PSX5Central
Playstation/Gaming Discussions => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: 420blunt on June 01, 2002, 07:19:24 PM
-
No this is not another bash thread cause honestly if you say anything pro/con, every other mofo would call you a fanboy. If I am a fanboy it would be for Nintendo cause I always respected their strategies and their first party games, yet I own a PS2. So call me a fanboy, but you make no sense.
I do hate Xbox, partly cause I hate Gates and partly cause I got pissed of renting games when I went to my friend\'s place (Motherfuker gave away PS2 as a present and got Xbox) and then end up playing them for no more than an hour since they sucked big hairy Osama Bin Laden balls. We ended up using it more to watch DVDs. Then it dropped 100 bucks and he was pissed and I was laughing at him and saying "Told you so"
But MS has said that they will stay in the console business 10-20 years if they have to. Why, god knows. It\'s already obvious that profit from Xbox project is not going to appear for a long long while. But what would happen to the actual Xbox console. I mean they could force it to stay but will game developers keep on making games? MS could start paying and buying up game developers and making more games themselves.
If anyone here remembers Neo Geo, well, I could see Xbox 2 being smth like that cause it obviously cant compete vs the standard consoles. Neo Geo was like the rich kids console with some pretty awesome games, almost all first party. It was also like 600-700 bucks with games at 100 bucks.
But in general, I\'m just wondering what the hell is MS thinking. They made obvious mistakes so far and are still making stupid mistakes. Not suprising cause they have no idea anymore how run a real business in a real business enviroment. Running a monopoly, especially one established with illiegal practices, does not take any real skill.
BTW, I hear MS real goal with all their side projects, is to have everyone in the world connected to Microsoft everywhere. Now anyone else think that doing it through a console is a really stupid plan? I mean they are also trying to break into mobile PC/phone market which makes more sense (although they are doubtful to succeed there as well). But through a gaming console? WTF?
-
MS is a smart company. They enter a field and eventually dominate or become very very profitable.
Look at the browser wars. IE was utter garbage when it first came out, but MS stuck with that.
Xbox is doing well relatively speaking. I for one wouldn\'t bet against MS. They\'ve got more money than brains (and that is substancial).
The video game market is emerging as a huge player right now and it is only going to get bigger. MS wants part of the cake and their not going to give up.
-
did you ever wonder why Ie became so popular?
hmmm, i wonder
:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by mm
did you ever wonder why Ie became so popular?
hmmm, i wonder
:rolleyes:
Ohhh! I know! I know! Pick me pick me!
-
Originally posted by 420blunt
BTW, I hear MS real goal with all their side projects, is to have everyone in the world connected to Microsoft everywhere.
You been in a cave? That bug has been in Gates\' butt long before X-box. Look up .NET and Passport.
-
Originally posted by Watchdog
MS is a smart company. They enter a field and eventually dominate or become very very profitable.
Look at the browser wars. IE was utter garbage when it first came out, but MS stuck with that.
Xbox is doing well relatively speaking. I for one wouldn\'t bet against MS. They\'ve got more money than brains (and that is substancial).
The video game market is emerging as a huge player right now and it is only going to get bigger. MS wants part of the cake and their not going to give up.
And I\'d be willing to bet that Microsoft is never going to dominate the videogame market.. they have an outside chance of dominating in America in the next 10 - 15 years (very oustide chance). But on a global scale they will never achieve \'dominance\', or be "very very" profitable. Not unless they buy out every developer and have every large franchise. Sony were lucky, Microsoft will have no such luck. :)
but then again.. you never know ;)
-
Well the browser wars always puzzled me. Yeah the first IE was absolute crap. Now Netscape is just old and outdated. But I never truly figured out what the deal was. I\'m pretty sure MS did a lot of shady stuff with that. Besides the money issue, being that Windows and IE went hand in hand, it was not hard to make Netscape to have problems with Windows. I do remember that Netscape started running slower than IE and having funny problems. Thats when I switched to IE which was finally good.
