'Xbox 2 Development Secrets Revealed'

  • Thread starter Thread starter R420
  • Start date Start date
Tim said:
Consoles suck compared to PCs for controller options, they should expand
their diversity. For some games nothing beats a mouse and keyboard,
especially FPS titles. MS should give its customers the *option* of using
controls best suited for the game. Obviously anyone reading this already
has a keyboard, mouse and monitor (most of them, anyway) So why not give
them the option of using them? How much could that cost MS compared to the
R&D of new graphics technology? And with a KVM switch you could integrate it
right into your PC rig, giving you the advantages of both. For those who
prefer the XBox on the living room TV, using a regular controller, could do
that too.
Click to expand...

You don't play consoles much, I think.
 
You don't play consoles much, I think.
Click to expand...

LOL We're creeping towards convergence every day. PCs can now be used with
your TV so why not allow your console to be used along side your PC? For
games, I think the XBox is a GREAT alternative to a pricy PC upgrade. It
makes sense to at least have the *option* of using common controllers and
screen.
 
Consoles suck compared to PCs for controller options, they should expand
their diversity.
Click to expand...

For controller _options_, yes, consoles suck compared to PCs. For control,
they are oh-so-much better. Trying to find a PC game that supports analog
control aside from the mouse (ie. analog movement, not just looking) is next
to impossible. Different controllers, and even different mice (aside from
mouse settings) react differently in-game. On a console, the developers
know exactly what controller you're using, and can program responsiveness
accordingly.
On the PC, quite frankly, any game that doesn't lend itself well to a one
non-centerable analog device (mouse) and 100 unintuitively layed-out keys,
has really lousy control. Even games that properly support gamepads (even
using a console controller) don't feel right on the PC. It's one reason
that only a few genres still thrive on PC--point and click based games, FPS
games, and button-heavy simulators.
There's really no compelling reason to introduce keyboard support to
consoles. The keyboard is a horrible game control device. The mouse is
nice at a desk, but not very comfortable to use from a couch. Console
controls are fine. There's room for improvement, but aping the PC's
non-gaming-related setup is not the answer, at all.
 
There's really no compelling reason to introduce keyboard support to
consoles. The keyboard is a horrible game control device. The mouse is
nice at a desk, but not very comfortable to use from a couch.
Click to expand...

Again, it's nice just to have the option.
 
Michel Thiffault said:
____________________________________________________________________________

Get this then:

http://www.apexdigitalinc.com/proddetail.asp?category=ApeXtreme&subcat=&linenumber=76&c=4

Or some fine products here:

http://www.alienware.com
http://www.dell.com
http://www.hp.com
http://www.gateway.com

Who needs a keyboard in a living room (or worst: 4 keyboards for multiplayer
games)?
Click to expand...

What if it would be bluetooth, and only contained WASD keys plus F1-F4
(smaller than most gamepads) and a wireless mouse that would also serve as a
remote control for media capabilites surfing ?
Or a full size rollable keyboard ?
 
Paul Smith said:
Intel standards will be around. Power PC is yet to be seen - it certainly
doesn't deliver anywhere near the "bang per buck" that x86 does. The
whole Power PC business seems to be wishful thinking by Apple users.
AMD64 please.
Click to expand...

2Ghz 64bit processor that has typical power in the ~25watt range....

Oh, whats that.. the PowerPC 970FX is the only one.....

(There's a 30w 2Ghz Opteron IIRC, but even so..)

-JB
 
Leon Dexter said:
On the PC, quite frankly, any game that doesn't lend itself well to a one
non-centerable analog device (mouse) and 100 unintuitively layed-out keys,
has really lousy control.
Click to expand...

I still pine for they days of Doom, entirely controlled by the
joystick. Being stuck to the desk, operating the mouse and keyboard,
is one of the reasons I don't enjoy the new games nearly as much as I
enjoyed Doom.
 
Intel standards will be around. Power PC is yet to be seen - it certainly
doesn't deliver anywhere near the "bang per buck" that x86 does. The whole
Power PC business seems to be wishful thinking by Apple users. AMD64
please.
Click to expand...

Power PC is used in alot more applications than just apple et al. Its
pretty much the defacto CPU for many military applications.

The big point of the processor is supposed to be that it supports ML
native. Now whether that was speculation or not is another thing, but
if it does support ML as the native machine code then it doesn't
matter whether its intel/amd/ibm as the CPU instruction set will be
custom to the application. It doesn't seem unreasonable to support ML
after all its really just a version of a JVM.

This 3 CPU stuff got me thinking. Personally I expect 1 CPU but 2 or
three cores on the same die. This is the way the CPU manufaturers are
pushing now and its the latest big thing they are all touting as
comming soon.
128Mb ? What's the ****ing point then? You'll need dozens of the things.

Dropping HDD - big mistake. I'd rather pay an extra £100 for the hardware
then have to put up with shitty flash memory.
Click to expand...

Personally I wouldn't want to loose the HD either, it would be a big
mistake and a retrograde step, espesh as the ps3 will have one.
 
Back
Top