Page 6 of 26

sleep when you're dead

PostPosted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:22 pm
by tfactor
wonkabar wrote:Death to Sony


no! I still want one of those :lol:

The garbage man - you lucky duck! Stop whatever it is you're doing and go play video games all night, seriously what the hell!??!?!?!?! I have to go sit OUTSIDE in line for 3 days with no guarantee I'll even get one, and you have one right now? But don't have time to play it?!?!!!!!?!?!?!?!

AAARRRGGGGGHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhpphhhhsssszzzzzboomshaka laka

I expect a full report on my desk by 9am sharp, and I'll be very disappointed if you sleep ... at all tonight! You can sleep when you're dead, YOU GOT THAT MISTER? SLEEP WHEN YOU"RE DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!

*head explodes*

Re: sleep when you're dead

PostPosted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:27 pm
by wonkabar
tfactor wrote:
wonkabar wrote:Death to Sony


no! I still want one of those :lol:



Good luck finding one. I think I'll spend my 600 bucks on a 360 and a Wii....I really want those damn Turbografx-16 games....and they better come out with Alien Crush too...I miss that game.

PostPosted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:53 pm
by godzillasushi
Im all over the Wii. Perhaps I will get lucky and get to pick it up on launch day as I did with my 360. No waiting in line or anything, just drove to the store at 11:00 am and nabbed one!

PostPosted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 8:57 pm
by Bob Samonkey
tfactor wrote:So are you guys going to get the heavily active Warioware: Smooth Move? That Zelda and Wii Sports are the main games we're talking about getting, what are you guys planning on getting?


Man I am getting em all. I am going to be sooooo broke. I would like to apologize to my family in advance...

PostPosted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 9:14 pm
by Fried Gold
Pacino86845 wrote:I'm sure you guys've already said it in one form or another, but how awesome would the eventual Star Wars Jedi game be using those controls to swing a lightsaber and performing force moves on Storm Trooper bitches?!

Have you not learnt to do that for real yet like the rest of us?

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 4:08 am
by The Garbage Man
First impressions: it's pretty spiffy. I've only watched, not played myself, but the gameplay is interesting to say the least. The Mii avatar creation tool is cool, and despite the fact that you're creating what look like Lego characters, there's a fair amount of customization to be had and you can create a surprisingly good likeness of Hitler with the thing.

A rundown of the games:

Excite Truck - basically a dirtbike/motocross game, but with trucks. The physics are, let's say exaggerated, but it's a fun diversion.

Wii Sports Tennis - fun, cartoony, and a great integration of the controller. Ditto for the golf game.

Zelda - if your anticipation is in large part based on graphics, please begin lowering your expectations... now. It's not ugly by any means, but looking at it, it doesn't exactly scream "next-gen." From what I've heard it more than makes up for that with story and gameplay, but I didn't watch long enough to say.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 4:12 am
by silentbobafett
Er.... well Wii isn't really NEXT GEN graphics console. Sure they are improved on the GC. But this is about going somewhere other than graphics. Best graphics in the world or best game play in the world... you decide.

not saying Wii has done it, I ain't seen it yet! but it sounds the most interesting of all the new consoles! :-)

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 5:04 am
by wonkabar
silentbobafett wrote:Er.... well Wii isn't really NEXT GEN graphics console. Sure they are improved on the GC. But this is about going somewhere other than graphics. Best graphics in the world or best game play in the world... you decide.

not saying Wii has done it, I ain't seen it yet! but it sounds the most interesting of all the new consoles! :-)