But here is the thing. Software is cheap and it cost nothing for MS to put IE onto Windows. It was more marketing costs. But we are talking about hardware, no windows to support their grip, and losing 200 for every console sold (and 400 not sold). Also this is a cut-throat industry which is unforgiving for failed consoles (Dreamcast and Sega is a prime example) Another problem is that with 3 consoles competing closely, profits will be very slim.
Plus MS has made a number of bad mistakes already. Bad timing, bad selection of games, bad & inefficient design, bad forecasting, no cost control whatsoever, bad confidence sign with price drop. I do not see the current Xbox succeeding but the next console has another chance.
Plus in general, I do not consider Microsoft to be smart when it comes to running a business fairly. Not to say that Bill Gates is not smart man, but if you learn the history of Microsoft, you will notice that their real key to success was manipulating/stealing/cheating.
I mean what does Microsoft know about games, hardware, and electronics?
-
Originally posted by 420blunt
I do hate Xbox, partly cause I hate Gates and partly cause I got
I have givin a lot of thought into why i hated Bill Gates.
I have come up with a few reasons. First of all his business crimes are commonplace in big business. Not many companies get called on them... for example big oil, or food like nestle.
The CEOs of those companies are kept out of the lime light. And I have a theory about that.
Bill Gates isn\'t a free mason.. he doesn\'t come from a powerful family.. but he is the richest man in the world. I am sure that makes some people sore. He is justa normal "joe" who happened to get a hell of an opurtunity... (shady or not).
so now he gets constant problems from political fronts which are traditionaly controlled by the old legacy families.
So why did I hate him.. because I was told to.... just thought.
-
Originally posted by PahnCrD
I have givin a lot of thought into why i hated Bill Gates.
I have come up with a few reasons. First of all his business crimes are commonplace in big business. Not many companies get called on them... for example big oil, or food like nestle.
The CEOs of those companies are kept out of the lime light. And I have a theory about that.
Bill Gates isn\'t a free mason.. he doesn\'t come from a powerful family.. but he is the richest man in the world. I am sure that makes some people sore. He is justa normal "joe" who happened to get a hell of an opurtunity... (shady or not).
so now he gets constant problems from political fronts which are traditionaly controlled by the old legacy families.
So why did I hate him.. because I was told to.... just thought.
If you cannot figure it out, lemme spell it out.
Monopoly: Bad for consumers. Very bad. Microsoft make crappy Windows that crashes too much, takes over your PC, causes "non-intended" conflicts and problems with certain Microsoft competitors in other application fields. Very bad. Microsoft customer service = oxymoron. Not good.
Competition: Good for consumer. Innovation, price battles, customer service. Gooooood. Me like when companies compete for my money.
On that note, thank you Microsoft for letting me get my PS2 for 199
-
420, what OS you running on yer PC? oh yeah, :rolleyes:
actually, m$ makes some of the best PC periphials (mice, keyboards, gamepads, etc)
OMG! im sticking up for m$?
aCK! GRRRRRRRRRRR!
*head explodes*
-
The only thing wrong with the xbox is a lack of quality games.I thought MS said they knew what gamers wanted?Gamers want great games,and right now even at 200 dollars the xbox doesn\'t have enough games to compel me to buy their system.And all the great textures and bump mapping in the world is\'nt going to make up for that.
As far as your theory that MS wants everyone everywhere using their apps.,well what company would\'nt?Sony and AOl are in bed together already.Clearly in the next few years more and more people will be surfing the net through their consoles,some people may even end up going online for the first time through a console.If your online through a console in your living room that\'s one less P.C. in your house.Where does this leave windows and IE?This is the only reason MS even got involved in the console market,and not for this life cycle of consoles either.Their getting ready for the next round when online function of a console is going to factor into your decision on wich game system you buy.
But who can blame them for trying to stay on top?
-
AOL is crap, Sony can have them.
As mm has stated, MS makes great hardware.
The xbox does have great games out now, and it\'s only getting better if E3 is any indication.
