That and the fact that we tend to be very apathetic to new technology as a society in general, Chaos.
Quote:
HDTV is taking its sweet time to catch on in this country - in fact, we may not even get HDTV broadcast signals until 2012 at the earliest, due in part to the general public's reluctance to switch over.
Doesn't SkyOne already broadcast in HD? Unless I read your statement incorrectly...
It does, but only as an optional - and more expensive - extra.
Ah, I see now. I assume Velotix was referring to standard non-extra HD broadcasts then.
Oh, and for the record, I don't own an HDTV either. Would be nice, but my current 20" TV suits me just fine. (don't really have room for anything bigger at the moment anyway) I don't expect I'll be switching to HD until it's necessary or my current TV quits, whichever happens first. And for a standard definition TV, I'm quite pleased with the one I have. It's the best picture quality SDTV I've owned.
Quote:
Doesn't SkyOne already broadcast in HD? Unless I read your statement incorrectly...
Thankyou for reminding me; Sky is our Satellite TV service in this country, so you have to pay for it (on top of a 131.50 TV licence which has to be renewed every year, might I add). I was referring to Freeview; the digital TV service that requires a standard aerial to watch and is free to view, licence permitting of course.
Yeah, "high-tech" seems to be more popular here than in some other countries.
Cyc, just shut up. If you choose to believe that I think only 12 Xbox games work on the X360, go right ahead. Do me a favour and don't tell too many other people that I think that, yeah? C'mon, I don't spread lies about what YOU believe, do I?
30%? less than a third?! Damn, dude, that's just pathetic. I mean, the PAL PS3 uses software emulation too, and it claims a success rate of just under 75%, and everyone is screaming bloody murder about that. What the hell is the deal?
and why are we still talking about the X360 in a thread about the Wii?
Why are we talking about TVs in a thread about the Wii?
Threads go on tangents. If it's not doing any harm, it's not going any harm. Let it be. We established all the stuff about the Wii early on, under normal conditions this thread would be falling down the ranks by now.
Okay, fair enough. Though, the X360 doesn't affect how the Wii plays. Graphics do, hence the HD discussion.
Graphics don't affect how something playes, either.
They just affect how it looks while doing so.
Frankly, once you move into 3D territory, everything else is pretty much just bells and whistles.
Graphics are an aspect of the Wii.
The X360 is not.
^ Is that less likely to get something like that again?
Quote:
I mean, the PAL PS3 uses software emulation too, and it claims a success rate of just under 75%, and everyone is screaming bloody murder about that.
See my previous post as to why.
So if the Wii sucks because it's graphics aren't as good as the PS3 or aren't HD, does that mean the PS2 sucks by default now, despite how good it was last weekend before the PS3?
Quote:
30%? less than a third?! Damn, dude, that's just pathetic. I mean, the PAL PS3 uses software emulation too, and it claims a success rate of just under 75%, and everyone is screaming bloody murder about that. What the hell is the deal?
The deal is that Sony promised 100% backwards compatibility from the beginning. There were already some minor problems with the hardware method, and now they plan to drop back to software emulation, offering considerably less compatibility than the hardware method offered, and with it being unlikely that it will ever increase. All after promising 100% compatibility.
Meanwhile, Microsoft never once promised 100% compatibility. Microsoft's compatibility percentage may be considerably lower than Sony's, but they never said it would be otherwise. People have every right to be annoyed at Sony after they were pretty much lied to.
And despite not having the full backwards compatibility other regions do, Europe still pays a lot more than everyone else.
Quote:
does that mean the PS2 sucks by default now, despite how good it was last weekend before the PS3?
It still is good which is why games are still coming out for it, and more people bought a PS2(even if it's 6 year-old hardware) than a PS3(new hawtness).
And about the Wii, it seems to be the only new home consoles with zero BC issues for obvious reasons.
I have an issue with how they claimed, before the console's specs were released, to be backwards compatible with pretty much everything including N64...then it's only compatible if you ppay them to download it. What if we own the cart? We're screwed and still have to buy it again (when it's free elsewhere anyway).
I don't recall that Nintendo claimed that Virtual Console was going to be free.
Quote:
Cyc, just shut up. If you choose to believe that I think only 12 Xbox games work on the X360, go right ahead. Do me a favour and don't tell too many other people that I think that, yeah? C'mon, I don't spread lies about what YOU believe, do I?
First of all, saying "just shut up" doesn't qualify as an argument. Even if you were exaggerating, it was a MAJOR exaggeration to say thay only "a dozen" Xbox games are compatible with Xbox 360. If you truly believe that only 100 Xbox games work with Xbox 360, then you're still completely off from the 298 that actually do. Stop telling people to shut up and admit that you made a very misleading exaggeration to try to prove your point (if there even is one to this thread anymore).
