Bond, forget about it. Gekko just doesn't get that console online gaming isn't PC online gaming. They are 2 completely different animals. He wants console online gaming to be exactly like PC online gaming, and it never will be, nor does it strive to be.

And by the way, Halo is a console game, not a PC game. Thats why its on a console and its controls were designed specifically for a console and a controller. Just because it is a FPS, that doesn't make it a PC game.

Actually they can be. Sega was smart enough to release a keyboard a mouse.

And Halo is a PC game. Started development for PC (Mac to be specific :p), levels were designed for PC, etc. It's a PC game on a console, just like Unreal Championship. And not all FPS are PC games, look at Bond, TimeSplitters, etc.

I guess if you play PC FPS enough you notice the changes. The way the game plays, the way the levels are designed, etc.

Well, if Halo is a PC game, then it made a SEAMLESS transition to console gaming.

I couldn't imagine it on a PC. It would be too fast, like Quake, and loose all of its realism. What made Halo great was that it WASN'T Unreal or Quake. It was a mix of quick twitch blast 'em action and tactical strategy, with more of an emphasis on tactical strategy. If you wanted to just rush in an blast away, you'd be dead pretty quickly because you weren't as fast as lightning, especially on the harder levels. In this way it was completely a console FPS.

And forget about the damn keyboard and mouse. Ya ain't getting it any time soon. Lets see how they work the headset and cobtroller online before we make unrealistic judgements on something you haven't even experienced yet. Just because it doesn't have a keyboard and mouse, it doesn't mean it won't be good. It means it will be a lot more accessible to people, and thats the only real judgement we can make on it right now.

Just because its different, it doen't mean its automatically bad.

Many PC games have speed governers, so if it's meant to be more tactical, they can slow it down. Still, aiming doesn't slow down. It's much more realistic. And multiplayer is supposed to be fast like Quake and Unreal. It's what deathmatch is.

As for the keyboard and mouse, they are the exact reason why these FPS took off on PC before console. They were designed for it. I've played Halo with the controller, I've played DC games with the controller, and they all suck. No need to wait on that. And the headset, played CS with em. Guess what? They suck too. If someone could actually simulate phone-quality sound using those, they would be nice, but they can't, or haven't yet. And even so, they are only good in certain games, and only in-game. They should be used with a keyboard, not instead of. These headsets are far from a new idea, and they have been avaliable and supported by PCs for years. It never really caught on... and neither did they with DC. Take the hint, they suck major ass.

The keyboard and mouse don't make it less accesible to people. Do what DC did with UT, Q3A, and Outtrigger, design it for a controller, but add support for the keyboard and mouse.

Another thing on the headset, which i hope isn't true, is that Microsoft is being very restrictive with Xbox Live. Only games that support the Live features will be allowed to go online, and that means developers are FORCED to add support for the headset, and for their stat tracking and all that crap. Play by the rules or don't play, exactly the attitude that hurt Nintendo. And developers hate that, so if it's true, it will be the downfall of Xbox Live.

Nintendo and Sony's approach is much smarter, although won't allow the same features... err... I'm not going to go off topic too much.

I think Sony and Nintendo's plans are FAR more stupid. For one reason. No server restrictions.

By allowing developers and publishers to set up their own online gaming systems, they will make it MUCH more complicated and MUCH more expensive.

XBox Live: $50 for a complete start up kit, including head set and one year of online play. $9.95 per year after that, play as much as you want of any XBox online game.

Nintendo and PS2: Game at your own risk. Each developer or publisher will have their own subsciption charges. You may find yourself spending over $50 a month for the right to play a couple great online games. Now for someone that owns 8 DVD players, price may not be an object, but in the real world it is. Cost is prohibitive, especially when you add gaming subscription costs on top of you standard internet connection. What will this mean to Sony's and PS2's online games? It means that their customers will most likely play only one online game at a time to avoid piling up the fees. This is not good for business.

Developers will put up with a slightly more difficult process if they think that thier game will sell better. Bottom line.

As for accessiblity... If the Dreamcast online was so bloody accessible to the public, why did most of the owners not use it and why is it basically dead? Answer: Most console gamers don't want to deal with a keyboard and mouse, thats why controllers were invented. If the keyboard and mouse system were ideal for everyone, they there wouldn't be controllers. Saying that most gamers find keyboards and mice more acceptable that controllers is like saying most wrestling fans would rather see Mitsuharu Misawa vs. Toshiaki Kawada and not Nash vs. Hogan. While keyboards and Misawa/Kawada may be better for the hardcore, console controllers and Nash/Hogan will always rule the masses. (Thats my obscure reference for the day)

Now would I like to see a keyboard and a mouse? Sure, why the hell not? I'd love to play Mechwarrior on the XBox (virtually impossible without a mouse/keyboard setup), but once again... NO ONE HAS PLAYED XBOX LIVE YET. AN OPINION MADE ABOUT HOW GOOD IT IS IS INVALID, NOT APPLICABLE, UNEDUCATED AND IGNORANT.