IE dominated because IE is much better. There is no comparison.
I think MS would be happy dominating in US. From that solid base they can expand into Europe. They got into the console market because there is a ton of money their and Windows has reached market saturation.
And MS is running their business fairly it\'s only the whiners that can\'t compete that think differently. I don\'t want to get into the economics debate again, but take a course or read a book then tell me if they\'re playing fairly. It\'s this joe public, anti-MS misconception that MS is evil and it\'s just not true. Their only fault is playing by the rules and playing much tougher and better then their competition
-
Originally posted by 420blunt
If you cannot figure it out, lemme spell it out.
Monopoly: Bad for consumers. Very bad. Microsoft make crappy Windows that crashes too much, takes over your PC, causes "non-intended" conflicts and problems with certain Microsoft competitors in other application fields. Very bad. Microsoft customer service = oxymoron. Not good.
Competition: Good for consumer. Innovation, price battles, customer service. Gooooood. Me like when companies compete for my money.
On that note, thank you Microsoft for letting me get my PS2 for 199
Lemme spell something out for YOU... first of all I at no time take an insulting tone with anyone on the board. If you could extend the same respect I would be grateful.
Now if you think that Microsoft is the only company with a monopoly... think again.
MS is just the most publicised.... becuase of my above reasons...
If there was a better OS it would be out by now. You can\'t keep that sort of thing under wraps forever. It\'s hard for OS compitition, becuase the software would most likely run into compatability problems. The only way around it is to release windows source code.... which seems fair to me, being as how MS stole Windows in the first place, it needs to be givin back to the people.
And on that note... if Billy hadn\'t stolen it, we would just be under the thumb of Xerox, or Apple. All that changed was who would get rich offa it.
-
AOL utterly dominates the online market, hands down
If there was a better OS it would be out by now.
there are several
-
AOL is crap, Sony can have them.
AOL is the worlds biggest internet service provider - which indicates that there are A LOT of people who obviously don\'t quite share your opinion. To get AOL as a teamplayer was a very smart thing to do by Sony.
As mm has stated, MS makes great hardware.
Great hardware? Yeah in the least sense. I\'d rather say that they make great periphials.
IE dominated because IE is much better. There is no comparison.
No, IE did not dominate because it was better, but because Microsoft integrated it into its OS. IE might be better today, but it certainly didn\'t get there because it was better.
-
Originally posted by mm
there are several
There may be several, but none of then support windows games very well... which is where most of the good games are. Not only games but yer geforce 4, et cetera... drivers would be severely limited as well.
I then refer you to my statement about Windows source code. If the courts order it to happen... then we will see healthy compitition.
-
actually, m$ makes some of the best PC periphials (mice, keyboards, gamepads, etc)
isnt that what i said? hate when i get misquoted :)
you said it, windows games
windows has a stranglehold on the PC market that keeps us in the dark ages of PC architecture
-
Originally posted by PahnCrD
There may be several, but none of then support windows games very well... which is where most of the good games are. Not only games but yer geforce 4, et cetera... drivers would be severely limited as well.
LOL, okay, then I guess your definition of better OS\'s is something different than mine. Also, I\'m sure Microsoft has that monopoly because they support games better than all the others... :rolleyes:
-
Here is how IE dominated:
An excerpt from my recent paper entitled Antisoft
The primary way by which Microsoft has violated antitrust laws is the method in which Microsoft dealt with Netscape. Netscape had plans for making Netscape a platform application. This plan, however, did not correspond well with Microsoft, which, in turn, suggested that Netscape work with Microsoft in making Internet Explorer (Manes 87). Soon after, Netscape denied the partnership and continued the development of Netscape (Heilemann 133). Microsoft then resorted to a secondary plan. Because of turning down the special relationship, Netscape intentionally received the imperative remote network access (RNA) application-programming interface (API) after the holiday season forcing Netscape to postpone the release of its Windows 95 browser until significantly after the release of Windows 95, which was bundled with Internet Explorer, in August 1995 (Alsop 52). Additionally, Microsoft withheld an important scripting tool from Netscape, which was needed by Netscape to be compatible with several Internet service providers (Stone 50). Having crippled Netscape, Microsoft then focused on expanding the Internet Explorer market share. For example, Microsoft gave rewards to companies that helped to increase the Internet Explorer user base (Heilemann 143). In fact, Microsoft was so persistent in making Internet Explorer the most widely used browser that Microsoft acknowledged that it would not be making any money from Internet Explorer software (Jackson NP). Clearly, these anticompetitive tactics against Netscape show that Microsoft violated antitrust laws.
