Pretty Bold Statement
 

this little snippet is taken from the latest Cubism over at IGN, I believe it was 34 if anyone is interested. It basically takes a postive look at Nintendo's e3 showing. One statement in particular was rather.. well read

So what do you thik of the above statement?

Multiplayer was reinvented with xbox live. Call me a fanboy, but it has nothing to do with the the fact that it's an xbox product, it's a revolutionary system. It takes something that few could have on a computer (super fast, all the time, voice chat, gaming) and gives it to everyone for 50$ and an xbox.

I love nintendo. But they're losing it.

sorry, but xbox reinvented nothing with that... they give you crappy service that you have to pay for ontop of what your already paying for broadband.

no. online gameing for PC is miles ahead of any console. its going to be next gen at the earliest. prolly the gen after that for console gameing to catch p to that

Miyamoto sort of is, but not wholly. He's just taking an idea, making it play differently, and play better. With the whole GBA/GCN connectivity, the definition of multi-play has changed for Nintendo. For everyone else, its just online, online, online.

:lol:

I think that PS2 and Xbox have done a great job to the multiplayer experience. Having online communities are really fun, except for those damn glitches and cheaters! lol... Null is right, that PC online gaming is much more advanced... But oh well. For those who stick to consoles, XboxLive and PS2 Online are great.

And... I don't know... I think that Nintendo should step up and make a bunch of their first party games online... But I guess they "know" what they are doing. LOL.. Who knows if Miyamoto is losing it.. Who knows.

PC online = Great
Console Online = :unsure:

Additional fees and more hardware.

I really think I am going to stick to my Pc for online because it's got the entire experience. Online games + internet/video/audio etc. and a keyboard+mouse.

I don't know about everyone else, but paying for broadband on Pc is costing me enough. I'm not really to keen on having to pay another bill to pay for my xbox/ps2 going online specifically for games.

As exciting as the idea sounds, I don't see it as being feasible for most casual gamers. But maybe that's how Sony/MS are marketing it :unsure:

All I pay for PS2 online is the monthly broadband, and the one time payment for the Network Adapter. I am not too keen on online RPGs (which seem to be the only games that cost extra to play online), so it is pretty basic for me.

How much is it?

And did you have to buy a HDD? Or just the N/W card.

I'm glad to see Miyamoto still HAD steam after all these projects he's been doing with outside sources. Sheesh, look at the gamecube's second party game list, and he's been on work with MP2, F-zero, Star Fox, tons. And still, he's even working on in-house games like WW2 and Mario 128. If this is the least he could do, I'd buy it for a dollar. It would probably be cheap anyways. Cheap thrills are always the best. :)

Xbox Online = closed network. pay to get on.

im not really sure what Sonys is. i would assume its a more open network. which would be possible to connect to other platforms aka GC or PC (not xbox cuz of its closed network) if a developer wanted.

but PS2 is free online just like a PC is. as long as you provide the connect. so for PS2, buy a $30 broadband and just plug it into your home network and your good to go with online games. I will be playin SSX 3 and GT4 online for PS2, i will buy a broadband modem for it possble a HD when that time comes.

same with GameCube online which is ATM, pretty much nonexistant. but it COULD be that way if nintendo wasnt so closed minded.

which is why i say its going to take a little bit for consoles online to catch up they're getting there. just not there yet. and having to pay extra ontop of the online cost sucks which is why i dont like xbox online.

Err... I think that playing PC games online is different from Consoles... it may be "more advanced" but it's not even close to main-stream.

You guys talk about monthly fees, but do you realize that a person who wants to play games online is liable to pay 10x as much $$$$ just to get STARTED on the PC. Is it 10x the quality? Maybe, but most aren't willing to pay that much, period.

To me, PC online gaming might as well never have existed, because the most I have ever done with it is play a game of pool or spades. PC online gaming may be great, and I may be missing out, but eh, I'm not about to risk $3000+ to find out :)

I say more power to MS and Sony (and Sega), for online gaming they revolutionized it for me... They recreated Multi-player games, period.

As for this topic, I feel that GCN-GBA Link up has yet to move past the level of "waste of technology" in my book. Nothing shown from what I have seen could make a GBA owner want a GCN, or a GCN owner want a GBA... the only people who will be using this crap are people who just happen to have both.

Dude you really need to go online gaming with ur Pc.

Warcraft III, Command And Conquer, Starcraft, Diablo, Ragnarok, Counter Strike, Q3, UT. I haven't even gone beyond these yet.

A new Pc that's capable of playing most of these games is about $1000 AUD (assuming you have software organised). Considering the Ps2/Xbox launched @ $750-$800, I think it's money well spent.

And going online with Pc makes a lot more sense than a console. There's ALOT more you can do. And it's a lot more practical.

I am interested in console gaming online though, but at the moment I am not willing to pay monthly fees for it because I know I am not disconnecting my Pc net connection coz it kix ass.

That's not in the states....

I doubt you can find a CPU (with Monitor and sound) that can run the complete high end games of today in it's full glory for anything less than $1,500 US...

