Cell to outpower X-Box 2(NVidia press report)
 

http://www.visualwebcaster.com/event.asp?id=12272


NVDA Morgan Stanley Conference
by: atyguy (36/M/Montreal) 03/03/03 08:25 pm
Msg: 55287 of 55451

Just listened to the webcast. This is a different Jen-Hsun than I have heard on a couple of other occasions.

Focus of the discussion was on non-core business, but he touched on all segments.

When questioned on what he expected from his new FX GPU family, he hesitated and said that he foresees a good year for the "GPU market" with no real reference to the expected success of the FX family specifically. Said that they are going to market 0.15u mainstream versions of FX, as opposed to the "competitor" which is going with 0.15u in the high end and 0.13u in the mainstream. Says it will provide NVDA with more capacity to meet high-volume mainstream demands and calls it a "clever decision" that should benefit NVDA. Admitted his disappointement with 0.13u delays and problems.

With regard to XBox, said the arbitration process has ultimately helped relationship with MSFT, but when asked about XBox2 he was very ambivalent and said that it represented a significant "technology risk" to any company that undertook the challenge.Uncharacteristically lavished praise on Sony's upcoming PS3 and its cell processor, insinuating that it would almost be miraculous to outdo it.

The only issue on which he sounded relatively confident was nForce2.

Lots of hesitation and uncertainty in his demeanor; he cleared his throat more often than Orton ever has, and sounded far less cocky and sure of himself than I've ever heard him.

Power won't be a big issue next gen methinks...it will be all about the games...

I guess it's good to hear that the Cell is intimidating competitors, but I don't see the big deal...

What wardrum will we hear with X-Box 2 when it loses it's "most powerful" console advantage.

If Sony plays it's cards right Microsoft is in for a beating harder than this gen.

sure, XBox fanboys could lose that weapon in stupid little pathetic arguements...but maybe their games will be of higher quality?

Either way, I see definite quality in both Xbox2 and PS3

Thing is... If the X-Box was to launch with the same processing abilities as PS2... you can expect it's sales to be half of what they are now.

hmm...probably, simply because developers would have no reason to make games for the system...but with M$ backing it, it's going to sell a decent amount

Uh oh...

The "My product will be superior to your product" play. Not good.

Har har.. I still remember Sony claim that PS2 will have Toy Story graphics.. I still laugh..

First of all, this is one guy's opinion. Second of all, we have absolutely no facts, this is all based on speculation. So right now it's basically a bunch of nonsense and a fight over nothing.

Also, it is Xbox, damnit!!!

Yes...one guy's opinion. One guy who knows a lot more than all of us about: a) technology in general. b) what we can expect from this Cell technology and what the competition can produce in the future, specifically. I bet he's also representing a lot of people who share his opinion...

you don't know what he knows, therefore you can't state that this is all about nonsense...

oh, and there is no 'fight' of which you speak of...just a statement

Im sure all consoles will be so powerful next gen you wont tell the difference. Well, you may, but its a toss up between super ultra realistic, and mega ultra realistic.

Though I doubt either will be THAT realistic...

*sees all games turn cel-shaded*

Ya know, it could end up like that. Every game on the SNES was cel shaded. Didn't anyone ever notice? :sneaky:

Well, think about it. It probably takes less processing power to execute a cel-shaded game done very well to a realistic game that's mediocre. With all this so-called power we're going to see next gen, wouldn't it be awesome to have a 200 hour cartoon quest?

*hears teh Celda groaners approach him from behind*

Well, being Weaker than Ps3 next generation will be a sin, much like beaing weaker than Ps2 this generation, and Psx last generation. Sony is the only company right now that I can see getting away with weak technology while getting the most units sold.

I dunno though, we can peek into the past to see how graphics effect sales... look at N64 compared to GCN. N64 was leaps ahead of Psx, and it sold well because of that... now GCN is a few steps ahead of Ps2, and it sales like crap... what's next? It falls a step behind and it can only get worse.

As far as M$, I think they will have enough quality titles to reverse it's power issues... Third parties trust M$ for some weird reason, and MS has better first party support than Sony.

The thing is, the curve for graphics will not be as huge as it has been in the past no matter what happens. This generation the weakest console (Ps2) is still damn close to reality... the gap between games looking like real movies is getting smaller and smaller. I expect the next consoles to have a longer shelf life then this generation for that reason.

Re: Cell to outpower X-Box 2(NVidia press report)
 

Ummm Yea but did not Sony say the PS3 was not using a CELL type chip! The whole CELL chip would not work to well in a Console! In other words all the info that came out about a year ago was total crap! A CELL system as used in super computer will just not work in a Console you will never see the type of online speeds to you will need to make it work in 20 years let alone 3.

The Whole CELL based thing came around cuss Sony is going to use a CELL type net work in most of it's TV's DVD's and Other type systems so they can talk to each other. I do happen to think the new IBM CPU in the PS3 will be far better then any thing else your see! But as the Xbox shows you that don't mean a god damn thing the CPU in PC's MAC's and Console's is doing far less work then before, no the race will be all about the GPU (again).

And hell as most will tell you who the hell needs a 64 128 or even a 256 bit! more bit do not always give you more speed.