I predict alot of Wii buyers that don't have 360 yet will give in down the road and get one. Wii just isn't next-gen, and you can talk about gameplay vs graphics all day, but grphics DO matter, and so does online gaming, they are part of "gameplay" today. To say they're not is denial...plus it's not exactly like 360 has a bunch of shitty games these days. I mean, more Zelda-gameplay is superior to Gears of War, Halo-3 etc? I think not. Just look at this review of COD. It got a 9.0 rating on the other consoles. The Wii version sounds kinda fun, but alas, not as good...not next-gen, and maybe even annoying after awhile. I imagine that controller is gonna get real old, real fast. If I want an emersive experience, I'll settle for the real activity. I don't need to be swinging my arm around and jumping around the couch...video-games are supposed to be a semi-casual indoor experience, if I wanna work out my arms I'll lift weights or play a real sport. Don't get me wrong, I give NIN props for doing something different, and I'll probably get one eventually. But I believe the excitement for Wii will wane as people find it more limited than PS3 or 360....(and maybe decide that PS-3 is too expensive and find Blue-Ray-- a risky gamble...at least Microsoft gives you a choice for a change. Could be wrong, but we'll see). Yes, Wii looks fun, but I just can't help but feel that at the end of the day it's a much smaller world than the other systems.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 6:06 am
by Pacino86845
Fried Gold wrote:
Pacino86845 wrote:I'm sure you guys've already said it in one form or another, but how awesome would the eventual Star Wars Jedi game be using those controls to swing a lightsaber and performing force moves on Storm Trooper bitches?!

Have you not learnt to do that for real yet like the rest of us?

:shock::shock::(

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 6:41 am
by MonkeyM666
Poor, poor Wonka... such a narrow view on the future of gaming. Graphics can only go so far, I couldn't count on all of my pointy bits the amount of games that looked great but were a major let down in every other area. Nintendo is trying something new this time, the pursuit of superior graphic levels is an endless game that no one will ever really win. The Wii's graphics are better then the cube, they just aren’t HD like the other two.

At least they're trying something new, and I for one am glad. Hell why wouldn't I want to get a bit fitter while playing my favourite games? I throw my body around when I'm playing anyway... The Wii will be huge, mark my words. I can see quite a few health organisations putting in their two bob and recommending the Wii for all the little fatties out there. If they're gonna be inside anyway playing games, why not get them moving a bit. The new CEO of Nintendo knows that people these days always want to improve themselves, even if it’s just a little. The DS’s campaign is a perfect example of this. Market it to everyone as a personal improvement device and watch the money roll in. When revenue is up, there’s not as much pressure on the real games that come out. More money, less pressure means that more games designers can try different (riskier) ideas and with more ideas more good quality games will be sure to arrive (all be it that some crap will come out as well... but at least there will be more inovation). And it’s all about the initial marketing…

I’m not saying that’s all that’s in the making of a good device, but it certainty will help a heap…

Well all I’m going to say is….

'If your gonna play with yourself, play with your Wii'

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 6:59 am
by ThisIsTheGirl
I think the success or failure of the controller, and by extension the console itself, will ultimately come down to the quality of the games. I'm pretty damn sure the Wii will be a lot more successful than the GC though, so hopefully developers won't desert it too soon.

I agree with the view that it's a really exciting direction for videogames in general - it could fail, but on balance I really think it's gonna succeed, and I think Sony might be fucked in this round of the hardware wars - so in my opinion Wonka makes a fair point about Wii owners buying cheap 360s a year or so down the line. I'm going round to my mate's house tonight for an all-night Gears of War session, which I am fully expecting to blow me away, so I can't deny the pull of a console like the 360 - but only when the game is worth playing.

To answer tfactor's question about which Wii gamkes we're going for - I definitely want WarioWare, but I've heard that it might not be available at launch over here. I was gonna wait a while to get Zelda, and maybe try out something like Elebits, which looks like the new Pikmin. I also want Trauma Centre, Red Steel, Project Hammer and that COD trailer looked great, but that review of Wonka's doesn't seem so positive.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 7:08 am
by MonkeyM666
You are right TITG. The controler is the key. I didn't realise until last week that you need to place a long receiver next to the telly to receive the controllers signal.

Image


Bad, bad, bad.... well bad it you have to have it next to the telly, not behind it.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 7:23 am
by ThisIsTheGirl
Do you think so? My TV is on a cabinet already, so I don't think it'll make much difference if I have to put the sensor bar in front of it.

I'd be pissed off if my TV was on a stand though! But then, I'm sure I read somewhere that the sensor bar comes with its own stand or something like that.

