NHL Free Agent Frenzy!

[Imran Siddiqui]

That's okay... if you want to waste your money, be my guest.

Don't worry I won't. I'll be getting a system that can display graphics better than any PC, on my 30 inch HDTV, while I lean back on the couch with my wireless controller. And all for $400 for the system!

I used to deride consoles, then I got an XBox and I don't think I can really go back (except on strategy games that require a mouse I guess).

[Ninot]

Originally posted by Tingkai
The Leafs will be dangerous if everyone is healthy for the Cup run.

I agreed with most of that, but I think the Leafs will struggle even when healthy. I think with the new penalties and such, the Leafs will just bomb.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I'll be getting a system that can display graphics better than any PC,

one doesn't exist...

console hardware is inferior to PC's... that's just the reality

PC's are just superior Imran. It's pure fact. Nothing you can say will change that.

And what's the point of playing on a 30 inch TV (which is actually kinda small for a TV) when you sit so far away from it? We've got a 36 inch flat screen TV that I used to play my PS2 on. Then I got a video processor and hooked my PS2 up to my 20.1 inch LCD monitor... and it's far superior. Even though the screen is smaller, you sit closer, so it actually takes up more space in your field of vision. even though it didn't improve the PS2's graphics, I can see more detail. Plus, sitting upright in my office chair, my reflexes are better than if I were lounging on my couch.

I don't understand some people. To use cars as an analogy, I guess some people can dillude themselves into thinking driving a yugo is better than a ferrari.

So if you're happier drivin' your yugo, more power to you Imran.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ninot


Have you tried NHL 06?

Please don't make expansive statements about things you have no authority on.

The EA vs. Sega argument is old and boring. Each company puts out something different every year, and each year 1 company seems better.

NHL 06 still doesn't have real goalie physics.

How can you honestly like a hockey game that uses a random function with some probability offsets to determine if a shot is a goal or not? It's a joke of a game, it's an arcade hockey game.

I've played EA's NHL series from '93 up through 2001 and tried the 2K2 version, and never looked back.

It's about time most of you EA players watched a hockey game and compare how that plays out to EA's games. Set 20 minute periods in EA's games and watch the 20-31 goal games...ridiculous.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Asher


NHL 06 still doesn't have real goalie physics.

How can you honestly like a hockey game that uses a random function with some probability offsets to determine if a shot is a goal or not? It's a joke of a game, it's an arcade hockey game.

I've played EA's NHL series from '93 up through 2001 and tried the 2K2 version, and never looked back.

It's about time most of you EA players watched a hockey game and compare how that plays out to EA's games. Set 20 minute periods in EA's games and watch the 20-31 goal games...ridiculous.

who the hell wants total realism?

I don't want to play full length regulation games... that's ridiculous...

EA has dropped the ball before... NHL 2005 was terrible. I spent last year playing NHL2k5.

But facts are Asher, NHL 2006 is solid this year. And unless NHL2k6 is going to be released on PC, there's really no reason to buy it.

blind hatred of EA

judging each game on it's own merits

BTW asher, play NHL2k5 with 20 minute periods and you'll get the same result

[Asher]

Originally posted by Sava
one doesn't exist...

console hardware is inferior to PC's... that's just the reality

PC's are just superior Imran. It's pure fact. Nothing you can say will change that.

That's total nonsense.

The GPU in the Xbox 360 is at least 2 generations ahead of ATI's PC roadmap in technology, and you'll be about 3-4 years away before a PC processor can do the same amount of calculations the Xbox 360 CPU can do.

And what's the point of playing on a 30 inch TV (which is actually kinda small for a TV) when you sit so far away from it? We've got a 36 inch flat screen TV that I used to play my PS2 on.

I don't understand some people. To use cars as an analogy, I guess some people can dillude themselves into thinking driving a yugo is better than a ferrari.

So if you're happier drivin' your yugo, more power to you Imran.

The car analogy doesn't work. I like to compare the analogy to computers vs consoles.

PCs lose about 40% of their performance due to abstracting of the hardware and varying configurations, it takes a couple years for games to fully take advantage of the hardware vs. instantly for consoles, and they're considerably more expensive.

I've had a PC with a similar amount of power as you do, Sava, but I've had mine for a full 2 years.