Re: Cell to outpower X-Box 2(NVidia press report)
 

He did not say that at all!!!! he said some thing like this "He also spoke of the difficulties that he expects Sony to encounter with its next PlayStation console, saying that its Cell processor would be extraordinarily powerful, but difficult to engineer and produce." But as i said in my other post Sonys CEO said that PS3 would not be using a Cell CPU.

I think Sony wanted to talk about Cell and being in the PS3 just to get publicity because anything PS related deserves to be blown out of proportion. I doubt we will see the next console be 1,000 times faster/better then the last console. I dont think the PS2 is 1,000 faster/better then the PS1. Or any console for that matter. I know someone will say this if I don't, so I will. Yes, technology is advancing faster then ever, but I think Sony is blowing some things out of proportion and trying to misinform some people so that they think its something else just for publicity. But I'm not listening to much until I see the official specs and see that whatever ANY company says is true and I can see that it is. blah!

Wasn't it "all about the games", anyway? Isn't that why both Xbox and GameCube are struggling for second place?

Clearly both systems are alot more capable than PS2 (if not just for easier programming), yet, the mainstream populace seems to think "power" isn't a big issue at all. Once again, SCEA rules with an iron fist, and dated hardware. How novel.;)

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

Well, Shadow... it's not all about the Games, it's about timing, pricing, hardware features, and games equally. If you really want to debate with me on this one let me know.

I didn't make myself clear...and people are just too picky on message boards :nono:

In arguements amongst 'fanboys', graphics seems to be the biggest weapon. What I meant is that people will have nothing to argue over next gen other than GAME QUALITY. I'm sure people will find another way to bitch at eachother, but meh

There is no debate. Gamers don't buy games because of hardware features, or timing. Pricing isn't even as important considering most will buy a high-quality game for $45 than a crappy one for $15.

I bought my Xbox for Halo, the promise of XboxLive, and Malice, truthfully. All of which are related to games themselves (more or less the XboxLive title I want is Halo 2, and maybe CVS2, but eh). I didn't buy my Xbox just to buy a seperate remote to play DVD's, and I didn't even buy my PS2 for that. While the DVD features are great (even on the Panasonic Q), media playback is really a SECONDARY function of a console, and will always be that way.

Hell, I bought a GCN for damn-good Nintendo games, and KI3 (which I'll now have to get on Xbox if it resurfaces). True, all three consoles have their own advantages over one another hardwarewise, but think about it- PS2 having a very rough ISA isn't going to stop me from playing Metal Gear Solid 2, or GTA VC. GCN having smaller disc capacity isn't gonna stop me from playing thru Resident Evil 4. And Xbox's weaker texture layering damn-sure isn't gonna stop me from buying Halo 2 or Perfect Dark 2/0.

I dunno how you see it, but that's how I see it- and it's been that way since the beginning of the industry itself. If not, people would've never gotten pre-32 bit consoles, and just spent all their quarters on [insert more advanced arcade machine here].

And that's all I've got to say on that subject.

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

Yes there is, there is very much a debate :)

And, your lil $15 vs $45 thing is't valid because I'm talking about what ships consoles, now what ships games. As far as price-effectiveness goes, i's a HUGE factor in if you would buy a console or not. If Xbox didn't have a built in HD, costed $100 more, and had a $50 memory card, you are saying the game quality of Halo would still make you go out and buy one?

Tell that to consumers in Japan when Ps2 launched... The DVD player has value, and gives both systems an edge over GCN. If you live in a house without a DVD player, and you have no money (in other words, your parents buy al the games) , the system your parents will most easily buy into is the Ps2. For your parents the DVD player maybe the primary function,for you the games may have been, but either way you look at itthe DVD player is a factor in the systems value, and a reason to buy one.

It all depends on the person...

Of course the hardware isn't going to effect you or change your mind when buying a new game... A good game is a good game, period. But, like I said before, timing, priceing, and hardware value DOES effect if you are going to buy a system or Not.

Timing: The most obvious... if DC was released fall of 2001, it the exact same shape it was fall of 99, with the same $200 price tag, you wouldn't buy it... because the hardware is serverely outdated, not because the games are weak. If you would buy it, you must be smokin somthing.

Hardware Value and Priceing: it makes a difference... right now, $$$ for $$$ the most valuable system is winning. You have a Psx ($50) DVD Player ($100)... then that leaves what price for the Ps2 game player? While on the other end you have GCN $150... all games. Then Xbox... $230 for a DVD player and the system.

but the question is... are we argueing about how you personally chose your console, or how america is buying.

Personally, I'm like you, games first, then hardware... but that ain't how the plublic choses. The only people who really matter here are the peeps who buy one, and ONLY one console... what makes them chose that certain one over the others? Well, what advantages does Ps2 have? That the's only explanation.

im sorry to say but to me it is all about the games i dont really care about any off the other extras the system has

In a word, YES. As a matter of fact, I've spent more than that on a console and one game (3DO and SSFII Turbo-$499, Neo Geo Silver and Magician Lord, $649, Sega Saturn and Shinobi, $449). What good is an HD if I don't NEED it to play games (only to save some, barring Blinx)? Your point is no more valid than mine.Since you brought in the Japan equation, every last one of those people looking for the better experience could've also gotten a Panasonic Q with better DVD playback/options than both Xbox and PS2. If this was still the case, the "better hardware features" would've made the Q an easy favorite in Japan, and it might have even come stateside. Instead, both the Q and Xbox are suffering in sales there- hardly an advantage.

