But I bet you will only be able to download Nintendo games right?. Like Mario, for example. No way in life you will be able to download Mega Man games, I guess. Capcom just released Mega Man Anniversary Collection for Xbox, PS2 and Gamecube. Before that, they re-released Mega Man 1-8 to PSone. It's soon coming a Mega Man X - Collection too...

What I'm trying to say is, that even though those games are old, they are still very profitable. I really, really don't think you will be able to download so many. Not by legal means anyway

No but not like nintendo games are bad. And I think games whose License nintendo owns they can rerelease. We shall see I guess....but man Zelda a link to the past again? Dare I hope for Super Mario RPG THE BEST GAME of all time!? *drools drool*

bah, this is pointless. Why pay for games you already have just to play them on the new nintendo if you can already use emulators? Of course, if you don't have them, that's a different story. But I feel that the Namco games sell for a lot more than what they are actually worth.

As someone said. A lot of people have long since gotten rid of their old game consoles. Cartridges tend to fail rather easily IMO. I mean don't any of you remember blowing on the old nintendo slots just so it would play :-p

That's so true. But looks like they've improved a lot though. I never had to blow in my N64 or Gameboy games . It's not as reliable as CD/DVD's that you even make backups yourself easily, but still... NES pretty much sucked though. Hated even more games with battery (as Final Fantasy, LOL) that you could easily lose you save games.... arghh. That's has nothing to do with the fact that I hate FF, I promise .

Now that I mentioned, I think I have had problems with save games on every single platform I've ever tried: NES, Snes, N64 (specially with Castlevania 64, it had the bad habit of delete my save games on my memory card). PSone had crappy games as Fifa Soccer 98 which could erase your memory card. Xbox loves to corrupt files from the hard drive too... Never had problems with PC games though.

I second that. I'm not going to buy it out of sheer protest because of my hate against Micro$oft. I hope more will join me on this. The more that boycott Micro$oft (in all of their forms, Windows, Xbox etc), the better for Linux, PlayStation etc. Now remember, Sony were nice enough to release PS2 Linux, and that goes far with people like me. Clearly, they support open source (unlike EVIL Micro$oft).

HALO 3 confirmed for XBox 360. Im just saying.....

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html

I'm not an expert on hardware, but oh man, that sounded like the most biased thing I've ever read. Why is Micro$oft the only company in the world that is claiming Xbox 360 to be superior PS3 when every gaming site and everyone else claims the opposite?

Because what sane company would say otherwise? Oh yeah nintendo did and they are doing well....its a shame I really love nintendo the most.

Oh and Sony a big proponent for Open Source huh? yeah ok whatever. Thats the biggest load of garbage I have ever heard. Sony wants nothing more then for the world to use your Sony branded, Computers, with their sony branded Cell Processors, which can connect to sony branded: Digital cameras, video cameras, game systems, and MP3 players all who utilize Sony's memory stick and/or UMD media systems and watch it all on a Sony TV/Monitor with our Sony surround sound system. lets not forget to pay the Sony Premium license fee's which make anythign branded by sony 20% higher then anything else. And let us not forget in the sony future every media will be played using Sony branded blu-ray information storage discs. Everything from Sony is propietary. The only reason they made a Linux kit available is so they can make even more money. The way they saw it is that someone was going to try and do it anyways so hell why not do it for them and charge people for it. Actually it was done to harbor the anti-MS people who love linux and loathe MS and migrate them towards Sony products.

I don't care about what you're saying. So far I've seen Sony support standards like MPEG-4 and Linux (as opposed to Micro$oft). That's enough for me.

Nintendo fan here too. At least I'm used to be. Sadly, most of my Nintendo favorite games went Sony, as Mega Man and Castlevania. Oh well .

Now, how exactly is Linux standard?. If there's something on earth that has no standard at all, that's Linux. No single package manager, multiples desktops, custom kernels... Every company out there has it's own version of Linux, which looks and feels totally different from one to another.Now, I love Linux the way it is, and I'd hate to see only one alternative. But saying that Sony supports standards as Linux is just nonsense.