Since you're antisocial you probably don't understand the main draw of consoles. When you can play with ~4 people at a time at a game like NHL 2K6 infront of a big-screen HDTV with Dolby Digital 5.1 you may have a bigger appreciation for the differences.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Sava
who the hell wants total realism?

I don't want to play full length regulation games... that's ridiculous...

It highlights the fact that EA doesn't actually use physics in their goalies -- which is a major problem.

EA's NHL series feels arcadey and the goals feel so random. The play management is awful, the online play sucks, the league management sucks, and it doesn't even have basic controls like allowing you to skate backwards and sweep with your stick.

EA's NHL games are arcadey, 2K Sports' are more simulations.

EA has dropped the ball before... NHL 2005 was terrible. I spent last year playing NHL2k5.

But facts are Asher, NHL 2006 is solid this year. And unless NHL2k6 is going to be released on PC, there's really no reason to buy it.

blind hatred of EA

judging each game on it's own merits

It's not blind hatred of EA, it's objective hatred. NHL 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 all sucked, while NHL 2K2 through NHL 2K5 have all ruled. And they're $19.95US...

BTW asher, play NHL2k5 with 20 minute periods and you'll get the same result

Actually, that's not true.

Play NHL 2K5 with 20 minute periods and full realism and you'll get realistic game scores.

[Sava]

NHL2k6 with 4 people?

that would be GOD AWFUL

antisocial?

3-4 times a week I go over to my buddies house and we play gamecube and counter-strike, BF2... usually 6-8 of us are passing around controllers playing super smash bros. or mario kart...

ignorant assumptions about my social life

a step up from blind hatred of EA though

I know the car analogy is preposterous. But the point still stands. PC's are superior. Sure Xbox360 is going to be a good console (in terms of performance, not necessarily the quality of its games). But it still is not as good as a PC.

what vid card do you have? IIRC an ATI 9800? similar? not quite...

similar is a real general term Asher... my last system was "similar" in power to my current one... and I had that for about 2 years.

Somehow I suspect, if we were to benchmark games with equal settings and such, I'd come out performing much better.

Now go back to jacking off in your xbox usb port or something, k?

[Asher]

The thing that really pissed me off about EA is I had NHL 2001 for Xbox, but due to my school schedule I wasn't able to play it until about a month and a half after I got it.

And at the end of EVERY game during the corny "celebration" animations, the game would hard-lock. I called EA and they said there were some disc pressing issues (which sounds like bull**** -- I had a launch copy which was obviously bugged) and for $30 they would send me a new disc, or I could exchange it for free at the place of purchase (catch: EB's policy was like 15 days for that...)

[Sava]

Originally posted by Asher
The thing that really pissed me off about EA is I had NHL 2001 for Xbox, but due to my school schedule I wasn't able to play it until about a month and a half after I got it.

And at the end of EVERY game during the corny "celebration" animations, the game would hard-lock. I called EA and they said there were some disc pressing issues (which sounds like bull**** -- I had a launch copy which was obviously bugged) and for $30 they would send me a new disc, or I could exchange it for free at the place of purchase (catch: EB's policy was like 15 days for that...)

that sux

shoulda got PC version...

patches...

[Sava]

XBOX CAN SUCK IT


1. Piss-poor design.
The system is the brain child of Seamus Blackley, a 32-year-old red-haired jazz pianist and nuclear physicist. To quote him: "I was flying back from visiting [my girlfriend] and I had just got a new laptop and I was trying it out on the plane and I was thinking about graphics cards and I realized that we could make a machine that had much higher performance than anything else in the industry." Yeah, it's called PC dumbass. Real revolutionary idea. Take existing hardware, throw it together in a big clunky box and call it a console. Everything about the system reeks of poor design. Rather than getting a hand full of the most talented game developers in the world (here's a hint: YOU WON'T FIND THEM MAKING PC TITLES IN THE US *******--GO TO JAPAN) and designing a system around the games from the ground up, Blackley comes along with an unlimited supply of stupid ideas about the gaming industry and designs a system that he himself admitted to being "little more than exposed cards with processors and graphics chips hooked to a monitor." No ****? I couldn't tell from how HUGE the case is. It's almost as if it was thrown together with pieces bought off of a store shelf--oh wait. What more, once he senses the impending fizzle of the launch, he bails from the company to work someplace else--where he'll inevitably spawn more stupid ideas.