Could it suck? Of course it could. It could revolutionize online console gaming also, as could Nintendo and PS2 online. We don't know yet because they haven't launched.

No server restrictions is a damn good thing. It allows developers to make games how they want them, not how Microsoft does. Look at PSO, if Sonic Team hadn't constantly updated the servers throughout the games life, the cheating would get so bad the game becomes unplayable. They haven't been working on them lately due to GC going on beta tests, but trust me, PSO players are quitting left and right until the new games. And guess what? It'll be a major problem with Xbox PSO.

And I might've read it incorrectly, but it was $50 for Xbox starter kit and one year of service, $9.95 per month after that, not year. And for most games, they will likely be free. Sega never imposed a single charge until PSOv2, and that's because MMORPGs require tons of updates and maintenance. Games like NFL 2K2, just setup and leave it.

And Xbox is far from appealing to the casual gamer. $50 just to try playing online? Not to mention the broadband issue. Microsoft had a poll, and 50% of people who visit Xbox.com have Broadband. Now most people who visit there will be fans, not casual gamers, and most will be spending more time online, where broadband is reasonable. But only half of those people actually have broadband, and even less casual gamers will because it's twice the cost each and every month. DC had the hardcore gamers, it didn't help. PS2, Gamecube, and Xbox will all have the hardcore gamers, too bad it doesn't mean anything. They all need to try to get the casual gamers, because that's what will make the difference.

DC died because too many people believed Sony and didn't buy it. It was by far the best console of this generation. And the keyboard/mouse setup isn't for everyone, most people won't take the time to learn it if they are used to a controller. But the fact that MS isn't making it avaliable is the problem. DC fans played with controller all the time, but if they wanted, they could buy a keyboard and mouse.

And no one has played Xbox Live yet, well, none of us. Still, people play Xbox multiplayer so we can comment on that, and people have used headsets before, so we can comment on that. And since I've done both, it is educated, valid, and pllicable to comment on those features.

Gekko, have you played with MS's headset?

No.

Do you know for a fact how XBox online will play?

No.

Your opinion about something that hasn't even happened yet is NOT valid. Evaluating XBox Live using products not applicable to the XBox is rediculous. Its like me saying I don't like the Gamecube controller because I played with the PS2 controller and I didn't like it.

Just wait until it comes out, is that so hard?

As for the keyboards, you made my point for me. Casual gamers, who make up the vast majority, do not want to "learn" to use a keyboard with games. They also do not put hours upon hours straight into games. They play when they're bored and have nothing else to do, or when they have some friends over. If MS were to release a keyboard for the XBox, developers would design games exclusively for the keyboard because its easier and you can do more, but then you are alienating a lot of casual gamers. Typing of the Dead was a great game, but did it sell well? No. Why? You had to use a keyboard.

MS is trying to avoid this issue by making the developers design games using the controller. This is smart because their games will appeal to a larger audience.

No, I haven't played with Microsoft's headset, but that's like telling me the idea behind telephones changes if I use a Sony or Panasonic phone. A headset is a headset, there is nothing unique about Microsoft's. And I have talked with people who have used the headset, and they too have confirmed it is very hard to understand people talking on it.

Since when have developers designed games exclusively for the keyboard? Typing of the Dead is the only game I can think of, and that's for obvious reasons. Samba de Amigo doesn't require the maracas, FPS don't require the keyboard and mouse, fishing games don't require the controller, racing games don't require the steering wheel. What makes you think developers would design games exclusively for the keyboard?

And I doubt Microsoft would allow a game through that doesn't use a controller. In the same way they won't allow online games without support for the headset, they don't have to allow games that don't support the controller.

There's never been a problem developing exclusively for peripherals before, there won't be now.

It's actually $49.99 for the Xbox Starter Kit. Which includes a on-year subscription to Xbox Live, the Xbox headset, and some Xbox racing game that I forget the name of. The pricing for each month of Xbox Live after the one-year subscription has run out has not been announced yet to my knowledge. Also the Xbox headset is not just a normal headset. If you watched the Xbox Conference at E3 you would have seen the demonstration of it, which was quite impressive in my opinion. It is a second generation headset, you should really read more about it... quite interesting.

Ok, just watched the confrence again, no headset demo. Care to explain?

And I don't hate the headset thing, just I don't care much for it in normal situations. There should still be a keyboard, cause if I wanna send senor Bond a message telling him I'm ready to kick his ass, I wanna type it out via keyboard, not on-screen keyboard. And Microsoft's idea of an 11vs.11 soccer game is great, cept that that many people talking is too much.

1 on 1 games, the headset is nice. But for others, I wouldn't want it. They still need a keyboard. Even signing up for Xbox Live will be a bitch. Ya, like typing my name and password with the on-screen keyboard sound like fun :rolleyes:

My other concearns with Xbox Live are the security of the network, and developers not having control of servers. Like Sega, they won't have the oppertunity to keep patching the servers for PSO players. It would be much better to kinda have a mix, like Sega connects to their own servers, but your character is tracked via XBL account name. Kinda like D2, characters and account names are different. And then if companies wanted to use Microsoft's stuff, they can. You know, allow them to choose? Also allow them to choose whether they want to support the headset or not.

