Nintendo was right, next gen to crash and burn

Crash · 03-03-2005, 04:23 PM

http://www.happypuppy.com/editorial....s&news_id=1081

Quote:

In today's sessions of Destination PlayStation, Sony's annual gathering of its retail partners, Sega showed off Condemned, a survival horror game, and a racing title described as "Burnout 3 with weapons" both for the Xbox 2.

Because this is a retail event, the retailers were primarily concerned with what the games were going to cost. According to a source at the event, Sega representatives stated that the company's games for the next generation of consoles would enter the market with a suggested retail price of $59.99 and speculated that launch titles from EA Sports would retail for as much as $69.99.

It is understandable why Sega would mention EA Sports as Electronic Arts has signed an exclusive deal with the NFL taking the NFL license away from Take-Two and Sega.

Regardless if the $70 price tag is speculation or not, one thing is for sure -- if you want to play a licensed football game on the Xbox 2, you'll pay whatever EA decides you'll pay.

I'll be damned if I'll be paying $70.00 for a rehashed P.o.s. EA sports game...

MuGen · 03-03-2005, 04:26 PM

rehashed EA sports game? They said a licensed NFL game... and quite frankly MADDEN is the best football game franchise out...... in no way is Madden NFL a rehashed POS.....

in any other case... those prices seem fair enough... Not the 69.99 one but the 59.99 one..

EDIT: Nintendo was right, next-gen to crash and burn.... for them.... /fanboyism

Crash · 03-03-2005, 04:28 PM

i remember when i paid $74.99 for Shadows of the empire... and look where nintendo went wrong ... .coicidence? I think not!

MuGen · 03-03-2005, 04:30 PM

I paid $59.99 for Lunar: Silver Star Story Complete <~~ RPG for PSX.... that was the most I've ever spent on a game....(for the playstation one)

Canyarion · 03-03-2005, 04:31 PM

I'd like to see screenshots of those 2 new games, so I can make fun of them.

Edit: And hoppa! there I go: http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/crosspl...ots-032659.php

Real world compared to graphics:

Now I don't think that's too great for a next-gen game..... I mean of course, the graphics are a bit better, so what? The leap isn't half as big as PSX/N64 -> PS2/GCN/XB.

I really start to understand Nintendo.

Crash · 03-03-2005, 04:39 PM

some of the best graphics on the system

now gamecube... thems some good graphics:

nintendo is right, I dont think next gen will look much/any better than this bottom screen if they did the same exact level

KillerGremlin · 03-03-2005, 04:49 PM

Ahahahahahahahahahhhhhahhhhhhhaaah.

All the people that supported EA in that one thread that went on for 4 pages can kiss my ass.

Looks like having a little competition in the market isn't such a bad idea, is it now?

MuGen · 03-03-2005, 05:04 PM

What are you guys talking about? Of course it doesn't look AWESOME but it looks a lot better. But truth be told the leap was tremendous since PSX was a 32 bit console and leaped to 128 bit, so the differences were noticeable. Now it's 128 to 256..... which isn't that big.

But in any case, we're only seeing Screenshots of one game...

It's been proven..... PS2 games aren't all sharp with graphics but Gran Turismo 4 comes out and I've never seen graphics like this on PS2 since FFX..... and so you never know.

Some developers will design really great games for the next-gen, and some wont'

Blackmane · 03-03-2005, 05:06 PM

I hate how EA now doesnt have to keep their prices reasonable because they have the only license for football gaming now. They are just going to keep gouging too, because people like Kyuzo will buy their games.

(no offense meant to you, man. Just making a point.)

Canyarion · 03-03-2005, 05:11 PM

We've also seen True Crime: Streets of Honk Kong. That was.....

nothing special.

Another problem is that modeling characters and environments keeps taking more and more time. Games get more expensive because of that. They need to come up with something to spare time.
Why do you think GB games are cheaper than console games? The medium is more expensive, but the development time is much lower.

GameMaster · 03-03-2005, 05:25 PM

I don't think I'll pay $59 for any next generation game. It's too much for me. Exceptions noted (Hey You Pikachu!). Best $75 I ever spent.

Unless the game comes bundled with an additional piece of hardware, it's either going to have to be $50 or nothing.

Canyarion · 03-03-2005, 05:28 PM

Haha +rep for your terrible taste of games!

not that I played or dislike HYP

Jonbo298 · 03-03-2005, 06:35 PM

This is reminding me of N64 prices. $59.99 MSRP with prices being higher on some games. It was a major turnoff for the N64

and history seems to be repeating itself

jeepnut · 03-03-2005, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kyuzo

What are you guys talking about? Of course it doesn't look AWESOME but it looks a lot better. But truth be told the leap was tremendous since PSX was a 32 bit console and leaped to 128 bit, so the differences were noticeable. Now it's 128 to 256..... which isn't that big.

Uhhhh...

Difference between 32 and 128 is 96 bits.

Difference between 128 and 256 is 128 bits.

Most of the time you make some pretty good points Kyuzo, but this wasn't one of them.

Besides, if I recall correctly, it's not the number of bits anymore that make the biggest differences in a console's graphics power. So I guess this who comparison is rather pointless.

Regardless, I don't think we should be making excuses for the developers. If they want me to go out and buy a new console, I need to be impressed. So far, none of the graphics I have seen have done it.

As far as prices go, I have a very hard time paying $49.99 for a game as it is unless it comes as a gift. I don't care how cool it is, usually I will wait until it drops to at least $39.99 before I even consider a purchase. $59.99 and $69.99? You can forget about. Waste of money in my opinion.

Stonecutter · 03-03-2005, 08:11 PM

Come on guys, don't be ignorant.

If a game cost $50 in 1996 (when N64 came out) it would cost $62.24 now if the price of the game had risen with inflation.

http://minneapolisfed.org/Research/d...calc/index.cfm

Stop acting like you're not going to spend $60.

I'd love to see EA sports games retailing for 70, that way we can see if the EA Sports dopes like our Kyuzo here will put their money where there mouths have been the last few years "oh I'd buy Madden if it cost $100."