DM Forte:
<<I don't recall that Nintendo claimed that Virtual Console was going to be free.>>
Me neither. Well, maybe the statement came from some Nintendrone pipe dream.
SX:
<<What if we own the cart? We're screwed and still have to buy it again>>
You only have the options of buying the game again if you don't have access to a working cart-based Nintendo console anymore, and you choose not to replace it or get it fixed by Nintendo or any other place.
The only issues I have with the VC so far from a non-Wii owner point of view is the small game list, and the pricing of the games. I think at the most NES games should be priced at $2-$3 and SNES at $4-$5. Though they use Wii Points and I'm not exactly sure what it the current equivilant of 800 Wii Point to US dollars.
<<(when it's free elsewhere anyway).>>
And by that you mean illegal.
Quote:
Though they use Wii Points and I'm not exactly sure what it the current equivilant of 800 Wii Point to US dollars.
$8.
It's overpriced. I'm a Wii-supporter, and I do not deny this. The emulation's spot-on, though.
30%? less than a third?! Damn, dude, that's just pathetic. I mean, the PAL PS3 uses software emulation too, and it claims a success rate of just under 75%, and everyone is screaming bloody murder about that. What the hell is the deal?
Sony initially promised 100% compatibility. Microsoft initially promised no compatibility, and then limited compatibility (some Platinum Hits titles, basically). Now they are releasing a patch every six months or so that adds dozens of new titles to the compatibility list.
Cyc, just shut up.
What is this the O'Reilly Factor now?
Do me a favour and don't tell too many other people that I think that, yeah? C'mon, I don't spread lies about what YOU believe, do I?
So far, this has pretty much been between you and me. I haven't exactly been making the rounds.
Hey at least they aren't really overcharging us for old games like they did when they released those old games for the Game Boy Advance.
Ugh. The fact that it's so extreme an exaggeration is supposed to be the hint that it's just that.
Even if it was intended to be a sarcastic exaggeration, it made no sense...
Quote:
Personally, I'm more upset about the backwards compatibility issue (here in the US it's only hte 360) because they still advertise that you have HUNDREDS OF CLASSIC GAMES in the library, when of those hundreds, only a dozen work.
...because in truth, they advertise that you have hundreds of classic games in the library, and you can, in fact, play hundreds of Xbox titles on the 360.
Quote:
what does it have beyond some crappy gimmicks, channels with cheap, overrated features (pay for internet browser? What the hell, seriously?)
Actually, SX, the internet browser is absolutely free that is if you download it before June, and even if someone were to wait until June, it would be a one time fee of 500 Wii Points ($5). BTW, to me, the "gimmicks" are far from crappy whether gimmick is the right word for them or not.
Oh, and about Secret Rings, it's more than just steering Sonic; it's actually fun and this coming from a guy who also enjoyed StH06 very muchly.
Downloading it before June is a trial, Nintendo said. Five bucks is five bucks more than needed. It's less the AMOUNT and more that you have to sign up, register paypal or a credit card (which usually = mailbox spam), and give them money, when the exact same kind of thing is available for free everywhere else.
Gimmick is the right word, and "crappy" is an opinion. One mostly formed on research, not experience. "In marketing language, a gimmick is a unique or quirky special feature that makes something "stand out" from its contemporaries. However, the special feature is typically thought to be of little relevance or use. Thus, a gimmick is a special feature for the sake of having a special feature."
All consoles do it. You can't say the Wii doesn't have "unique or quirky special feature that make something "stand out" from its contemporaries." Most of the gimmicks, especially some of the channels, fit that perfectly; like the forecast channel, for example. It's neat. But it's also mostly useless; it doesn't allow anything that isn't allowed before. It's like MP3 play on gaming consoles; almost everyone has an MP3 or CD player anyway, or at least a computer. Sure, it's neat to check the forecast on the Wii. but y'know, Firefox constantly updates me on the weather anyway. Also, I can just flip the the Weather Channel on the TV at any time and get a forecast. So what's the point? It's a gimmick.
Sorry, but paying for an internet browser at all just bugs the hell out of me.
Paying 5 bucks for a browser bugs you. Paying the price of a computer for a console bugs me. I don't see why people have to argue.
~Tobe
Quote:
Downloading it before June is a trial, Nintendo said.
No, downloading it before APRIL is a trial. Downloading it between April and June is a free Internet Browser; one I don't expect I'll use much, but one I'll certainly download anyway.
And you don't have to "sign up" for anything; if you don't have PayPal or a credit card, you just go into a store, buy a 2000 Wii Points card for $20, and use that on the shop. Simple.