$1,500 is an Xbox, Xbox live, and 25 full priced games... see my point? If I'm going to spen the $$$ for a PC mainly for gaming, it's just blocking me from getting a MUCH wider list of games for other consoles. Is PC worth it? Like I said, I'm not risking the Money to find out.

1) Online play is an old addition to games. NES had it, SNES had it, Dreamcast had it. I think even Atari has had it. Maybe MS has evolved the service some, but the result is still the same. Just cause its good doesnt make it a re-invention (unless the term is used loosely). Even GBA-GCN connectivity is more new idea, and it sucks compared to XBL.

An xbox is strickly games. PC is a lot more.

and btw. PC... 2.66 GHZ, Geforce 4 GFX card, Sound Blaster Audigy X sound card. 19inch monintor and more. Under 1000, thats mine.


And not reached main stream? you go online on xbox, you'll find 10 times as many players per game playin online for PC. Much of the time, people are just now getting these online games for consoles. like EA sports games for example. They been online for years on PC, and a WHOLE lot more people playing them.


another reason for how many people play online games on PC, you DONT need a top of the line computer to do it. Almost every game you can play on a crappy computer. PC games have options to turn down stuff that eats up CPU so they can be played. and i know your going to say you dont want to play games with dumbed down graphics. and i like wise feel that way (then again i dont need to dumb down anything) But some players online actually dumb them down on purpose to get an advantage. theres ways in certain games that turning graphics on totally ugly make it easier to do some thigns.

And its not about how many people play.... Theres so much more can be done online that isnt there on consoles yet. People still play the old games like the original Quake online. because theres still new modes and downloads and levels and things being made for them to play. i mean they literately never end.

being able to make your own servers for the games and all that stuff.... i mean even the Pay to Play online games. Ultima Online, or Ever Quest. soon games like FFXI.. you can play them for free by getting let into someones private server where everyone there plays the game without the online costs for it.

Consoles just arent there yet.

As far as im concerned, AS OF NOW, console online gameing is just a mulitplayer mode where your oponent is in another home. (and insome cases pay extra fee's just to play them.) not true online gameing.

geez.

My tower (atm prolly valued @ $1000 AUD) can play pretty much anything.

Well then I see your point. Too bad I won't be able to kick ur ass @ Warcraft ;)

This is what happens when you dont read everything.

THAT's revolutinary.

PC gaming is so small. Xbox took the some of the best things about pc gaming and gave them to a MUCH bigger audience.

how is that revolutionary? your paying the montly fee for broadband. so they already have a computer to go online with.

then add ANOTHER payment just to play only games?

if your going by that.... then PS2 puts the rev in revolutionary. they give it to you with no extra cost.

and the online audience for PC games is not small. not by a long shot.

I disagree. Your just trying to defend the XBox as much as you can. It's not revolutionary if XBox has online play for $50 a year (also after a year it's $11 or $12 a month). Online play has had all of the voice chat, all time, super fast. The only difference is that XBox is a console and not a PC. If ur not interested in buying a PC then an XBox can be an alternate choice, but calling their online play revolutionary is a bunch of bull****. PS2 had their network set up before the XBox. So if calling anything revolutionary, it would be the PS2.

I think DC should get the credit for being the foirst console with strong online gaming support... Ps2 simply improved on DC, and Xbox took it even a step fursther.

I think that voice chat in home consoles is a must, I mean, you only have two hands, two will be on the controler, so the keyboard is only an annoyance.... mainly in games where you have to make quick decisions and Communication is key.

keyboard and mouse is very important in playing FPS/Strategy games, but I'm sure most of you already knew that

Hmmmmmm...

Wait a second. Not all people who have an Xbox have broadband, most probably have dial up. THAT was a mistake, limiting the service to BB only customers. You may say that they should get with the times, or, they'll slow down everyone else, but who the f**k has any right to say that? Some people either don't have the money, and some people's telecom providers may not offer broadband in their area. MS should have catered for those without BB.

You know what is funny, Stonecutter made one simple comment, which you may disagree with, but did anyone actually read what the topic is?

Lets look at the actual topic, which is Miyamoto making a remake of Pac-Man and re-inventing multiplayer gaming.

Give me a break.

By the way, One Winged Angel, an extra year of Xbox Live is only $50.

You're really good at making up numbers though.

Miyamoto's new 'revolutionary multi-player games' are a joke, plain and simple.

As for arguing over who has the best online service, I couldn't care less...I'll just stick to actually PLAYING THE GAMES like Battlefield 1942, Midnight Club II, and look forward to upcoming games like Madden 2004, Tiger Woods 2004, Gran Turismo 4, Halo 2, Half Life 2 etc. etc. etc.

I like using a controller for Shooting games... But I haven't really played a FPS on PC, so I guess I don't know what I am missing out.. lol.


Oh, and bobcat. I don't know how much I pay for broadband. My parents pay for that, so whatever. I don't have an HDD because it is not out yet for North Americans, and I only have the NA... Which was like 60 bucks Canadian.

lol... now if a person has never played PC games how would they know that? I have played a FPS with the mouse and keyboard, but I didn't like it.... why? Because I wasn't used to it. There are people in the world who prefer a controler.