True, alot of people bought a PS2 as a DVD player, at first, mainly because the launch was so lackluster (c'mon, THREE games?). Also, like you and I knew, many folks got that PS2 because they knew there would soon be a plethera of titles for it just as its precursor the PSX. Nice point you're making, but the fact of the matter is only people in Japan would have this issue then (many people in the US and elsewhere have had DVD players since 2000). Even now there are more affordable DVD players in japan for less than $99, and if this was an issue, a GameCube and a real DVD player is just as cheap as a PS2 or Xbox, and was even cheaper before the system pricecuts this year.Yes it does, but you are going against this very ideal by saying price has more to do with things, when it's really totally random as a factor.

Get this- not everyone buys a console as a DVD player, but everyone buys a console for games.;)I never said those wouldn't affect whether someone would purchase a console or not- I said it wasn't what it was all about, which it isn't; those only play a small role, whereas the games themselves hoist the majority of the decision.Actually I'd buy it, and I wouldn't be alone. Why? What was before DC? N64? PSX? Dreamcast was a great leap over those two, and was well worth the money for the expansive list of games (and hacks) developed for it.

Even compared to the PS2, the graphics are very crisp, and the DC even has a cleaner antialiasing scheme...

BTW, GCN and Xbox aren't exactly new technology, either- both consoles have parts in them dating back as far as 1999.Once again, I never said it didn't make a difference, I said it wasn't all about pricing.

If you could get an Xbox the way it is now, for 100 bucks, would you get one? Hell yes. But what if the Xbox, at that price, had not a single game that interested you in the least? Would you buy an Xbox for 130 just to use it as a DVD player?It's whether or not a console is all about the games- you are way off track here.I'll just close with this: PS2 has games. Lots of games, and a head start with a few very good games. Guess what, Game, that's THE MAIN REASON why they bought their consoles, end of story.

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

Yea but it's sad to say the market is not made up of only Gamers like you! Many people did buy the Xbox cuss it has more power now that may not be right but they did it and they are still doing it. If power really was nothing no one would have got a PS2 over the Dreamcast (lets face it Dreamcast had far better games then PS2).

Power = Hype = Sales.

Then why is PS2 still outselling Xbox by a huge difference?

Umm cuss they have more hype by a long way! and always have. who plays the most add on TV oh look it Sony by a long (look at your TV play list for last year). Who has more units out there Oh look it's Sony more unit sold = more hype. You don't seem to under stand what 10 years in film has done for sony! It has made them the master of all that is hype and not even Microsoft comes close.

Ask almost any one on the street what come into there head when you say Games console and they will almost all say PSone ,PS2 or Sony! and that comes from hype, Alot of people got a PS2 just cuss they had a PSone again thats hype they did not know if the PS2 was any good they just got one (I know I got one just cuss of the hype). hype hype hype hpye hype it can make almost any thing sell.

heh heh

I purchased a Sega saturn too... that's the last time I spend that much on a console.

As for Panisonic Q... do you remember me saying a little thing called timing?

Err, timing yet again.... Timing and price are equal factors... in 2012 if sombody released a console with DVD playback on it, it wouldn't effect sales half as much as it did Ps2 at launch... Why? Ps2 was released at a time where DVDs were blowing up.

No, not true... I have plently of little cousins who have Ps2s... why? Well they want the games. But who bought the system? Not them... thier parents did. Why? The DVD player.

Now, that kills your point alone... like I said before, for some the DVD player is the main fuction of the system, AND the reason why they purchased one.

And people wonder why Nintendo is losing thier main market :rolleyes:

Kids don't buy consoles, parents do, if Nintendo were to make games to appeal to kids, why not make the console appeal to the parents as much as Ps2?

There are many people in the world who flopped out $200-$300 to please thier kids AND buy a DVD player. Not EVERY person in the world buys a system with the intent of playing games... well, not anymore.

I said if it were released fall 2001, along side GCN and Xbox, priced at $200, and with the same launch games it had in 1999.... you would buy it? You need a drug test.

:lol:

yeah yeah, the fact is Madden 2001 looked better than any DC game EVER released... and it was technically superior to any DC game ever released... and it was a launch title.

I'm not trying to hear all that BS about AA, the fact is Ps2 games looked and animated better, period.

If the games look better, the games look better, period. That's the only judge of power. I could care less about on paper, it's all about on screen.

Invalid...

here's the quote from me again:

"it's about timing, pricing, hardware features, and games equally"

The poin't I'm trying to make is that if any one of those four categories is insanely off track, people won't buy the console. Name a console that has failed and it was leading any generation in all four of these categories.

Hell, the n00b Xbox is passing up GCN because GCN is more of track in these four ways than Xbox.

no, it isn't... :)

1) Timing: Ps2 came out a year before competition, and DC completly dropped out of the race by the 5th month of Ps2's life. You may not believe it, but there were people in the world who purchased a Ps2 instead of waiting because they couldn't wait. If GCN and Xbox were out earlier in Ps2's life, they could have stolen more initial sales than they are stealing now.