2. The games suck.
It's been almost one full year since the launch of the Xbox and so far the only game that doesn't suck as much as everything else on the system is Halo. Everything else is either out on another console, mediocre or a boring PC port. Even Halo doesn't cut it as far as I'm concerned. The first person shooter (FPS) genre is best done on PC, period (just because some genres have been represented best on PC doesn't mean I'm biased towards PC, if anything I'm biased towards consoles so quit emailing me). As good as Halo is, it's not even the best in its genre (an honor reserved for Half Life as far as I'm concerned). The Xbox library of games is flooded with **** titles like "Azurik": games that seem more like projects for computer science majors in their senior year at college than professional products. I would rather be shot than have to play one more uninspired ho-hum platform title starring some stupid cat or some random guy that runs around bumping into other vague uninspired objects. Throw that **** away.

Here are some examples of the bull**** games on the Xbox:

# Max Payne - Wait, so not only do I lose the ability to adjust my resolution and system specs to improve performance, but I get a game that's been out for months on PC already? Where do I sign? The game's not too bad, but why bother with it on Xbox when it's on PC already?

# Nightcaster - How original, a rushed third-person RPG title with four magic types: light, dark, fire and water. But wait, here's where the strategy comes in: use water against fire, light against dark enemies, etc. Brilliant.

# Blood Wake - I liked this game better when it was called Twisted Metal and you drove cars instead of boats. Unoriginal, uninspired.

# Azurik: Rise of Perathia - Would have been more aptly titled "Azurik: Onset of Paralysis." Bad gameplay, poor camera, muddy textures, lame characters. Does the fun ever start?

# Star Wars: Obi-Wan - More like "Star Wars: Obi-Wanna-Play-A-Different-Game." Poor AI, poor controls, boring environments. Any non-geeks care to play this? Doubtful.

# Bruce Lee: Quest of the Dragon - Broken gameplay, bad camera work, cheesy voice acting, and the game crashes. All this crap for just $50? It's a win/win situation for publishers: put a lackluster effort into development and make boat-loads of cash off of suck-er.. customers.

Sure, every console has its share of ****ty games but the Xbox has a disproportionately higher percentage of them. In fact, I think only the N64 rivals the Xbox in the ****ty to good title ratio. When all is said and done, it doesn't matter what I or anyone else thinks about the games, the fact is that the games just aren't selling. All you cry-baby, whining, sniveling *****es can stop emailing me with "HAY MADDOX YOU IDIOT YOU DIDN'T MENTION DEAD TO RIGHTS LOL!!!" Because here are some cold hard facts:

For the entire month of July, only 2 games made it into the top 20 highest sellers (based on units sold), and only 1 in the top 10: Halo at #10 and NCAA Football 2003 at #11. For the month of June, only 3 games made it into the top 20, with only 2 in the top 10. Same for the month of May 2002, and only one in the top 10 in the month of April 2002. Even when the Xbox newly launched, their best month ever has only yielded 4 games in the top 20 with only 2 in the top 10, and don't even bother looking at Japan's stats where the Wonder Swan system is outselling most Xbox games (Source: NPD TRSTS Video Game Service). Compare this to Sony's healthy 15 titles and you can see the big picture. I don't favor Sony's platforms, but these are facts. Any other systems sell this poorly in recent memory? Oh yeah, the Dreamcast and where is the DC now? The DC was by far my favorite system in its prime, but the only difference between me and all you whining Xbox pussies is that I can see the same thing happening here. It doesn't matter how good anyone thinks the games are, because they're just not selling which should tell you dumbasses something. That's not to say that good games always sell, but there's no excuse for Microsoft to have this kind of piss-poor performance because they have all the marketing muscle in the world to make it happen and they're screwing it up.

HUGE 3. The controller is almost as big as my nuts.
This has to be by far the ****tiest controller packed with a home console ever. What were they thinking? Over 25% of the surface area on the controller is wasted by a giant green Xbox jewel--you know, in case you forget what system you're playing in between loading screens. You can seriously drop the controller onto a cat from 5 feet and break its back... so I've heard.

What Microsoft should have done was team up with Sega to buy all their unsold Dreamcasts and just use them as controllers for the Xbox. It probably would have been smaller than the 8 lb atrocity that they have now.