So are you planning on getting a Wii at launch too, Monkey?

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 7:26 am
by silentbobafett
The long reciever - ita hardly a bad boy is it! :-)

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 7:28 am
by colonel_lugz
Have you pre-prdered yours TiTg?, If so where from?, when will you get it? etc.

I don't know whether to pre-order or just turn up and hope. I got a GameCube on the day of it's release (I still say it's an awesome console if not ultimatly successful!) I just walked into Woolworths as soon as it opened, no-one thought to queue there, it's an untapped resource I tell ya

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 7:29 am
by MonkeyM666
Planning yes, able too...... sadly no.
I don't own a TV in the UK (I've only just got over here from OZ) and the one I have access to is, well to put in nicely..... crapola!

I'm really sad though because I've gone to every launch for nintendo since the SNES and this will be the first time I haven't been with the 'in' crowd.

Myself and another Zoner are planning to find a demo in a shop somewhere, push all the kids out of the way, and play it for as long as security doesn't arrive.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 7:44 am
by ThisIsTheGirl
Lugz: I've pre-ordered from the GAME in Queensway - I hate that chain, but it seemed like my best option at the time, and they called me up the other day to ask what games/peripherals I wanted too - so they've been pretty cool about it. I imagine you'll definitely be able to get one at Woolworths or somewhere like that, so at this point you might as well just do that. I've booked the day off work on the 8th, so I'm hoping they have the consoles first thing in the morning!

Monkey: An Aussie living in a London squat! What next? A Doctor playing golf? :lol:

I get it now; I was kind of wondering why you were so keen on this console when you didn't have TV. Why don't you get a TV with some of the hundreds of pounds a month you're saving on rent - then you'd be ready for the Wii on the 8th!

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 7:52 am
by wonkabar
With all due respect...But Mario and Zelda are hardly the "future". And I seem to recall Nin and it's fans making a not so small issue out of graphics-superiority when Nin was on top in that area back in the day. Besides, there are bigger issues at stake here. I'll admit that I'm pulling for Microsoft at this point. But Sony is trying to foist $80 games and a $600 Blue-Ray machine (cheaper than the $1000 price-tag of others, but sill) on us. If you want a Wii, fine. But just getting a Wii isn't enough...it amounts to a meaningless protest-vote at best. Look, HD needs to happen, I don't really care if it's BR or HDDVD, or Sony in charge of the show. But I do care if it's insanely expensive. Buying a Wii is nice "fuck you" to arrogent-ass Sony who seem to think we'll buy anything for any price just for their name, but getting a 360 sends a clearer message. Because this is about more than just games. The sooner PS-3 goes down, the sooner we have a winner in the HD format-war, and the sooner that happens the sooner we get SW and LOTR box-sets. Hey, if folks WANT HD itself to go down in flames or Sony to send the price way up like it seems to be trying to do then that's what's gonna happen. As much as I cringe at saying it, MS provides the best chance at stopping those things from happening. While Wii can hurt Sony, it will not crush them. Besides Wii might be cool as fuck, but it is NOT the future as some claim. People speak as if graphics are all the next-gen sytems have to offer and the games simply suck despite looking pretty. Dude, a more powerful system = better gameplay, period. Not just better graphics, but a better game overall. And like I've said before, I don't really care if it's Sony on top, I just can't handle the price and the attitude that we're all gonna drop everything and PAY. 360 has the games NOW, and they have their online shit together NOW....THAT'S the future of gaming my friends. The Wii just lacks so much. Yeah, it's cheaper, but you get what you pay for. Of course a Nissan owner is gonna say he doesn't need all the extras that come with a BMW. Of course he's gonna talk-up all the benefits of his car. Sure, it's good car but it's not in the same league. That's how see the Wii. If you don't want an all around entertainment-system fine, but don't assume that lacking in those areas means that makes it the "official" "gamer-machine" As illustrated by the IGN-link I posted above, it's clear that Wii has the lesser COD-3 game. I believe that once the hype dies down, and Wii owners have played many such lesser efforts, they will also realize they have a lesser console as well. Once that happens they will fork over a couple hundred more (360) rather than four hundred more (PS-3), and that will be a good thing as it will help make the HD revolution somewhat more affordable I think/hope. I'd take Master-Chief over Mario any day anyway. I do wish Wii all the best though, I DO plan on getting one at some point. It's just not my first choice, at the price it almost offers too little IMO

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 8:09 am
by MonkeyM666
Well you've answered it all TITG..... PRASE THE LORD!