2) Hardware features: Ps2, out the origanal box, simply has more features than GCN and Xbox. DVD Player and PsOne... and if I go any further I get into:

3) Pricing: On Ps2 you don't have to buy the new accessories... and Ps2... and hell, Sony can chose what they want Xbox and GCN to be priced at. Because of the head start... which gets back into timing. Also, for that period, the cheapest next-gen system that you could get that was consoderd "alive" was $300, so it had a great price advantage over the competition ;)

4) Games: Ps2 basically stayed good enough to be purchased for it's first year, with games like Tekken, Madden, GT3, etc... then when competition came, Sony stepped up it's game. :)

To sum it up, Sony's timing gave Sony the lead in sales... Sony's timing also gave SOny more freedom with Pricing because they could sell the system for less and still make a profit While competition. Sony also threw in a DVD player, to make thier system valuable even IF the games were weak. But the games weren't weak, and they only got better and better... so in the end, Sony steals the most sales.

It's not all about games, but games are a key factor. I know people who even purchased a DC because of timing. Like myself and DsH... neither of us feel that DC's lineup was all that great, but what else was there to buy?

Games=big factor, but not the only factor...

1. If a System had no good games for it you wouldn't buy it
2. If a system was priced at $2000 you wouldn't buy it
3. If a system is released at the wrong time, you wouldn't buy it
4. If a system had weak hardware features... (let's say, no memory cards or hard drive, on a CD so you couldn't save the games) you wouldn't buy it...

Let's say a mix of any two of these things would completly turn you off, if there is a mix of two things that wouldn't turn you off, like I said, you must be on crack.

Yep, I agree, if all your friends buy it, there is a better chance of you buying it. Sales are like free advertizing.

Now the question Stu should ask is... why is Xbox outselling GCN in Europe and America. :)

I was going to actually respond to all that crap above, but I realized you were agreeing with what I said in the first place...Games are the MAIN factor, period.TrueFalse; insert PC/Mac here; Phillips/Magnovox CdiFalse; insert 32X/Saturn/Jaguar CD/Neo Geo CD/Xeye/TG-16 hereNot neccessarily...think NES; saving isn't always pertinent- hell, I often go thru GCN games and erase them all and try to play thru without saving; same with PS2. Of course not with Xbox though...;)They may, or they may not- keep in mind this ISN'T EVERYONE, which you were trying to claim at first.

And about your point regarding PS2's DVD, do you assume that EVERYONE bought a PS2 just as a DVD player? Your point is moot- you say the kids WANTED the PS2 for the games, thus the parents now know about it, and bought it instead as a DVD player. Would the PS2 even be known to their parents if the kids didn't want the games? I'm very sure these same parents didn't look at early 1999 demos of Tekken Tag tourney FMV's and drool about how nice a DVD player it would be- hell, that wasn't even announced until well after the initial specs were released in 2000.

Either way, games are the main factor, whether you want to admit it again or not.And on that same token, why isn't it selling at all in Japan, especially with the DVD feature, and why is it barely outselling GCN in US/UK even though TWO free games came with the system, selling some 2+ million units alone last year, against a system with no free game until recently?

Judging by your "timing", "hardware features", and "pricing" hypothesis, Xbox should be tearing the floor up with GameCube, which is hardly the case. ;)

And I reiterate:

Games are the MAIN factor of buying a console, and systems existence to boot.

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

Would you disagree with this?:

"One of the reasons why PS2 is selling so much better than its competition is because most gamers would say that it has the superior game quality."

Also, you make it sound as if just ANYONE could create hype. Positive hype, at least :p. Let me give you an example. Two companies advertise a similar product on TV. One, by nature, will produce more hype than the other. There's a reason for that. Maybe it's because one company had the better advertising campaign. Maybe it's because one company was known for its quality in the past. Maybe it's because people heard good things about the one product, and the commercial peaked their interest. Whatever the case may be, it all boils down to what each company did. If people look at PS2 commercials and say "wow, I gotta have one of those" then Sony has done a terrific job in advertising.

But then, my friend, you must know that hype can only take a product so far. It can give it the kick in the pants it needs to get rolling (PS2 launch, anyone?) but sooner or later the hype dies down if the product is crap. Let's face it...if a company tried to sell small boxes @ $50 per box, they won't be successful. They could have the best advertising campaign in the world, but they won't sell 50 million of them.

In the end, quality reigns supreme...people can think for themselves and form respectable opinions. Nobody's forcing them to buy anything.

You said it was ALL about the games...All = 100%...Everything...you can't change your stance and still take credit for what you previously were arguing about.

It looks like you're agreeing with Justin's 'Games are the biggest factor, but not the only factor' statement. Could one assume that in turn, Justin won the arguement?

If you're going to say 'I didn't mean that (All about the games) entirely literally' then I would understand...because points are made to be exaggerated.

When I said next gen would be 'all about the games' I didn't mean that in a sense of console sales...I meant that it would be the only thing fanboys would be able to argue over (and I could/probably will be wrong)

Lol Shadow... way to twist words.

But it's only one of many factors. You said it was the "ONLY" thing before.