-
whats all this about monopoly and domination by m$,
i really dont know what all the hub bub is about, m$ did what they had to do in order to get where they r today (i.e at the top )even if it meant eleminating (for lack of a better word) the little guy(meaning other companies) , this is exactly what all companies and businessess do isnt it.
im not tryin to stand up for ms just statin my .002 cents :)
-
Originally posted by Watchdog
Bill Gates isn\'t a free mason.. he doesn\'t come from a powerful family.. but he is the richest man in the world. I am sure that makes some people sore. He is justa normal "joe" who happened to get a hell of an opurtunity... (shady or not).
so now he gets constant problems from political fronts which are traditionaly controlled by the old legacy families.
You don\'t go to harvard without money. He came from a pretty wealthy family.It\'s also how he could afford to buy all of M$ shares.
But since that is not importent, other then showing your knowleage/lack there of in the field of M$ history.
But let examine the real question here,
Blunt you may had had a bad experience with the Xbox, but I know a lot of people my self included that think the Xbox has been one of their best console, yet. But I may be able to explain you friend’s disappointment. Was he between the ages of 18-25 causes that is who the Xbox was targeted for these last 7 months.
The Xbox has and only will loss $20-50/console which is pretty good on the bigger scheme of things. Also it has a huge game attach rate. Which will more then compensate
for the low hardware numbers. Also it sells on par with Nintendo game cube in every region with the exception of Japan, which is only ¼ of the market. It’s coming with what looks like a killer line up for this fall/holiday season on par with that of Sony or Nintendo.
And though Xbox live is shaping up to be what should like the most solid new online gaming experience.
I’m just not seeing all the mistake you are taking about please elaborate.
-
The Xbox has and only will loss $20-50/console which is pretty good on the bigger scheme of things. Also it has a huge game attach rate.
Where ya been? they are loosing more then $100 per console right now!
-
No it only $20-50 this main due to the fact that it has mostly generic Pc hardware it’s price goes down quite quickly.
That why they began to plan the resent price cut.
-
No it only $20-50 this main due to the fact that it has mostly generic Pc hardware it’s price goes down quite quickly.
That why they began to plan the resent price cut.
So you think it was, too bad it was not
i\'m not going to dig up all the articles that say differnt, and all the evidence cause your, frankly, not worth it
-
Originally posted by TheTsar
No it only $20-50 this main due to the fact that it has mostly generic Pc hardware it’s price goes down quite quickly.
That why they began to plan the resent price cut.
I agree that the production cost of an Xbox will fall quicker than the rest - but I very much doubt it\'s only $20 - 50 their loosing right now. Most parts within might be very PCish, but they still have quite a few costumized parts. All these parts aren\'t cheap and furthermore, every single manufacturer (Nvidia, Intel etc) who gets those parts for Microsoft aren\'t given it for free either.
And Microsoft didn\'t reduce the price because they wouldn\'t be loosing out on too much - but because it hasn\'t been selling.
-
Chrono that article has a very anti-MS slant.
Again, I\'ve been through all of that anti trust stuff before and I\'m not going to do it again, but the fact of the matter is that all this is Netscape\'s story. Netscate NEVER could produce documents to back up these claims nor could they sepina any of their executives that had any knowledge of this.
This is why the whole browser end of the anti-trust case was thrown out of court. If there is anti-competitive practises they are in the grey area of the law and the courts have sided with MS so far.
