By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - If you think about it, the original xbox was ahead of its time besides xbox live.

teigaga on 14 October 2015

This is partially why it performed better then the gamecube. It was offering something really exciting in the console space.

Its what introduced me to western RPGs with Fable and Knights of the Rebulic



Around the Network
kappie1977 on 14 October 2015
DonFerrari said:
tripenfall said:
Halo showed that a FPS could be as good on a console (if not better) than a PC so in that regard the XBOX was
very influential. The problem with the console IMO was that other than Halo 2 no other games match the quality of the launch title. A bit of a let down there.
Also first XBOX controller was a turd.... And the size and weight of the console itself yikes!
Despite some good ideas and high specs the PS2 ruled the day.

Ignoring N64 and GoldenEye in this case is an abyssal mistake.

I was exactly thinking of this. I think Golden Eye is THE GAME which paved all path for FPS genre on Consoles!!
Furthermore the mentioning earlier about Live network on Xbox was way ahead of it's time, that's not true I think Sega (with the Dreamcast was way ahead of his time) but I must say Microsoft did a very good job with their network functionality as they improved the online experience on consoles in general! Because of this they pushed Sony to also finally invest in a good online experience on their consoles as this was really lacking in PS2 time!



DonFerrari on 14 October 2015
zero129 said:
DonFerrari said:
zero129 said:

The console versions compared to Halo i wouldnt call them crap but imo the console versions of them games wasnt as good as Halo or had as big of an impact. But id credit Goldeneye on N64 as being the game that showed FPS could be great on console and Halo building on that. and Credit Halo 2 more so then Halo 1 for opening the gates to online FPS games on console.

Also did any of them games pave the way for online shooters on consoles??.

Ill also answer most of your other questions here.

"Besides the above mentioned Half Life being PS2 console exclusive" it was also being made for the Dreamcast (Running an MS OS and in a way was what paved the way for the original xbox and ms to enter the console space), but it was canceled not long before release due to sega going 3rd party. But you can find it online and afaik it is fully playable.

"Age of Empires 2, with RTS games being one of the most PC centric genres, was released on PS2 before the Xbox had even been released. But hey, PS2 did nothing for PC developers right?"

Where did i say PS2 did nothing for PC developers??. I didnt say that but its clear they didnt do as much as MS..

Also is Age of Empires big on consoles today? does it sell millions of copies on consoles today??.

Thanks to the Original Xbox being pretty much a PC with a custom OS (Kinda like the way all consoles are today and something that used to be used to slander the original xbox funny how times change), it made it really easy for Once PC devs such as Bethesda to port to consoles for the first time something that they continued with the 360 and is the main reason why we see so many of them genres that are now huge in the console space.

Imo to denie this is just being ignorant to just what MS did do for the console space.

Now maybe you have your reasons for doing so, i dont know.

But your coming across to me as someone who would sooner see sony get credit for something where credit is not due, instead of seeing the one that deserves it get it, and will try to come up with a number of excuses and reasons as to why the one who doesnt deserve it should get it instead of just saying "Yeah good job ms for making it easy for PC devs to enter the console space when Sony was doing everything to make it super hard twice in a row for developers to develope on their consoles".

So like i said while Sony was making game development hard with both the PS2&3 MS was doing everything they could to make it as simple and easy as possible to develope for their system. Something Sony was forced to adopt to with the PS4.


Sony made everything to make it super hard twice to develope on their consoles??? Are you saying that because of architeture? Well it wasn't that way to prevent devs to release on them... or are you talking about something else?

And being a PC with custom OS have made the consoles lose a lot of their charm to me... Wouldn't care much if my PS3 or PS4 were exclusively made to play games. So that is one improvement that Xbox brought that I don't apreciate... and the HD + online MP I couldn't care less.

Yes cos of the design of the systems with PS2+3 made them super hard to develope for and that was for a reason. To make the systems last longer.

It payed off with the PS2 since it become such a massive success thanks to coming off the back of the PS1 and Sonys great marketing but in a way it bited Sony or should i say Kaz in the ass with the PS3 even his comment here" "We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that (developers) want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do, so then the question is, what do you do for the rest of the nine-and-a-half years?" explained Hirai. LINK: http://www.cnet.com/news/sony-ps3-is-hard-to-develop-for-on-purpose/ " shows that they made it hard for a reason.

and i know Sony would of continued that trend with the PS4 if it wasnt for the 360 being such a success and gaining so many developers thanks to its ease compared to the PS3.