Sony is just as "evil" as MS as stabile007 stated. They both want to be the only ones on your living room. Sony has even smashed the concurrence as Sega, because they had more third part developers, making exclusive games for them, in a dated, crappy hardware as PSone was. We had better alternatives at that time, as N64 and later Dreamcast. They did not get as "good/many" games as PSone due those lame exclusive titles. The ones who lost the most at the end, were the players (such as me) who had to own multiples consoles to play my favorite games, Mega Man on Sony PSX, Mario on N64, etc.

At least, unlike Sony, MS is very innovative and did a great job on the Xbox, pushing the graphics to the very best for it's time and shipping with things that no other console had by the time, as harddrive, network card and great online experience with Xbox Live (we even got Doom 3 for the Xbox, which PS2 could never ever possible run), while Sony PS2 barely changed the joypad color to black... And Nintendo totally disappointed on this aspect with Gamecube too. No DVD playback, ugly handle on the console and one of the high bosses on Nintendo said himself that Gamecube would not have online play, because "Players don't want to play Online". No wonder why Nintendo is going down. And the funny thing is, Nintendo is killing themselves slowly and not by the concurrence . First created N64 when everybody was going with CD-rom media. Then creating a custom sized DVD for Gamecube, when everybody was using ordinary DVD's for the DVD playback function. Hopefully, is Sony going down too.

Go Xbox

I know very well that Linux isn't a standard. I was referring to MPEG-4, which is a standard. As for Linux, I find it good that Sony has shown support for it. That's why I added it into the same sentence. And what Micro$oft did, was to pack a PC with a control and call it a console... very innovative indeed. If you've got a hard on for graphics, then I doubt we play games for the same reasons (I'm after game play). How much was it that Micro$oft loosed on the Xbox? A couple of billion dollars if I'm not mistaken? Oh and Castlevania/Mega Man rule.

Well, your comparison of a Xbox to a PC is not very valid, sorry. How exactly is the PS2 different from a PC for that matter?. It has a processor, it has RAM, it reads ROM, writes and read files, read inputs, generate outputs... it can be added a harddrive and the tiny PS2 has a network card already out of the box. On the top of it, you can install an OS as Linux and use as a personal computer. It's _exactly_ like a PC. It's not that we are comparing a PC to a toaster. MS choose x86 as a processor, because that's what they are "good" at. They also have their own API (DirectX) and their own development tools, as Visual Studio, which works neat with DirectX, indeed. Choosing a x86 is not only easier for MS, but good for developers already familiar with game development in Windows, using DX API. Xbox runs a custom win2k kernel, a custom Nvidia card. It's very, very well designed.

"If you've got a hard on for graphics, then I doubt we play games for the same reasons (I'm after game play)"

How exactly is the PS2 gameplay superior to the Xbox?. Is it the controls? Because with a 15 USD adaptor, you can plug a PS2 joypad on the Xbox. If you were refering to the gaming experience, I also have to disagree. Xbox has a much more solid framerate then PS2. Take a look into Halo 2 or Unreal Championship 2. It has great gameplay and solid fps. Please, tell me how great is the gameplay you were after. And I'm not after the graphics, if I was, then I'd be gaming in a PC with a 500 USD graphics card right?. And don't tell me that PS2 owners were never after graphics either. Otherwise, everybody would still be playing PSone, since the games on PS2 are more of sequels with similar gameplay, but enhanced graphics. When you saw PS2 first time at the Expo, you did not say "what great gameplay" by looking at a movie, did you?. PS2 owners _do_ care about graphics. They just use it as an excuse today . Xbox just happens to have better graphics because 1 - It's newer then PS2 and 2 - Has separated modules for graphics, while PS2 does everything with the crappy Emotion Engine (sorry, it's crap).

And it's obvious that MS won't support Linux. It's their rivals. It's like asking Ferrari to produce engines for the McLaren. For Sony, it's no big deal, they do not have an OS themselves on the market.

Supporting Linux is pretty much paying for it, donating or collaborating with code and making Open-sourced stuff. Anything not going into those lines is debatable. Sony does not do any of these. Some believe that Nvidia gives great support for Linux. I disagree. Nvidia would support Linux with Open-sourced drivers, which they don't provide, only binaries. For me, it looks more like they are interested in selling their products to Linux users. Sony is pretty much giving "support" to Linux to divulge their hardware, since they've nothing to lose anyway, because Linux is free...

ID software, on the other hand, does give a descent support to Linux. Every game they release, you can bet it will be open-sourced in the future. It has been like that since Doom.

