf between taking advantage of, and building upon, success. One leads to progress, improvement, and reward for player and developer alike; different AND better. The other causes wallet-fatigue and frustration; different, worse.
Infinity Ward didn't even release mod tools for CoD2, not that the community should have to fix the mistakes of the developer. At the very least they would have been able to keep track of the natural gaming trends of those people who were playing their games. IW could have pursuaded their publishers, with the added weight of black-and-white statistics to back them up, that they were going to deliver a product which would not merely sell more units than its predecessor but would exceed commercial expectations because they had heeded the wants and needs of the market, instead of simply imposing wants and needs on them in the form of a console-only release.
Activision took CoD3 away from IW and put it in the hands of Treyarch who had previously developed CoD2:Big Red One for XBox. That is symptomatic of a publisher cutting its losses and consolidating. The console community is significantly less vociferous than its PC web-bretheren and is far more easily disposed to forking out money on a game which they will digest (happily or otherwise) silently. When a PC developer drops the ball, they're the first ones to hear about it on web forums and via reduced sales on future titles. Console users have a different mentality, a sort of 'out of the box', take it or leave it, vibe... meaning that ANY console product with sufficient marketing will achieve at least minimum sales figures.
Perhaps this PC/console schism is precisely what CoD, what the WWII FPS in general, needs. Hopefully IW or another potentially decent company will apply their expertise and experience to future titles without the overbearing pressures imposed upon them by global multi-platform publishers. Obviously it's a catch-22 situation but there will ALWAYS be that addictive and rewarding feature of any great game which bubbles away underneath the fancy bells and whistles, the HD/Widescreen/SVGA/VGA/text graphics, and once again that feature is gameplay. Doesn't matter if the game's an RPG, a Flight Sim, Action, Strategy, whatever. The best developers focus on gameplay and let the other bits complement it. They do not build a game around the latest version of Direct X fogging, or some physics card feature which won't be properly implmented for another few years.
The best developers give the publishers what they want simply because they give the players what they want. The worst developers fail to give the players what they want because they give the publishers what they want. The blame doesn't fall in any one place and there are huge market forces at play but as long as computer game fans chug down sub-standard games without protesting economically, the general standard is gonna get worse and worse, and before long we'll be seeing Oleg Maddox developing a futuristic space action shooter for FoxXboXMicroCokeMcConsole.
Ooh, a digital revolution! Imagine that: the virtual proletariat brandishing chainsaws and BFG9000s in the pentagonal office of Bill Gates...
CoD2 was nothing more than a console game, even on the PC. Good riddance to CoD3, I'm glad that it'll lurk solely in the XBox domain.
Take the Battlefield series as another example... BF1942 was ahead of its time in terms of multiplayer scope. Unfortunately it demanded a very high-powered PC and by the time most punters possessed a rig decent enough to run the game, the genre had moved on. The bugs associated with early incarnations of BF1942 were due largely to its ambitious scale and not necessarily to a rushed development cycle as is typically the case these days.
BF:Vietnam and BF2 improved on the original title only by 'borrowing' the best features from the two most popular third-party BF1942 mods whilst adding whatever eye candy the latest and most expensive video cards could churn out. The developer's cross-platform focus divided its resources and led to a PC game which is still bug-ridden up to the latest patch. Payware add-ons simply compound compatibility issues and increase economic pressures for the end-user. And these are not strictly content booster packs; each of the three add-ons released thus far for BF2 has been little more than a thinly veiled attempt on the developer's part to address problems which should have been solved before the game ever hit the shelves.
There's a good reason behind the fact that Counterstrike, Medal of Honor, and Call of Duty remain the most popular multiplayer FPS's years after their original release dates... gameplay!!! These games work as they're supposed to, have a large third-party mod community supported by the games' developers, and stand head and shoulders above their better-looking, newer FPS counterparts.
CoD3 isn't a game, it's just another marketing opportunity in a now-homogenised gaming franchise. Of course any developer with business acumen will exploit the advantages of an initial success, but there is a wide gulf between taking advantage of, and building upon, success. One leads to progress, improvement, and reward for player and developer alike; different AND better. The other causes wallet-fatigue and frustration; different, worse.
Infinity Ward didn't even release mod tools for CoD2, not that the community should have to fix the mistakes of the developer. At the very least they would have been able to keep track of the natural gaming trends of those people who were playing their games. IW could have pursuaded their publishers, with the added weight of black-and-white statistics to back them up, that they were going to deliver a product which would not merely sell more units than its predecessor but would exceed commercial expectations because they had heeded the wants and needs of the market, instead of simply imposing wants and needs on them in the form of a console-only release.
Activision took CoD3 away from IW and put it in the hands of Treyarch who had previously developed CoD2:Big Red One for XBox. That is symptomatic of a publisher cutting its losses and consolidating. The console community is significantly less vociferous than its PC web-bretheren and is far more easily disposed to forking out money on a game which they will digest (happily or otherwise) silently. When a PC developer drops the ball, they're the first ones to hear about it on web forums and via reduced sales on future titles. Console users have a different mentality, a sort of 'out of the box', take it or leave it, vibe... meaning that ANY console product with sufficient marketing will achieve at least minimum sales figures.