Lmao, twist... we are talking about consoles, not a PC... and even if we were, a PC has SOOOOOO many features that consoles couldn't do that makes up for the price.

those didn't come out at the wrong time, they just simply weren't sucsessful.. Some are add ons, one was hard to develop for, and the rest had no chance to begin with.

lol, what a joke... first of all, when NES came out that wasn't a requirement... and second, you would rather have that save feature then not. Imagine trying to play "great" games ike Zelda OoT, or Metroid pime with no memory card... and lets not even imagine animal crossing.

No, don't get it twisted yet again.. YOU were the one saying "EVERYONE" buys consoles for Games... The fact is, the person who laid down the cash doesn't have to be in it for the games...

Also, I said Games are a main factor, but it's not the ONLY factor, like you are trying to say.

Let's see... Japanese gamers are racist aginst american games/systems. Also, don't try to swing it back the other way for Nintendo's lack of sucsess in america, because America has urchased a Japanese made console more than ANYTHING.

If Xbox was made in Japan, it would be selling better, period.

No, it isn't... Which system is priced better? Which system came out earlier (especially in Japan)? Xbox has the hardware features over GCN, that's it. GCN has Price, timing, and argueably games. n america though, Xbox has Timing, Hardware features, and argueably games.

And I repeat yet again, a main factor, not the only factor...

If it were the only factor, DC would have ate Ps2 alive at launch, butdid it, HELLLLLLLLLL no.

He could be bluffing. But i think the Cell technology will be great but a pain in ass to develop for it. Also with the latest info about Ati's newest chips, looks like the big N's net console will be doing some damage.

Game/Stu, I guess you didn't read my post from the get goAnd yes, Stu, that "all" was a play on your own words, and was a sarcastic question, not a statement, nor a fact.

What I said above was always my point, which both of you have been agreeing with all the time; only The Game has some really invalid reasons for proving "features" is a factor of success.

And while I'm thinking about that "if Xbox was made in Japan" remark, wasn't the Saturn made in Japan? 32X? NeoGeo? Using your logic, why exactly didn't they sell well?

Like I said, there was no debate to begin with; looking at the whole thing, we were basically arguing over who worded their statements the best while saying the exact same thing.

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

You have to be joking...

Don't give those as examples, give US consoles that sold well in Japan as examples... wait, you can't, because there are none. 90% of the reason Xbox is failing in Japan is the fact that it's american made, and over there american made games or consoles are just a joke.

Also, your examples are also bad because they didn't sell well anywhere, not just in that region. Xbox is beating GCN in two places where Japanese consoles have allways (and still are) dominating. But GCN is beating Xbox in Japan because they are biased against American made consoles. And like I said before, Sony still dominates over here, so you can't say we are biased against Japanese consoles.

In your opinion, %90 of the reason Xbox is failing in Japan is that it's american made. If you can't prove this The Game, don't state it as fact.Hmm..what of the Sega Master System then, which sold comparable to the NES in the US, but nowhere near in Japan? Yes, Xbox is currently, and even with the 2 free games gimmick, not by much. While history proves, that isn't entirely true, or DOAX (yes I know it's made by japanese Tecmo) wouldn't have sold as many copies as it has there simply because it's on Xbox. And while this isn't a console, Amercian-made Mortal Kombat 2 was a serious quarter-muncher in japanese arcades for quite awhile in the late 90's. Not entirely biased, many of US games just don't appeal to them. Surely a Final Fantasy or Lufia game will sell oodles on Xbox in Japan if that were possible.And why would I say that? Japanese games have dominated the industry even when the Atari was the top console; nearly all of the supporting software was from japanese developers, including Nintendo and Sega.;)

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

Well, quit asking questions there is no answer to... unless you want to hear my opinion I highly suggest you start coming up with your own answers.

Now, let me throw it back in your face, if the reason for Xbox's failure in Japan isn't because of Japanese bias against US made game/consoles, what is the reason?

I can't seem to find a reason better than "because it's american made"... if you have a better reason say it. I promise it will be no more valid then what I have said... be sure to give examples.

1) Xbox is the first any only American made console to have support from a lot of Japanese developers... meaning it has Japanese games, the only kind of games that seem to sell well over there.

2) That's because they didn't have a fighting game that realistic of thier own... once japanese developers started copying the realistic approach to fighting games, MK just fell off the map.

3) You are proving my point by saying that American made games don't appeal to Japanese gamers. Why don't they appeal? Better yet, why don't american made consoles appeal to them?

4) Yes, Final Fantasy would sell a lot if it were released on Xbox, because those are popular japanese made games.

You really underestimate my knowlege on video games... unless you don't remember yourself, Nintendo did some illegal stuff to keep SMS off of store shelves.

Give me a break... GCN had a $50 to $100 price advantage thise whole generation so far... and Xbox's deal didn't start until around a year after both consoles were released.

Oh, and lets not forget GCN enjoyed an extra fall season in Japan AND GCN is basically offering the same deal as we speak.

Because you are in the mood for debating as I see, why don't you touch on some of those.