PSX to PS3 was hard to develope for, but not made like that specially to prevent PC devs to enter the market, so I fail to see your point.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari on 14 October 2015
kappie1977 said:
DonFerrari said:

Ignoring N64 and GoldenEye in this case is an abyssal mistake.

I was exactly thinking of this. I think Golden Eye is THE GAME which paved all path for FPS genre on Consoles!!
Furthermore the mentioning earlier about Live network on Xbox was way ahead of it's time, that's not true I think Sega (with the Dreamcast was way ahead of his time) but I must say Microsoft did a very good job with their network functionality as they improved the online experience on consoles in general! Because of this they pushed Sony to also finally invest in a good online experience on their consoles as this was really lacking in PS2 time!


Mega Drive/Genesis already had online capabilities... MS made it mainstream for console, and I absolutely don't like online, 10x preferance for local co-op



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari on 14 October 2015
zero129 said:
DonFerrari said:
zero129 said:

Yes cos of the design of the systems with PS2+3 made them super hard to develope for and that was for a reason. To make the systems last longer.

It payed off with the PS2 since it become such a massive success thanks to coming off the back of the PS1 and Sonys great marketing but in a way it bited Sony or should i say Kaz in the ass with the PS3 even his comment here" "We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that (developers) want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do, so then the question is, what do you do for the rest of the nine-and-a-half years?" explained Hirai. LINK: http://www.cnet.com/news/sony-ps3-is-hard-to-develop-for-on-purpose/ " shows that they made it hard for a reason.

and i know Sony would of continued that trend with the PS4 if it wasnt for the 360 being such a success and gaining so many developers thanks to its ease compared to the PS3.


PSX to PS3 was hard to develope for, but not made like that specially to prevent PC devs to enter the market, so I fail to see your point.

No compared to the Saturn the PS1 was easy to develope for. also they done it so that devs couldnt max out the consoles and in return that made it hard for pc devs or did you not see that quote up there from kaz?.

MS allowed it to be easy for PC devs since coding for the xbox was so much like coding for a pc very different from the PS2 and PS3.


I saw, and it says it would make it take longer to max out the console. Not specifically about prohibit or make specially worse for PC devs... it affected them and all 3rd parties... so your point is that by making it harder for everyone they were focusing on making it worse just for PC?

And Dreamcast being alien design don't make PS1 easy, just easier... and since PS2 released before Xbox and GC you can't say they decided to make it harder than both, just hard... so is there any purpose to this or just complain about sony?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
Sprash on 14 October 2015

Where is the video link to crapgamer?



 

 

Chazore on 14 October 2015
zero129 said:
Ka-pi96 said:
Half Life? I played that on my PS2...

Pretty sure Doom and Counter Strike predate Xbox by a long way. Besides I didn't even know they were on the system despite owning one myself, same with Morrowind actually.

As for the other stuff, it seems to me the Xbox 360 was MUCH more important for those than the original Xbox.


But it still cant be denied that the original xbox Paved the way for PC developers to enter the console space at a time when them type of games where mainly on PC.

Even if it wasnt until the xbox360 when them type of games really took off in the console space it was still the original xbox that opened the doors for them once PC only developers.

They seemed more or less within that direction back then, even now (at such a weird time) than their competitors to which one of them recently cut all ties with PC gaming.



Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"

Abun on 14 October 2015
zero129 said:
Abun said:
zero129 said:

Yes cos of the design of the systems with PS2+3 made them super hard to develope for and that was for a reason. To make the systems last longer.

It payed off with the PS2 since it become such a massive success thanks to coming off the back of the PS1 and Sonys great marketing but in a way it bited Sony or should i say Kaz in the ass with the PS3 even his comment here" "We don't provide the 'easy to program for' console that (developers) want, because 'easy to program for' means that anybody will be able to take advantage of pretty much what the hardware can do, so then the question is, what do you do for the rest of the nine-and-a-half years?" explained Hirai. LINK: http://www.cnet.com/news/sony-ps3-is-hard-to-develop-for-on-purpose/ " shows that they made it hard for a reason.

and i know Sony would of continued that trend with the PS4 if it wasnt for the 360 being such a success and gaining so many developers thanks to its ease compared to the PS3.

You don't have any idea what you are talking about and try to come off as you sre speaking facts when you are dead wrong lol.I played several PC games on the PSX and that is a fact that it started the trend of PC devs putting their games on consoles.youc an not disporve that and the argument was aout PC games,bit FPS only in which the N64 popularized on consoles and offline co-op paved the way for online gaming on consoles.

I think your a bit mixed up here or what im saying is going over your head.