EDIT: Actually, you can't even use PayPal. That'd have made life a bit easier, all things considered (the Wii won't take my debit card, annoyingly).
Game stores (in the uk that is) recently had the 2000 wii points packs for 7.49. I assume they would be cheaper in usland. Thus no credit cards/paypal/spam etc etc etc
or not @ SH: "$20"
I've never seen these Wii Points cards. Hm.
Still. That's $20 more than what I'd pay otherwise.
Rico: it seems odd that the one who bragged about the $3k computer is whining about the price of something liket hat.
Maybe when more options open up, you'll be able to get free or even better internet browsers. I mean, how long has the Wii been out?
If you don't like it, don't get it. And you complaining about a few dollars for an internet browser seems strange since you come off as a rich kid. Forgive me if I'm wrong...
How long has the PS3 (And the 360 iirc) been out, and we already have free internet browsers.
And if you don't like the PS3's internet browser, well, there's always using the Other OS system (They have free Linuxes specifically designed to take advantage fothe PS3's strengths) and just installing Opera or Firefox anyway.
I thought we'd established that he didn't like it and won't get it, though.
The 360 doesn't have an internet browser. At least, not one that you can use without hacking the thing.
I wouldn't have paid 2000 for something that just played games, SX. Quit trying to twist my words, you're not Jimro. :p
"But the PS3 can play Blu-Ray as well and can run Linux!!!"
I wonder if I just predicted the future.
Also, And you complaining about a few dollars for an internet browser seems strange since you come off as a rich kid.
TORN SAID THE R WORD *spasmcollapse*
I'm not a "rich kid" and it's fairly annoying (less so to you, but I've said it in chat for a long time now) knowing just how long I've waited and saved for such a thing. Rich =/= saving money. I'm not poor. I'm not going to claim I'm poor. I'm sitting comfortably in a two-story (+basement) house, watching a 32" LCD tv (bought on the cheap) in my room. I have my own computer in my room (It's a horribly, horribly cheap one, but I do realize that's more than most people can claim). But I'm not rich and I don't always have money. And the money I do have can go to better things than a feature that other things come with for free.
Anyway, if we were rich, I wouldn't get practically-daily asschewings from Dad on the cost of things.
Then it seems quite ironic you complain about paying 5 dollars for an internet browser when you just dropped 600 on a huge black box that most of us don't intend to get until it's much cheaper.
It isn't the price. Five bucks is almost nothing.
It's the thought that you can, on one hand, pay for something at all, when on the other, you can get the exact same thing just standard, for free.
Well, why do you have to pay for your first game with the PS3, while on the other hand, you can get one standard, for free.
And this isn't just five bucks.
Well, now, even though, 5 bucks is a drop in the bucket for most, I can actually see SX's point here. I mean with PSPs, PS3s, and any computer you get a free web browser; however, you got to pay for it on the Wii? I know Nintendo has enough money that they could have given it free, right? However, I still don't think it's that bad but I do understand.
Well, Steebs, if you want to count that - there are a lot of demos on Playstation Store that are just free games with only one or two levels. Things that are amazingly fun, yet not the knd of thing I'd spend ,money on (Full Auto 2: I don't really care for driving games, but it's fun for a free game). And that's more a few tiny minigames than an actual game...the games you pay for last hours and hours, while that'd only last me a few hours before I got bored with them.
Yeah, well what if you don't have wireless internet. You can't access the store, so you cannot get the demos. =/
EDIT: For me, it's basically what THS said.
You don't have wired internet either? Dunno about the 20GBs, but my 60GB PS3 has a port on the back.
I can't speak for everyone, but my internet line comes in at the very opposite side of the house to where all my games and such are, and there's no room for a TV where the modem is. So basically, for me it's wireless or nothing. Not that I don't have wireless adaptors, but you see my point for those who don't.
Yeah, well what if you don't have wireless internet.
Get a router, then. They cost like forty dollars. I'm tired of people who act like not having broadband or wireless is some kind of irreparable disease.
Actually, they have wireless things meant to plug in on one end to a modem, and to any console with LAN ports on the other. With no setup needed, some are said to be literally as simple as plugging them in on both sides and playing (and that isn't from the maker of said wireless adapter) - but, if you leave it like that, you're inviting anyone with a laptop and a WiFi card to free internet.
Cyc, I'm not complaining or acting that I can't get it, there's just no need for me to get it (there's only one computer in the house and I have no desire to play games online). I was just saying what if someone had no reason to buy wireless. But, I guess that it's just impossible for someone not to have some form of internet that allows online gaming.