4. People who own the Xbox don't play video games.
The average Xbox owner attends Microsoft SQL Server release parties, reads books on database theory and hates games like Super Mario because they're too old for "kiddie" games since everyone knows that it's graphics, not game play that makes a great game. I mean, why play a game that's actually fun when you can waste hours watching rendered, uninteractive intros instead? Ask the typical Xbox owner what other video games or consoles he likes and you'll draw a blank stare. The reason they bought an Xbox was because it's by Microsoft and they're blindly devoted to the company, not because of the games (being as there aren't any).

Real Video Games 5. No Soul.
You'll never see games like Metal Slug, Radiant Silvergun or Castlevania come out for the Xbox because Microsoft hasn't made the system attractive to the Japanese market. Capcom, Konami, SNK and a slew of other big game developers have turned their backs towards the Xbox except for a cursory presence with a half-hearted title port. There is light at the end of the tunnel, however. Sega is working on a Panzer Dragoon title as well as Toe Jam & Earl III. Regardless, the Xbox is still a PC at heart, right down to the hard drive and buggy software.

6. ****ty philosophy.
Blackley thought he had the formula for a great system because all the components were there for a great system (and they are): a powerful graphics chip, a beefy hard drive, a fast processor and DVD capabilities. What he failed to realize was that just because you have all the raw material to make a great system doesn't mean it's going to be great. Saying the Xbox is a good system because it's powerful is like saying you made a great painting because you used the best set of paints.

The Xbox is designed by people who think they know a joystick from their *******s. The problem is that they're mostly fat boring business men and not gamers. They're out to make a buck and it's painfully obvious in how poorly they're marketing the system (I think they've cornered the market on middle-aged men who buy one or two sports titles per year for their system).

7. Too expensive.
The last figures I heard were that Microsoft was eating $150 on every Xbox sale because they had hoped to subsidize the hardware cost with software sales. Too bad that all their software is ****, otherwise their plan might have worked. Unfortunately, Microsoft has deep pockets so we'll probably have to endure a couple more years of mediocre Xbox titles until Microsoft's share holders decide they've had enough. Don't buy an Xbox. Or if you do, wait until something worth buying comes out for it first.

For all you inevitably offended Xbox owners and developers, quit *****ing. I'm not hell bent on the ruin of the Xbox, and I'll eventually buy one, but not until some 'decent' **** comes out for it (ie, more than one game worth purchasing). The point of this article is that there are a lot of dumb cocks out there who buy systems out of blind devotion to the company rather than the games.

A lot of people email me asking which console I prefer. The console I prefer is the console with the most games that I want to play, and right now Gameboy Advance and PS2 have the most games that I want to play.

145,831 biased *******s still love their Xbox despite the fact that everything out for the system is ****.

old but still relevant: http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse....?u=xbox_suckit

[Asher]

Originally posted by Sava
NHL2k6 with 4 people?

that would be GOD AWFUL

On the PC, you're damn right it would be god awful.

On consoles, it's awesome.

I know the car analogy is preposterous. But the point still stands. PC's are superior. Sure Xbox360 is going to be a good console (in terms of performance, not necessarily the quality of its games). But it still is not as good as a PC.

That's not a point at all, it's ridiculous rhetoric.

Sure, the Xbox 360 has 48 pixel pipelines vs 16 on your 6800 plus. Sure, the Xbox 360 has 3 3.2GHz processors and you have one 2.2GHz processor. But still, it's not as good as a PC.

what vid card do you have? IIRC an ATI 9800? similar? not quite...

Still got my Radeon 9800 XT, got it on its launch day. Plan on upgrading to the R520 in October of this year, which will leapfrog yours hardcore.

similar is a real general term Asher... my last system was "similar" in power to my current one... and I had that for about 2 years.

Then you must be monstrously stupid to buy a new system if it's not an upgrade.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Sava
old but still relevant: http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse....?u=xbox_suckit

I think you just conceded your argument by linking to that.

[Sava]

R520... you're also going to pay a ton for it... and nvidia will have a more powerful, cheaper version out a month later.

good luck with that

[Sava]

Originally posted by Asher
Then you must be monstrously stupid to buy a new system if it's not an upgrade.

well yes and no...

it just lets me play all my games at the highest settings with 1600x1200 at better frame rates...

but then again, I care about quality

which is why I won't be buying any xbox crap