Also it seems to me like your the one speaking facts when your wrong on a number of things..

Where did i say that no PC game ever came to a Sony platform?? they did, but they never became console sellers like they are today and in most cases didnt even resemble the games they came from Call of Duty made by a console developer on consoles and not the original dev. With GTA Rockstar imo has always been more of a console developer and im pretty sure GTA was never a once PC exclusive. Baldures Gate on PS2 was nothing like its PC version and the list goes on.

But like i said i never said that no PC ports ever came to a Sony Console. I said Sony made it harder on PC devs with the PS2 and PS3 where as MS paved the way by making it super easy on them.

Also your stating your opinion as facts when you say "Not as good is laughable,because they were better but they did not have the impact because Sony did not need them to sell their console"

If them other FPS games that your talking about was as good as Halo is on consoles imo they would still be around and still be big today.

Also even if Sony didnt need them (So then Sony only needed FPS after they seen how big they where thanks to MS with Halo?? is this what your saying??)their publishers and devs needed to sell them!. Kinda the same way Call of Duty didnt need Sony or MS to become huge they needed a good game MW1.

Also if them other FPS games your talking about was better they would of had higher ratings and sold better then Halo did since they had a much larger install base. But like i said its all down to opinions its just that my opinion seems to go along with a much larger precentage then the one your stating as fact..

Also i credit Goldeneye with being what made FPS work on consoles and Halo worked on that to improve it with Halo 2 making Online FPS on consoles huge unless this is something you want to denie too?.

As usual you are full of contradcitons.Those other FPS did not sell better or get better ratings because the PS2 had better games to offer while the Xbox only had Halo which got hyped because the Xbox needed it for survival.See my point now?Nothing you said went over my head and I just pointed out how off you were with claiming that the Xbox is responsible for FPS being popular or bringing PC games/devs to consoles.Both are wrong and you have not rebuttal for my facts.



fatslob-:O on 14 October 2015

If anything it was the Xbox 360 that paved way for making some western and PC centric games big as it is today ...

Aside from Halo, the Original Xbox didn't do any of what you mentioned and there were a lot of those types of games that existed preceding the Original Xbox ...



DonFerrari on 14 October 2015
zero129 said:
DonFerrari said:
zero129 said:

No compared to the Saturn the PS1 was easy to develope for. also they done it so that devs couldnt max out the consoles and in return that made it hard for pc devs or did you not see that quote up there from kaz?.

MS allowed it to be easy for PC devs since coding for the xbox was so much like coding for a pc very different from the PS2 and PS3.


I saw, and it says it would make it take longer to max out the console. Not specifically about prohibit or make specially worse for PC devs... it affected them and all 3rd parties... so your point is that by making it harder for everyone they were focusing on making it worse just for PC?

And Dreamcast being alien design don't make PS1 easy, just easier... and since PS2 released before Xbox and GC you can't say they decided to make it harder than both, just hard... so is there any purpose to this or just complain about sony?

What im saying must be going right over your head at this stage cos you just dont seem to be getting it.

Where did i say that Sony made it hard for "Just" Pc developers??, my words where "MS made it easy for PC developers" . No point in trying to base your argument around something that doesnt exist..

And the Dreamcast was easy to develope for since it was running an MS OS, so i dont know where your getting that from..

And yes it was easier on Sony themselfs, since they knew their own hardware! and was the ones making the SDK's but shipping out PS2 SDK's to western devs with japan manuals and being a few updates behind compared to some of the japanese studios didnt help western devs with developing for the PS2 also..

As for your last remark.. You shouldnt ask someone a question if when you dont like facts or their answer your just going to downplay it as "Simply complaining" .


In this thread you have offended another user and me twice with pedantic "must be going right over your head" and which fact I didn 't like and your suggestion of fanboyism to me and the other user... and what purpose does that hold?

this is what you said

But like i said i never said that no PC ports ever came to a Sony Console. I said Sony made it harder on PC devs with the PS2 and PS3 where as MS paved the way by making it super easy on them.

MS allowed it to be easy for PC devs since coding for the xbox was so much like coding for a pc very different from the PS2 and PS3.

So yes, you were implying by some reason that sony was focusig on make difficult to PC devs and MS easier... the Kaz quote and your explaining shows that it clearly was harder for all no focus on PC dev, but you tried to defend the other point, so please decide yourself and be more respectfull.

And I mixed DC with Saturn, which also come after PS1, so Sony difficult to dev for have no relation with their competitors or making it harder on specific devs or region of the globe... and yes X360 made Sony focus on making PS4 easier.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."