Interesting how that works, no?;)Simple- because Xbox and it's games aren't selling, PS2 is, and GameCube is also.:DI guess you don't remember the 3DO, then. Capcom, Konami, Tecmo, Treasure, etc were all Japanese developers for that console, based in America. Scratch number 1.What fighting game wasn't this "realistic"? Last I checked, there was no japanese-developed console/arcade title with digitized characters. And if you mean total realism as far as presentation is concerned, keep in mind that Soul Edge and Virtua Fighter 2 were available at the exact same time. Scratch number 2.Note I said "many" of US games, not all. Fifa sells oodles in Japan, 'nuff said. To be totally generalistic, Xbox is the only console that won't be getting Gundam anytime soon (do I even need to harp on how popular this is over there?), while GCN and PS2 currently have new titles in the works. These consoles also have more "niche titles" (Mr Misquito, Doshin, Animal Leader, Crossgate, etc) specifically for that market available, which once again Xbox lacks or is in the vast minority. Plus, PS2/GCN have what I call "platinum duality":

PS2 has two great games that really push hardware sales, GTA series, and Gundam. While GTA definately wouldn't compete in Japan, it's sold birds in US and UK. Gundam does the exact opposite, with some 10 million copies sold in Japan over that series (so far 3 games and 6 PSX games).

GCN has two great games as well- Super Smash Bros: Melee, which is allergic to non-platinum status in any major territory, and Metroid Prime, which will no doubt gobble up the US and UK markets, and once again get downed in Japan.

Xbox doesn't even come close to this status, even with DOA3 and DOAX and Halo. They own the US and UK markets, but can't put a dent in Japan.

Is this what you were pushing for from me- a theory like this one? While it's entertaining, at the same time it's true.So, I'm NOT agreeing with you, and once again I say, games are a major factor. You yourself here admit that even though Xbox is an american console, if it had more games that appealed to Japan, sales would increase. This wouldn't be true if the japanese were totally biased against Xbox, which is what you were claiming. Put Nintendo or Sony in Microsoft's shoes, with no Square, no Enix, no Mario/Zelda/Spyro/Gundam, and they'd be selling just as poorly. Quite frankly, DC would be the console of choice in Japan then via the Gundam and Sakura Wars collection it does have.:yippie:And if I recall, that was only in the US, and they got fined, and the Master System still had relatively good sales. What about Japan?And when did Xbox sales INCREASE, though? Right after the price cut to $200, and right after the pack-in deal. Nintendo's numbers stayed steady regardless, and even with the bundle deal going on against them, they still outsold Xbox in the UK until January. Plus, Halo was also free with the JSRF/GT bundle- 3 games for 175 bucks (since Xbox also cut price like a mutha to keep from failing there- three times IIRC).GCN had a two month lead in Japan over Xbox in the US, which is equivalent to Xbox's two month lead in UK over GCN (GCN wasn't released until May, and Xbox in March). Hardly relevant, if you're trying to prove extra time as an advantage here. It's happened to both consoles the exact same way.

And since when is GCN offering two free games when you buy a GCN? Are they also throwing in Smash DX for free in the UK like Xbox did with Halo? If not, how is this "basically offering the same deal as we speak"?I've already touched on those, when I quoted and responded to them and told you why. Feel free to read them over; I don't have the time to say the same thing over and over again.

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

lol, I almost forget about this topic...

and that has nothing to do with Japanese bias? How so?

yes, I remember the joke named 3DO... I dunno, I never really considerd that to be even a console, with it's insane price and all. I guess Xbox is #2, but Xbox is the only one to not have somthing insanely wrong with the hardware too. :D

define platnum duality

Also, I see your point, maybe Xbox needs a game that has allready been popular over there for years ;)

But from the looks of it, they aren't really open to new things, well, at least not as much as US and Europe. I still think they would be a little more open to a game like Halo if it were released on GCN or Ps2, but thier bias has nothing to do with that does it?

lol, why doesn't GTA sell much in Japan? Also, I'm pretty sure Ps2's launch success had nothing to do with game quality. I mean, does TTT and Ridge Racer really compete with what Xbox had out at launch? Yet Ps2 sells more (yeah, just admit, in this scenario it isn't "all about the games") :)

as far as I know, Metriod isn't owning anything here... it's just getting owned by games on it's own platform. Zelda is getting more pre-orders day-to-day than Metriod is getting sales.

You didn't really answer my question... WHY doesn't US made games or consoles appeal to japanese gamers? I mean, besides the fact that it's US made. What I got from you is that it's just not selling, no true reason.

Funny, you just went two ways here... first you say that I admit games would save Xbox, then you turn around and say DC would have been the console of choice. Why wasn't DC the console of choice? Did it really have anything to do with game quality?

I think it had much more to do with hardware power and features, or lack there of.

GCN still has the price advantage... if it were all about the games that would be all that matters. Why isn't GCN selling more right now?

I mean, $50 price advantage, and you get your choice of one game for free. Right now in US a person can spend $200 on an Xbox with 2 free pre-selected games, or for the same $200 get one of four free games, AND another game of choice. This deal is lightyears better than Xbox's, but from the start of it GCN's sales remained steady :p

No, it's not the equivelent... the SEASON a console is released in makes a difference. Xbox hit it at much worse timing that GCN in Japan... and in UK they both had bad timing. It's not the same.

not the same deal, a better one, refer to earlier in my post.

Also, all I'm trying to do is show you the light... game quality isn't the only factor in a consoles success. There have been conssoles with good game quality to fail, and consoles with weak game quality to succeed. Some consoles just end up in the wrong place at the wrong time. Some are just too weak, some too expensive, and some just lacking things hardware wise that consumers have come to expect... and some do just lack the game quality.