And Microsoft's military-grade security, uh huh. Uh huh, if they were actually that good, they would be using theiur technology on Windows, but that has more loopholes than any other product on the market. And Microsoft has gotten hacked before, they stole the code for Windows before, hehe.

So I believe MS is the ONLY console maker BRAGGING about their online security, so how great do you think the other console's security will be? They'll probably leave that up to the developers and publishers to figure out. Sounds safe to me.

And designing games around peripherals has ALWAYS been a problem. I mean, WOW, Samba De Amigo and SEGA Fishing (whatever the name is) sold like HOT CAKES. Those shooting games built around light guns always tore up the sales charts too.:rolleyes:

You could play those games without the peripheral, sure, but they were made for the peripheral and weren't as fun without them. Trouble is, casual gamers don't care if they need to buy Moraccas that they'll never use on another game. Once again, cost is prohibitive.

MS is not giving you a heyboard to prevent games that will be designed using it. I don't believe I heard Nintendo or Sony were coming out with one either (but I don't know for sure), so I think they are thinking the same thing too. Casual gamers don't want to use a keyboard, they want a controller. Bottom line. Thats why they play almost exclusively on consoles and not PC's, except for may be the occasional game of SNOOD or Minesweeper.

But keyboards have never been that way. Like FPS can be played with the controller, but played much better with the keyboard. It didn't slow sales at all.

And games like Steel Battalion are still being made, being exclusively for the controller and will likely cost the price of a new Xbox, maybe more. Those kind of games aren't meant for casual gamers. And the fishing controller was used 3 times during Sega's life, and a keyboard can be used for every online game.

Sony has plans for one, remember the whole LCD monitor setup they showed before? Nintendo allows them. Remember, Microsoft has their own network, setup their own way. If they don't have chats and the Xbox Live software doesn't support keyboard input, it's useless. Nintendo isn't restricting anything, but MS is.

And guess what? Casual gamers don't have to buy the damn keyboard. MS keeps saying they are making their console for the hardcore gamer, and they are the ones who will buy the keyboard and mouse, not to mention the ones who are online a lot.

MS is making the XBox for the hardcore console gamer, not PC. PC gamers and console gamers are 2 different types of gamers. Because someone is heavy into one, it does not mean that they will be heavy into another.

Myself, I am heavy into both. Shogun: Total War (Warlord Edition of course) is one of my favorite games of all time. Its a PC game. I would not like it on a console even if it had a keyboard. PC games require a different amount of dedication and discipline than console games. For instance, you'll pretty much never see a console users manual that is 200 pages long. The longest console manual I've ever seen was for Wing Commander 3 for the 3DO, and that was a port of a PC game (a GREAT port at that). But the gameplay in that was more console like than PC like.

In my view, online or not, PC gaming and Console gaming should keep as 2 separate entities. If you need to have a keyboard to play the game correctly, than I'd rather see it released as a PC game. But if you can make an indepth title that is fun and easily played with a controller, then bring it to the Box.

Look at PE. Most people would say "Hey, that looks like a PC game.", but it has never even been planned to bve brought to a PC at all. It is being developed exclusively for the XBox.

I think you will be seeing more of that as consoles become more and more powerful. Developers mixing the size and depth of PC games with the gameplay of console games. But make no mistake, they are console games.

Look at all of the FPS games coming to consoles in the near future. This was a genre that has been ruled by the PC world until recently. Now the focus is switching to consoles.

...

What the hell was I talking about?:D

Ya, but hardcore gamers rarely limit themselves to one console. And guess what? A lot of hardcore console gamers play on PC quite a bit, like you said, PC has dominated the FPS genre for years. And they still do.

FPS focus on consoles? Hardly. Unreal Championship is a console version of Unreal Tournament 2003, Halo was ported over, the whole Tom Clancy series (Rainbow Six, Rogue Spear, Ghost Recon, Splinter Cell, Raven Shield) is PC games, Doom III (rumors it might see Xbox) is a PC game, Counter-Strike is a PC game.

FPS dominate on PC thanks to the control setup, and online play. It could do much better on consoles if they released a keyboard and mouse, and gave players the true controls. Sure, I'd rather just see these games stay on PC, but if they wanna port them, at least do it right. And the online gaming aspect, it won't ever dominate in that area, because PCs allow you to host games, configure your own rules, setups, run your own admin software, etc.

Either way, I don't mind seeing Unreal Championship on Xbox. Halo is another story, cause of the long delay. But the rest, by all means, port it. But there are people who might have crappy outdated PCs, and people like me just looking to kick some Bond ass, and we want the keyboard/mouse setup.

And PE, I think it would work better on consoles. Other RPGs, like Diablo II, work so much better on PC.

Lets get this straight: Halo first came out for the Xbox, and is now being ported to the PC. Whether or not it was in development for the PC, it first came out for the Xbox. Doom III will becoming out for the Xbox, it was confirmed a few months ago I believe.