-EDIT-

ah Joeiss, your post would have looked a lot better right after my post, not before it :p

Yeah, I have found myself better with a controller in FPS.

http://www.fragland.net/?page=newsitem&nid=5049

they were planning to charge $10 a month, but now they are considering $50 a year. So don't say I make up numbers :P

I posted this a few days before E3 in the Xbox forum.

You can argue all you want, but you're wrong.

he's just sayin he didnt make up the numbers. they arent taken outta thin air. he's not trying to argue that he's right

I feel sorry for people who were so certain this generation would spark some kind of online frenzy.

Just a year or two ago, they were so sure that console online gaming would be this huge entity that no "true gamer" could possibly deny. A feature that really pushes hardware(expecially in the case of Xbox Live), while taking gaming to "new heights."

I'm pretty sure I wrote a piece on it, urging us to seperate our own hardcore perceptions/excitement from the reality that online gaming(on console, and in general, for that matter) is JUST NOT VIABLE YET.


Heh... they never learn.... :rolleyes:

edit: as for the original post...

I think the statement should have us think long and hard about what quality multiplayer gaming really means.

On one hand, you have a certian group thinking that having a fun multiplayer experience simply means taking X, Y, or Z game, and slapping it online with a multiplayer mode, with all of the modern "buzz-words" one can think of.

On the other hand, here we have Miyamoto doing something that NO ONE WOULD HAVE EVER SUGGESTED. Taking one of the simplest gameplay systems ever in a game(avoid the enemies in a maze), transforms that into a multiplayer game, and effectively creates what is apparently a level of interaction and fun between multiple players that most of today's more elaborate, hi-tech games fall short of offering. I wonder if we(including many developers in the industry) know as much about games as we think.

Here's what I think we can conclude from that:

When other developers unravel the mystery of what makes a game fun to play, in it's simplest form, then only then will we see more technology-oriented (online) games that truly take multiplayer gaming to new heights in gameplay and overall entertainment/fun.

Sure, it sounds easy...

To all those people who think playing FPS with a controller is better (or find it easier) than using a keyboard and mouse are missing out BIG time on FPS's.

I used to think controllers were great for FPS, but the simple fact of the matter is a Keyboard and Mouse greatly increases your speed/accuracy hence increases overall satisfaction with FPS games.

Only reason why I'm so keen about this is because I denied that Keyboard+Mouse combo could be good for FPS. Now I have seen the light so to speak

IS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT PLAYS COUNTER STRIKE??

Ask any PC FPS freak, and they will tell you.

Controllers hinder your speed and accuracy when compared to a keyboard/mouse. Try a lot more if you haven't "gotten used" to using a keyboard/mouse. Trust me (and many other people) it's a lot better

Well maybe it'd help if you asked ur parents how much THEY pay for broadband! (on Ps2).

D-Real, I agr... ag... bah ;)

I think that online gaming isn't big, and isn't going to get very big until some killer apps that are mainstream (besides sports games) come out. I think a pokemon, a Final Fantasy, or a GTA needs to go online... I think GT3 has a great chance of making it mainstream, but I just don't see it.

I still think online gaming has become a feature that can and will push hardware... but this gen is just the start. Next gen if two consoles are not online, and one is, I think that this feature alone will push many people who bought into it this gen to buy into it again.

once you experience the joys of online gaming there is no turning back... I can never buy a EA Sport game again for Xbox or GCN... why? Not only because it's online on Ps2, you can download updated rosters etc. Next gen Madden being online will be a requirement for me to buy the system. (or it will be the deciding factor)

as for Nintendo and the GBA... err, I think that they need to find a better use for it. Right now it's just a waste of technology. Like I said before nothing that would make a GBA owner get a GCN, or a GCN owner get a GBA.

On the original topic, I'd hardly call Pac Man on the GC/GBA as a 'reinvention' of multiplayer gaming, although I haven't had an oppertunity to play it yet, but it does appear to be enormous fun, and I suppose that is all that matters really.

They're console players. Console FPS are slower paced, and since everyone on a console would be using a controller they all at same level.

However if ever 1 of them did get a keyboard and mouse while rest using controller, none of them would have a chance against him. :p

Tower alone
2.8 ghz
GF4 MX <----- not so great but works for any game out right now
512 mb ddr ram
80 gb 7200 rpm hd
16x dvd drive
cd r-w
and a good mobo that supports 8x agp

$900 Canadian... thats like $650 U.S. buddy.. well maybe not right now Canadian dollar is high right now :unsure:
No moniter tho but im sure theres nothing wrong with the moniter your using right now...


Yeah bobcat i play CS and i use to also not be able to accept the whole keyboard and mouse thing. I use to play goldeneye and thought the controler was great for it.. then i began to play PC FPS games like Rougue spear and CS and such and realized how much slower FPS games are on a console..

I feel sorry for people who Nintendo have by the tit :(

Good ol' Unreal Tournament on the PC. :cool:

I loved that game.