Windows is the best OS--nothing else can do everything windows does. Linux is good, but it doesn\'t have a complete dirver set nor does it have any support.
No one knows how much MS looses so don\'t throw numbers around.
AOL is ****, it\'s slow, limited and their compatability is crap. I don\'t care how many people use it (my grandma being one) it\'s crap--and you\'re the only one who says otherwise.
-
Chrono that article has a very anti-MS slant.
Again, I\'ve been through all of that anti trust stuff before and I\'m not going to do it again, but the fact of the matter is that all this is Netscape\'s story. Netscate NEVER could produce documents to back up these claims nor could they sepina any of their executives that had any knowledge of this.
This is why the whole browser end of the anti-trust case was thrown out of court. If there is anti-competitive practises they are in the grey area of the law and the courts have sided with MS so far.
It\'s not all that suprising that Watchdog chooses to oversee the obvious. :rolleyes:
AOL is ****, it\'s slow, limited and their compatability is crap. I don\'t care how many people use it (my grandma being one) it\'s crap--and you\'re the only one who says otherwise.
Reread my quote once again. I never said it\'s not crap. I just pointed out the well known facts.
-
Chrono that article has a very anti-MS slant.
Probably all beacuse I wrote it right?
-
Few things:
- AOL has its sights set on M$ and does not care who they partner with to kill them.
- Microsoft threatened to exclude JAVA altogether from XP so it could promote its own .NET and Passport strategy, which if you don\'t know is groundwork for spyware.
- Spyware is already in Windows Media Player and who knows where else
- Microsoft is still in court fighting a anti-trust lawsuit brought against it by 9 states for its operating practices.
-
Windows is the best OS
watchdog, you kill me man :laughing:
the best desktop OS perhaps, only by brute force
how many web servers out there are m$ based?
how many loopholes and security violations are found EVERY day in NT server?
UNIX > M$
-
Well in case you have been in the cave for the last decade, you should know MS has been in court forever. However I think it\'s getting obvious that they are paying off the courts when a judgement gets passed for them to break up and then a couple years later the courts just "oh dont worry about it, you dont have to break up".
And come on ppl, there is really just windows out there. Yes you have Linux, OS2Warp and Unix but those are more specialized, although much much better. The whole windows template is outdated and it sux. One of my friends thinks that they dont even test it at Microsoft and just throw it out into the public.
MS hardware good??? WTF u talking about? I mean the only reason I would agree is cause a Microsoft mouse would work best with a Microsoft Operating System and all due to software concerns. But from what I have seen with Xbox, it is a joke.
Now PS2 is no prize either when it comes to hardware reliability but it is way better what the super duper hyped up Xbox was doing. I really do not care to start comparing and spreading stories, but for all its talk about being the best console, this thing has performed horribly.
All Xbox has is graphics and I definitely agree it wins in that category. However graphics is all hype and a minor issue to real gamers. Ppl that buy games for graphics fall out of it fast because it is all about gameplay.
Well it is staying for a while and MS just wants to get more market share with their CrapBox. They are gonna force it to stay on the market and basically do what Ford did with automobiles. In case you dont know, Ford cars are cheap crap. The amount of liability lawsuits they have had is just ridiculous.
-
You\'d be stupid to argue that MS has a better server client.
Of course I was talking about the consumer level product.
But, again, I have to believe you knew that and were just being mm.
-
you cant call the M$ desktop OS "the best" of anything
they strongarmed the entire market and hash out mediocre OS\'s ever other year
Windows XP shipped with over 60,000 KNOWN vulnerabilities and bugs
i use it cause im forced to, no other reason
im run linux but not enough games are released on that platform, *yet*
-
No other OS has to do everything that Windows does and until one does we can\'t make a comparison. Also if linux was in the hands of everybody, joe hacker would find a million vulnerabilities with that OS. Anything is crack/hackable. That means nohting.
-
You find a vulnerability in Linux and it will be fixed in one week. You find a vulnerablility in WIndows it might never be fixed. The difference is M$ controls Windows while no one company controls Open Source Software.