It's not the only factor though.

Oh Christ...
 

Tell me this, if you're so intent on this "bias", and Japanese being the forefront of it, then why was Xbox doing just as bad before it's ultra pricecuts and free game scams after totally bombing the first 2 months in the UK/Austrailia? Is this also because Aussies/UK peeps have "bias" against Xbox, or is it because the best game for the system (Halo) wasn't even available for launch some month or so later? Why was GCN just as bad until Smash DX was released in the UK?Pikmin/Animal Forest weren't popular in Japan for years, and neither was XenoSaga...there's no reason Xbox can't have these same games that ARE NEW.Read above.And that would explain why Metroid Prime, and many other first-person RPG's/Shooters sell horribly in Japan on PS2, let alone GCN? Halo would bomb in Japan no matter what console it was on...seen any good sales of any FPS's in Japan lately?

On the contrary, Xenosaga would sell on Xbox, as may True Fantasy Live if it's done right.Read above; no it doesn't- otherwise the console wouldn't be selling at all, and DOAX wouldn't have done as well. DOAX sold damn-near the Xbox user base in Japan.I dunno, but according your logic, it should sell oodles because it's not on an american made system, right?;)Or are you...??Of course not, but was Xbox launching the same time as PS2? No. Was PS2 already out and dominating, along with GCN, when Xbox FINALLY launched in Japan? Hell yes. Did Xbox's launch lineup even come close to PS2's plethora of available titles, or GCN's monster Luigi's Manion, let alone Smash DX? HELL NO.Read above. Actually it is all about the games here as well. Xbox's launch lineup was last, meaning existing hardware had the upper hand with more titles available as well as better titles that fit that niche' market. Only DOA3 fit, and even it's sales were lackluster in comparison to the wide amount of Japanese titles available for the other two consoles this time last year.Metroid Prime is the closest holiday title to a million copies right now (Mario Party 4 is not far behind). This is what I meant. It's not too far under Splinter Cell in the US, and is doing very well, and will no doubt do good in the UK. However, MP only sold some 50k in Japan so far, but even that's better than I expected.Honestly, there are no games- which is what I've said over and over now. Look at the Japanese lineup of games compared to PS2's or GCN's. If Xbox had these games PS2 and GCN had, and they didn't, Xbox would be leading in sales there- at least in software.Funny, you misread my post. I was saying DC would be the console of choice if PS2/GCN didn't have all the Japanese games they have now, which would give DC the edge because it DOES. Read carefully next time.It was the console of choice; moreso than the PS2 until it died- then PS2 picked up. You don't recall this?In this instance, yes and no. In a way it had to do with the hardware since it wasn't there anymore, and in a way it was the software because there couldn't possibly further support for a dead console. Next.Then why was DC ruling with an iron fist in Japan with PS2 sharing the same market? Why were Sakura Wars games outselling PS2 games by millions of units until they were ported to PS2? And better yet, Nintendo 64 had better hardware than PSX- why did PSX outsell it in hardware (though not software)?

How is that hardware-related, going by your theory?Sure GCN has the price advantage- NOW...but how in the hell do you figure a GCN with two games at $250 is an "advantage" over an Xbox with two games at $200? This was the situation from May till December, and that bundle sold MS an extra 3 million units.

Sure, you get a GCN and two games for the same price as an Xbox and two games NOW, but even then GCN's are sold alone for the same $150, and sold. No solo Xbox's were to be found at major retailers for that same $200, and you know this- MS pretty much replaced the standalone with their bundle, while Nintendo didn't. How is this an advantage even now with peeps buying solo GCN consoles like idiots (400k so far)?

And you still haven't told me how $300 for a GCN and 3 games is an advantage over an Xbox and 3 games for $200 in the UK (and that 3rd game is Halo)...Read above.Read above again. How in the hell do you figure this is "lightyears better", and what of the deal in the UK where you get an Xbox and three games free?How is it not? GCN gained about the same sales advantage in Japan as Xbox did launching in UK...almost nothing until their heavy-hitters (Smash DX and Halo respectively) appeared months later.I never said it was; read my post before this one where I QUOTED such. I know this, but please believe it's the major defining factor.And those consoles are manufactured by companies that had heavy losses from earlier consoles they made that had no good game quality (Sega, NEC, SNK)...Name ONE.Here I'd have to agree and disagree. While all of the statements are true, every console that has failed was because of a combination of these things, not just one in particular. However, the consoles that did succeed were majorly led by game sales to keep the consoles afloat, and that is a fact.I agree.;)

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

*yawn*

Lets see, where is the developer Rareware based? How long after Microsoft purchased them did sales turn around? I think that UK is bias in a sense too, but thier baby went to Microsoft, and they are following.

No reason? LOL

First of all, use American made games as examples, we allready know anything with the name Nintendo on it is going to sell successfully at worst.

Also, did you see some of the reviews for Animal crossing? It ranged everywhere from a 3.0 to an 8.5. If it wasn't for the fact that Nintendo made it, it wouldn't have been popular anywhere. Let a game like that be on Xbox, and a new fresh developer make it, it wouldn't have enjoyed the success of the GCN version no matter how you look at it.