Indeed, everybody has different opinions for both Nvidia and ID Sofware and _every_ opinion is right, from a certain point of view .

And every company loses money when selling consoles. Do you think that Sony actually wins money with PS2 for 149 USD? Hardly. The money comes from the game licenses, accessories (as extra joypads, RGB cable, remote control, mem cards) and other services as Xbox Live. Sony gets money by the exactly same way. Indeed, it costs more money to build a Xbox then a PS2, but nonetheless, 149 USD for a console is nowhere profitable.

And even though Xbox had a considerable less amount of released games then Sony PS2, thus, making way less profit then Sony, they won something really good among gamers: Trust. By not dropping Xbox support even with loss, it's most certain that Xbox 1 owners will get the new Xbox. And with a lot of Japanese companies also producing games for the Xbox, you bet the new generations of consoles will kick butts. And looks like every company out there has by now, figured that it's more profitable making games to all platforms instead. We saw games from Capcom to Xbox and Gamecube, for example. Even Konami stopped by the Xbox with a few games too. Why? Because those games most likely weren't making enough money on the Sony's little toy _only_.

So yeah, I do trust MS and the Xbox. Now ask me if I would ever buy another Sega console?. Simply, never. They've just dropped the support since SegaCD (then 32X, Sega Saturn, Dreamcast, Gamegear). They all get a sudden, early death because they can't stand competition. Gameboy kille Gamegear, PSX killed Saturn and Dreamcast, NES killed MasterSystem, Snes killed Megadrive/Genesis). In some case, they even got better hardware then their competitors (as Gamegear with color display, instead of the horrible Gameboy and Dreamcast that was really good).

MS is smart, they've lost a lot of money now, but keeping the support and winning trust, they _will_ be reward at the end. Windows itself took a long time to become profitable too. They are just playing the waiting game... and God knows that they can afford these kind of game too

Next time, please don't write such a long response It's pretty much common knowledge that Xbox is a PC. I'm not going to argue with you about that, because if you deny it, you don't know anything. Sure, PS2 is very similar indeed to a PC, but not as much as an Xbox. This can be argued to be a good thing. I'm not saying that it's bad calling an Xbox a PC. All I'm saying is that it wasn't at all innovating. From a video gamers point of view, it might have been since Xbox was the first console with built in hard drive etc, but please, how revolutionary is it to start making video game consoles more like personal computers? Not much if you ask me. It's just a move in another direction that has already been there for many years. Then for the graphics, sure, they might look better on the Xbox, but face it, PS2 gets better games. That's what I'm after. Hell, the Xbox hasn't even gotten Castlevania yet (though it will later this year), while PS2 already has. Not to forget Devil May Cry, and many other kick ass games that I'm not going to mention. Even the GBA has Castlevania, and you know what? I couldn't care less about a Belmont with a frame rate of 10.000 frames per second, since I still think the games rule with such shitty graphics as the GBA has.

Wrong. You shouldn't presume so much, I really don't care about graphics (if I did, I wouldn't have bought GBA), and I never saw PS2 at the Expo since that was a period for me where I had taken a long break from video gaming. In fact, I didn't like Sony nor their PlayStation to begin with. I'm only after the games, I'm no fanboy of any console. I don't care who makes the consoles, except in the case of Micro$oft, since I hate their guts. Besides, saying that PS2 owners don't care about graphics since they had PS1 and bought PS2, is completely stupid (no offence). New hardware means that game developers like Capcom/Konami etc will inevitably make new games for it, thus almost forcing gamers to upgrade.

Do you really believe they give a shit about your trust? No, they're after your money. That's all. Sure, Sony are too, as are Nintendo. That's what the entire business is about, but please don't portray Micro$oft as some kind of a holy company. The reason why they're not backing out now, is because they believe they can win this console war, and with more people like you, they will. But with more people like me, they won't. At the moment, the people in favour of Sony's console is the majority to go by. Have you checked GameSpots latest poll? http://img289.echo.cx/img289/6643/ps3pwnsagain5nw.gif Besides, how embarrassing wouldn't it be for Micro$oft, one of the richest companies in the world, to just back out of the game right now? Their lead is higher this time (so it seems from the screenshot), but they still have almost twice as much to catch up before even coming equal to Sony.