That is a good point, I could but a TV... a nice new W/S LCD, but if I do that then I'll need surround sound, and a beanbag and a bar fridge.... bong.... ummmm, what else does a true gamer need...... hummmm.... (I may start another thread on this one).

The Wii may be worth it, but I just don't know how long I'm going to be in London for so I'm keeping my possessions down to what I can squeeze into my back-pack.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 8:27 am
by MonkeyM666
Wonka, you do make some good points. Sony are really playing the 'top shit' card at the moment with the PS3. The price alone lets you see that. The reason for this is that Sony is actually loosing money is every other part of there business, I mean Sony Pictures are doing espically badly (they relied on Davinci code to save there budget for the entire year.... ONE MOVIE! Just crazy). The entire company is pushing the PS3, not just the department. I know that I'll be waiting a fair while before I get one. The technology is just too new. Remeber DVD players when they first came out? They sucked, but it only took a couple of years and they nailed it on the head.

The 360 (or Xbox 1.5 as I've read in a few places) is the middle player here, Microsoft were unwise to release the 360 as early as it did but they were on the right track releasing it first. Get the game library up, get XBOX Live working steller and pick up the peases until Sony gets settled. I've played a 360, and it truly is next gen and super cool but by what I've seen it's nothing in comparison to the PS3.

I only love the Wii due to the inovation, it's one of the reasons that nintendo has lasted past the Atari, Commadore and Sega. If I want cool graphics I'll upgrade my PC, buy a controler and crack on with that. I just beleive that the definition of a 'consol' is different to that.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 8:42 am
by ThisIsTheGirl
I think you both make good points really, and I think we can all agree that Sony has messed up in numerous ways this time round. I would point out that the success of the DS over the PSP is proof that the internal power of a sytem is only relevant when you have a bunch of killer apps also available. But in the case of the 360, I think it has both; Battlefield 2, Table Tennis, Fight Night Round 3 and Halo 2 have provided me with some of the best gaming experiences I've had over the past year, no doubt about it -

Monkey - I guess you're right, if you're not gonna be in London for long, it probably doesn't make sense to get a Wii over here. Maybe we should host a London Zoners Wii gaming evening.....

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:03 am
by MonkeyM666
That's a bloody marvy idea! Ok, so who's gonna go and get one.... oh and I must stress I only watch post 2004 Widescreens. One must have standards...

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:26 am
by Chairman Kaga
Why does HD "need to happen"?

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:28 am
by MonkeyM666
That is a good question... It doesn't 'need' to happen, it's just a nateral progression of formats. HD will happen over time when it becomes cheaper and joe blow doesn't need to make the choice anymore, it's just all you can get.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 11:34 am
by Fried Gold
colonel_lugz wrote:Have you pre-prdered yours TiTg?, If so where from?, when will you get it? etc.

I don't know whether to pre-order or just turn up and hope. I got a GameCube on the day of it's release (I still say it's an awesome console if not ultimatly successful!) I just walked into Woolworths as soon as it opened, no-one thought to queue there, it's an untapped resource I tell ya


As far as I know there is no gaurantee that you will be able to get one unless you pre-order. But that's probably down to their PR department. I went into Comet in the first week of the Gamecube and got one.

I think pre-ordering is more about taking advantage of some of the deals certain shops are offering to early buyers.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 11:51 am
by godzillasushi
MonkeyM666 wrote:The 360 (or Xbox 1.5 as I've read in a few places) is the middle player here, Microsoft were unwise to release the 360 as early as it did but they were on the right track releasing it first. Get the game library up, get XBOX Live working steller and pick up the peases until Sony gets settled. I've played a 360, and it truly is next gen and super cool but by what I've seen it's nothing in comparison to the PS3.