But this has nothing to do with bias in this case, it simply has to do with who is developing the game and not how good or bad the game is.

Also, Xenogears has a cult following... if that were released on Xbox (still a japanese game so please don't give a dumb reply) it would still sell. Or, then again, more fans may have paid attention to the fact that Xenosaga isn't a sequal to Xenogears, and it would hae failed. But because it's on Ps2, people seem to blind themselves to that fact. Hell, some people probably are ignorant to the fact that Square didn't even develop the game this time around.

But it's all maybes... people think Xenogears/Square when they see Xenosaga. Maybe that thought force would havge been different had to been released on Xbox.

Did Ps2's launch line up compete with DC's "plethora of available titles" when it was launched? No, but ever single damn Ps2 was off the shelf.

Well, let me do like you and say "read above"

With the free game deal I'm sure it will pass SC. But if not for that I doubt Metriod would really go anywhere fast at this point in time.

*claps*

I agree 110%. Ps2 and GCN have name recognition, and that's basically why thier games sell better. But I'm not dropping the bias angle... because time and time again Japan proves not to go for US made games, no matter how well they do at gamerankings.com :p

I mean, you can sit here and say you don't like Halo, and I can sit here and say I don't like Metriod.... but most people do, and Japan is not buying it, why? Like I said over and over, give me a better reason than bias against american made games. We both know the bad sales have notta to do with game quality.

I find it easy to relate poor american made game sales in Japan to poor American made console sales in Japan.

??? Umm, you lost me. Try explaining it in different words, one more time.

No, I recall poor Japanese console sales, and half decent US console sales. While the game sales stayed atop Ps2 until it's death. Ps2 still outsold DC week to week from the day it was launched. (well, maybe DC stole some weeks because of the shortage, but from Ps2's launch to DC's death Ps2 in fact did sell more)

Read above, that doesn't explain why more Ps2's got into homes than DCs in that time period before DC's death. Of course DC held it's little head start, but for those months Ps2 smacked the DC.

Head starts don't count.. Month to month Ps2 beat DC in hardware sales.

More units sold=more people to sell games to.

Woah woah woah... I gave more factors than just hardware in success. Here's a quote:

"timing, pricing, hardware features, and games equally"

You see where I'm going right? If not... let's see.

timing: Psx came out a year earlier, people had enough time to adjust to the new brand

pricing: Psx costed less and had much cheaper games

Hardware features: Well, N64 got Psx in graphics, but Psx introduced somthing new in CD's.

Games: They both had good games, Psx just had the mass appeal. Nintendo got half assed support from Capcom, Konami, Nacmo, and EA, and no support from Square.

Let's not forget N64 still sold past the 50 million mark.

How do you know it's the bundle that helped sell the console? I know it can't hurt, but I'm sure many people didn't buy an Xbox just to get JSRF and SegaGT. Whille gamers now basacally get two games of choice to battle that Xbox with. You have to admit, if you didn't have a console this generation and you were trying to decide on which to buy and you had $250, chances are you (as I) would sway GCN's way due to freedom of selection period.

err, read above

read above AND read here

You get your personal choice, that's why GCN's deal would be better. Some people would rather just buy a GCN with Mario for $200 over Xbox and those free pre-selected games. So a GCN with one game of choice is a better deal to some people than Xbox with 3. It just depends on what you want/like. You get more freedom in Nintendo's camp though.

read above

season is still a factor. In UK GCN was released at a time where it had a fair chance to catch up... in Japan Xbox was released a bit too late to take any fire from GCN. This holdiday season was the true test, Xbox won in one place, and GCN won in the other.

it no more of a factor than Price. If GCN costed $2000 and the games were $4000 a peice Bill gates not many peeps will buy it. Just like if the games aren't popular enough, or just not good enough.

Now, on the other end of the spectrum, having good games could possibly be the biggest thing to drive console sales, but DC proved it isn't.

if Sega had such hevy losses, why bother making a new console? Heavy losses isn't what killed it, Ps2 is.

That's all a matter of opinion. There are people I know online who feel Ps2's game quality isn't even close to that of GCN's or Xboxs. Yet it still owns?

There are plenty of people who would say N64's games MURDER Psx's games (including me, aside from sports games) but Psx still owned right?

What point are you trying to get at? For every console to fail there are thousands of people who like it, and for every console to succeed there are thousands of people to hate it. So yes, consoles with weak game quality by many people's standards do succeed.

Now, that's why game quality isn't even what I talk about when I mentioned games as a factor, it more of name recognition. Quality is random, one person's trash is another person's treasure. There is no true way to define game quality without polling all the gamers who own consoles. Lets say game sales are the poll of quality... then why is Metriod considerd one of the best games of all times, and NFL 2k3 rated higher than Madden 2003 at most reviewing sources?

Game quality has a lot to do with it, but that doesn't mean a quality game will sell, and a crappy game won't sell like crazy.

Have you checked GBA's game attach rate? GBA's success doesn't really come from game quality does it? GBA doesn't have to release a good game for the next nine months to stay afloat.

Have you also checked Ps2's attach rates around the demise of DC? In Japan there was less than one game sold for every console sold. Yet it still pumped out more hardware, and got Sega in such a scared state that they had to quit.

Good... so you agree with basically the only point I'm trying to get accross.