The reason most people don\'t run Linux on their desktop is b/c of their unwillingness to learn. That and they\'ve already got too much invested in the vfat filesystem format and MS Office.
-
/me don\'t care windows gets the job done:p
-
Originally posted by QuDDus
/me don\'t care windows gets the job done:p
This guy/girl/tran is really one dumb and closeminded person. And this is just from reading several of your posts.
Hey does anyone else notice that like every other website has a "Win a Free Xbox" banner? I never seen a PS2 one and only a few GC ones.
Look for those failing to understand. Since Windows does hold a monopoly on the OS, browser and even certain applications, they are not moved to innovate, make good products or provide any type of customer service. In fact, MS has no direct customer service, only third party service from some horrible establishments. If competition thrived and hopefully Linux will start breaking, then we might see what MS is really made of. From what I see with Xbox, MS has no real business skills, just money to burn. And still they are failing miserably.
-
liteitup, call one more person outside of thier name and you wont be posting here anymore
not try not to be so hostile
-
youve already banned him once.. why not again?
-
I think it\'s simple. MS\'s competitors are envious and can not compete in the open market. So what do they do, they go to the government and cry foul.
You should be more frightened that the government is willing to crumble under the pressure and stick their nose where it does not belong.
If someone can make a new OS that can compete, it will sell.
If MS was so powerful, then the XBox would be outselling the PS2 now.
Ace
-
Ace, yer missing the point
anytime a company attempts to develop an OS, m$ cries copyright infringment.
ask larry ellison about that
m$\'s competitors envious?
more like pissed off, cause m$ has stolen all thier ideas and lied to the public for over 20 years about it
i dont think you know m$\'s history too well, i do
micro$oft = evil empire
-
Your right, I do not study the history of MS. I do know that it\'s a very common thing that when someone can\'t win they whine.
Believe me I don\'t think Bill Gates is an angel but I don\'t expect him to be. The business world is cut throat and it shouldn\'t be any other way.
You run a business to win.
micro$oft = evil empire
I just don\'t buy that. I think it\'s popular to hate MS amoung certain circles.
Ace
-
Ace, how can any company really compete with Microsoft in the OS business? I believe that Linux or any Unix counterpart is better in many aspects, yet the normal consumer won\'t pay much attention to it out of several reasons:
- underwhelming software support
- buy a PC - you get Windows
- compatibility?
Lets be honest - most people live in a Windows/Microsoft based world and don\'t even know of Linux (well maybe heard of it, but probably never saw it to really take notice of it). Call it good business or whatever you want, but there is no way one company can come out and make a new OS that will change everything.
As for software, read up on some Internet Explorer vs Netscape history. One prime example to what Microsoft is capable of when whipping off their competition.
-
Ace, how can any company really compete with Microsoft in the OS business? I believe that Linux or any Unix counterpart is better in many aspects, yet the normal consumer won\'t pay much attention to it out of several reasons:
That\'s my point. Consumers buy what they want to buy. The best man, (product) might not always win. I felt that way with Beta vs VHS. It looks like we want to stop a business from getting to big or from dominating a particular area. That scares me. Should we put a limit on market share so the little guy can have a chance?
No one is forced to own a PC. No one is forced to buy an MS product. I believe in the open market, and when the dust settles the consumer is the one that makes the choice.
Ace
-
Originally posted by mm
did you ever wonder why Ie became so popular?
hmmm, i wonder
:rolleyes:
IE became popular because Netscape turned into a piece of trash.
-
Originally posted by mm
anytime a company attempts to develop an OS, m$ cries copyright infringment.
ask larry ellison about that
You can also add Michael Roberson to that list (LindowsOS).
-
Originally posted by Ace
I think it\'s popular to hate MS amoung certain circles.
Exactly right. However, those circles are huge, many, and the anti-MS sentiment runs deep. MS lackeys and neutrals can argue around the clock the dislike/distrust for Bill and his gang isn\'t justified but it won\'t change a thing. MS is the OJ Simpson of the computing industry in the public\'s eyes, with a whopping mind share dead set against owning any MS product they\'re not cornered into buying. No need to believe me, just watch the market share for xbox continue to shrink.