Perhaps this PC/console schism is precisely what CoD, what the WWII FPS in general, needs. Hopefully IW or another potentially decent company will apply their expertise and experience to future titles without the overbearing pressures imposed upon them by global multi-platform publishers. Obviously it's a catch-22 situation but there will ALWAYS be that addictive and rewarding feature of any great game which bubbles away underneath the fancy bells and whistles, the HD/Widescreen/SVGA/VGA/text graphics, and once again that feature is gameplay. Doesn't matter if the game's an RPG, a Flight Sim, Action, Strategy, whatever. The best developers focus on gameplay and let the other bits complement it. They do not build a game around the latest version of Direct X fogging, or some physics card feature which won't be properly implmented for another few years.
The best developers give the publishers what they want simply because they give the players what they want. The worst developers fail to give the players what they want because they give the publishers what they want. The blame doesn't fall in any one place and there are huge market forces at play but as long as computer game fans chug down sub-standard games without protesting economically, the general standard is gonna get worse and worse, and before long we'll be seeing Oleg Maddox developing a futuristic space action shooter for FoxXboXMicroCokeMcConsole.
Ooh, a digital revolution! Imagine that: the virtual proletariat brandishing chainsaws and BFG9000s in the pentagonal office of Bill Gates...
"Can that thing fire?"
Loopy Girdlekisser...
Loopy Girdlekisser...
-
:FI:TacticalS!
- Post Maniac General
- Posts: 2513
- Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 10:05 pm
- Location: Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada
Enjoyed your post Moog!
Many of the comments are sadly applicable to the gaming industry in general. Seems like the ONLY issue is profit. Of course making money is important to any business, but there was a time when innovation, imagination, pride, quality, and customer service was worth more than requiring folks to pay for silly addons, or tolerate patches (if you're lucky to have any) to fix shoddy work.
The reality is only a few decent games are released each year, only to be copied by countless other publishers until someone makes the next interesting title. FPS, especially WW2, has become a cesspool of the same stuff without anything interesting. The Call of Duty series has at least done it in a cinematic way.
If money becomes the ONLY thing that interests the major publishers the PC gaming world will continue to grow smaller.
TS!
Many of the comments are sadly applicable to the gaming industry in general. Seems like the ONLY issue is profit. Of course making money is important to any business, but there was a time when innovation, imagination, pride, quality, and customer service was worth more than requiring folks to pay for silly addons, or tolerate patches (if you're lucky to have any) to fix shoddy work.
The reality is only a few decent games are released each year, only to be copied by countless other publishers until someone makes the next interesting title. FPS, especially WW2, has become a cesspool of the same stuff without anything interesting. The Call of Duty series has at least done it in a cinematic way.
If money becomes the ONLY thing that interests the major publishers the PC gaming world will continue to grow smaller.
TS!
CoD single player is great fun and especially suited to console conversion... my little brothers have an XBox 360 and I've played a few action/arcade games on it, madness! Superb graphics and good entertainment, but I'm not a console person. Different tool for a different job and all that.
Take series such as Grand Theft Auto or Pro Evolution Soccer... I've put in many many many many hours on those two on both PC and their various console conversions, but the majority weighs heavily on the console side, by virtue of the fact that these types of game lend themselves to that platform. Especially the multiplayer aspect of the later PES games... you simply cannot get that on a PC. Have a few mates over for a few beers and play some PES. Savage.
Now take a game such as Battlefield 2... while still buggy, it 'works well' on the PC format, just like BF2:Modern Combat, which is essentially a different game, sticks to its console advantages and has much more of an action/arcade feel. As long as the battle-lines are clearly drawn like this, I'm happy enough. Still, it'd be nice to pay one price for one game and have that game work perfectly right out of the box, eh? Free content add-ons are fine (Red Orchestra being a perfect case in point) but a game should be a once-off investment, not a feckin' mortgage!!!
Take series such as Grand Theft Auto or Pro Evolution Soccer... I've put in many many many many hours on those two on both PC and their various console conversions, but the majority weighs heavily on the console side, by virtue of the fact that these types of game lend themselves to that platform. Especially the multiplayer aspect of the later PES games... you simply cannot get that on a PC. Have a few mates over for a few beers and play some PES. Savage.
Now take a game such as Battlefield 2... while still buggy, it 'works well' on the PC format, just like BF2:Modern Combat, which is essentially a different game, sticks to its console advantages and has much more of an action/arcade feel. As long as the battle-lines are clearly drawn like this, I'm happy enough. Still, it'd be nice to pay one price for one game and have that game work perfectly right out of the box, eh? Free content add-ons are fine (Red Orchestra being a perfect case in point) but a game should be a once-off investment, not a feckin' mortgage!!!
"Can that thing fire?"
Loopy Girdlekisser...
Loopy Girdlekisser...
-
:FI:TacticalS!
- Post Maniac General
- Posts: 2513
- Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 10:05 pm
- Location: Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada
Convenience is such a joy when it comes to console gaming. And by the way I game a whole lot more on my PC then my kids' Xbox 360. Anyway being able to throw a disc into the Box and just play it without tweaking is great! Now with the age of HDTV console gaming has really received a boost in the graphical department. As a strategy gamer I wonder when (not if) I will be using a wireless keyboard and mouse with the Xbox 360 to play a RTS? With online play it will be appealing to someone like me who seldom messes beyond the vanilla version of games. 
When did your brothers get the Xbox 360 mate? Do they have a HDTV to go with it? What games? Are they connected online?
TS!
When did your brothers get the Xbox 360 mate? Do they have a HDTV to go with it? What games? Are they connected online?
TS!