Other then the blue ray stuff, what more does the PS3 have? I mean they each have plus's. 360 is more developer friendly. And I dont know a lot about this stuff, but doesnt the 360 have more memory and the PS3 have more powerful processors? I see that as a balance.

From a games standpoint, it was brilliant to release it when they did. It has a farely large library now and I believe the majority of the games have been rated farely well. And it has plenty of downloadable content. That gives them a huge advantage. Add to that the price. I dont know if you can tell, but im a big Xbox fan :P But right now it seems to be the best of the big three.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 11:59 am
by Fried Gold
Youtubes of IGN's video reviews of Wii games

http://wiinintendo.net/?p=1911

Beware that some of them follow the "next gen should mean HD graphics damnit" trend.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 12:46 pm
by colonel_lugz
Fried Gold wrote:Youtubes of IGN's video reviews of Wii games

http://wiinintendo.net/?p=1911

Beware that some of them follow the "next gen should mean HD graphics damnit" trend.


My excitement doubles each day, I need a Wii

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:15 pm
by MonkeyM666
Going on the Sony Launch at E3 this year the stats for the gpc and cpu aer quite a bit better than the 360.

From memory (and it is hazy today) the PS3 PC: GPU Comparision is...

Hightest grade consumer PC available on the market can precess up tp 8 HD streams at one time.

The PS3 can handle 30.

I don't know what the 360/PS3 GPU comparision is but I know that Nvidia has been working on a specific chip for the past four years for the PS3 and it will not be available in anything else other than the PS3.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:39 pm
by Chairman Kaga
This PS3 has massive computational powers but unfortunately due to the business structure of the industry very few games will be designed to take full advantage of it. Most companies will want simultaneous release on the PS3 and 360 thus many won't be going trough the effort to design the PS3 version with extraordinary content relative to the 360 version. It's up to the dwindling exclusives to push it's tech.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:40 pm
by The Garbage Man
ThisIsTheGirl wrote:Do you think so? My TV is on a cabinet already, so I don't think it'll make much difference if I have to put the sensor bar in front of it.

I'd be pissed off if my TV was on a stand though! But then, I'm sure I read somewhere that the sensor bar comes with its own stand or something like that.


The sensor does come with its own stand, and it's not really a big deal. We have ours resting comfortably on top of the TV.

Chairman Kaga wrote:Why does HD "need to happen"?


Because the Title III--Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act enacted by the U.S. government set "a firm date of February 17, 2009 for the cessation of Analog broadcasts."

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 2:00 pm
by ThisIsTheGirl
The Garbage Man wrote:Because the Title III--Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act enacted by the U.S. government set "a firm date of February 17, 2009 for the cessation of Analog broadcasts."


...but is that the same as HD TV?

For example, I can receive digital TV broadcasts through a set-top box on my 20-year old TV - but that's not the same as HDTV, for which I would obviously require a new TV set.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 2:58 pm
by Chairman Kaga
ThisIsTheGirl wrote:
The Garbage Man wrote:Because the Title III--Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act enacted by the U.S. government set "a firm date of February 17, 2009 for the cessation of Analog broadcasts."


...but is that the same as HD TV?

For example, I can receive digital TV broadcasts through a set-top box on my 20-year old TV - but that's not the same as HDTV, for which I would obviously require a new TV set.

No it's not. TV broadcasters will be required to transmit in digital. Most will shift to HD but an HD tv will not be necessary to view a digital broadcast only a converter box to change the digital signal into an analog one. It has nothing to do with HD.

Nintendo Wii Thread

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 3:10 pm
by bastard_robo
Chairman Kaga wrote:This PS3 has massive computational powers but unfortunately due to the business structure of the industry very few games will be designed to take full advantage of it. Most companies will want simultaneous release on the PS3 and 360 thus many won't be going trough the effort to design the PS3 version with extraordinary content relative to the 360 version. It's up to the dwindling exclusives to push it's tech.


Nailed it!