-
netscape was FAR superior to iE, untill m$ started stealing code and copyrighting for themselves
then netscape was left in the dust
again, m$ = evil empire
try buying a PC from one of the big boys like dell, gateway, or compaq. tell them you DO NOT want any operating system on there and you will be suprised the hassle you get
-
Originally posted by mm
try buying a PC from one of the big boys like dell, gateway, or compaq. tell them you DO NOT want any operating system on there and you will be suprised the hassle you get
How come I find this as a smart business move on MS\'s part?
Am I wrong? If I could convince a business to steer people in my direction I would do it in a minute.
Ace
-
there\'s where we agree, my friend
it IS good, in fact, great business...........for M$ and noone else
like i said, m$ is keeping us in the dark ages of PC architecture for one reason. to keep thier coffers filled.
-
Linux ownx0r j00!
It\'s just to bad it didn\'t come out in the early nineties when there were no other OS\'s on PCs. What a shame, superior products don\'t always win the market, timing and money does that.
-
What is wrong with XBox hardware? It is built sturdy, using sturdy-feeling plastic and not toy-feeling platic like DC or GC. The cords are long and steel braided, the AV cords are gold plated for best picture quality, it has a harddrive, bba, DVD player with remote, best controller (controller S), etc. People who cry about XBox\'s hardware have never touched or seen whats in the box when you get it.
Eric Jacob
-
DVD player with remote
like thats revolutionary :)
its too damn big, thats my beef, but hey, thats the american way
best controller, far from it
6 button genesis pad > xbox controller
-
I gotta agree with mm, the 6 button genny controller was awesome--only bested by the Sega Nights controller. Ever.
-
Originally posted by mm
like thats revolutionary :)
its too damn big, thats my beef, but hey, thats the american way
best controller, far from it
6 button genesis pad > xbox controller
6 BUTTON geneis pad. But hey I guess because genesis was more popular.
Turbo Grafx Turbo Stix Controller > 6 button genesis pad
-
yer joking right?
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.workingdesigns.com%2Fmuseum%2Fturbo%2Fhardware%2Fgraphics%2Fturbostick.jpg&hash=55e138c577963d6fcabe152948637019143b05b0)
that controller was poop, i had one
and always went back to the gamepad
damn, im resourcefull
:)
-
Originally posted by mm
yer joking right?
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.workingdesigns.com%2Fmuseum%2Fturbo%2Fhardware%2Fgraphics%2Fturbostick.jpg&hash=55e138c577963d6fcabe152948637019143b05b0)
that controller was poop, i had one
and always went back to the gamepad
damn, im resourcefull
:)
It was great for , Lords Of Thunder and forgotten worlds. man how miss my Turbo 16. But yeah me was joking
-
I was talking about greatness of construction, not revolutionary stuff.
On controller, I meant of this generation. NOTHING beats the NiGHTS pad...NOTHING. Still the best pad for any type of console game (yes, even THAT one)
Eric Jacob
-
construction, oh ok, i agree
the xbox controller is a tank
-
ATARI 2600 best.controller.ever. And not that fagg0t paddle.
-
I liked the Game Boy Color\'s controller.
-
Anyone watch the bill gates movie?
He stole everything
From zerox
From jobs
No one gets that rich without dirty work
-
Japanese Saturn Controller
Best Pad Ever!!!
Nintendo GameCube Controller
Most Ridiculous Design Ever!!!
-
I take back what I said about MS copying the PS2 controller.
Who can blame them?
As for the N64 controller they should be sued like some people tried to do, that pad gave my joints aches.
And the GC pad is better then the N64, but still terrible
-
Yeah well nothing beats the NES "Power Glove".
Did anyone else unscrew the controller on it so you could have something usable.
After seeing The Wizard I bought one... and it was quite a dissappointment.