The problem with both systmes (ps3 and 360) is that a good portion of their library are availble on both systems (or will be)

I think the squar games like FF will probably use the system's specs a lot better, but 90% of the games are still probably going to look the same on both systems.

Which is were Nintendo has the advantage. Over half of their Library will be developed in house, taking full advantage of what their system has to offer. IF you look at a lot of the Gamecube games, they looked far better and more colorfull than PS2 and Xbox. Not to mention a lot of them offerd more fun than a lot of the games on either other system. (i've worn my thumbs down on smash bros so many time)

Re: Nintendo Wii Thread

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 5:40 pm
by godzillasushi
bastard_robo wrote:Which is were Nintendo has the advantage. Over half of their Library will be developed in house, taking full advantage of what their system has to offer. IF you look at a lot of the Gamecube games, they looked far better and more colorfull than PS2 and Xbox. Not to mention a lot of them offerd more fun than a lot of the games on either other system. (i've worn my thumbs down on smash bros so many time)


Indeed you are correct my good man. But in 4 years, the Wii is still going to be visually dull whilst the other consoles will have games taking full advantage of the technology. Dare I say 60FPS Gears of War 2! I totally dig Zelda, but after a few years, are we going to see the same game that comes out in a few days visually? The games will always be of the highest quality with Nintendo, but I like graphics as well :o

PS: This is not a hit on Nintendo! I likes em good.

Re: Nintendo Wii Thread

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 6:14 pm
by Chairman Kaga
godzillasushi wrote:
Indeed you are correct my good man. But in 4 years, the Wii is still going to be visually dull whilst the other consoles will have games taking full advantage of the technology. Dare I say 60FPS Gears of War 2! I totally dig Zelda, but after a few years, are we going to see the same game that comes out in a few days visually? The games will always be of the highest quality with Nintendo, but I like graphics as well :o

PS: This is not a hit on Nintendo! I likes em good.

From the best estimates supposedly the Wii has twice the processing power graphically of the GC. Zelda:TP is probably the pinnacle of GC graphics but is only half of what the Wii can do if those estimates are correct. It isn't as if their graphics have topped out at launch.

Re: Nintendo Wii Thread

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 6:25 pm
by papalazeru
Chairman Kaga wrote:
godzillasushi wrote:
Indeed you are correct my good man. But in 4 years, the Wii is still going to be visually dull whilst the other consoles will have games taking full advantage of the technology. Dare I say 60FPS Gears of War 2! I totally dig Zelda, but after a few years, are we going to see the same game that comes out in a few days visually? The games will always be of the highest quality with Nintendo, but I like graphics as well :o

PS: This is not a hit on Nintendo! I likes em good.

From the best estimates supposedly the Wii has twice the processing power graphically of the GC. Zelda:TP is probably the pinnacle of GC graphics but is only half of what the Wii can do if those estimates are correct. It isn't as if their graphics have topped out at launch.


What you both seem to be forgetting is that everyone will buy one.

Also, its so cheap who cares if the graphics are a bit dull after 5 years, its not the graphics that maketh the game. Go back and play Goldeneye on N64 and tell me its dull, or how about getting your mates round and playing Chaos on one keyboard (using a spectrum emulator)...theres ya interaction that doesn't die with age.

And if you think that Xbox or Sony won't release another machine in 5 years....think again.

I think this is a ballsy move by Nintendo and it will pay off big time or I will eat my hat.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:12 pm
by The Garbage Man
Chairman Kaga wrote:
ThisIsTheGirl wrote:
The Garbage Man wrote:Because the Title III--Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act enacted by the U.S. government set "a firm date of February 17, 2009 for the cessation of Analog broadcasts."


...but is that the same as HD TV?

For example, I can receive digital TV broadcasts through a set-top box on my 20-year old TV - but that's not the same as HDTV, for which I would obviously require a new TV set.

No it's not. TV broadcasters will be required to transmit in digital. Most will shift to HD but an HD tv will not be necessary to view a digital broadcast only a converter box to change the digital signal into an analog one. It has nothing to do with HD.


You're right, but my point was that the government is pushing for HD transmission on all broadcast channels, which will require the public to either buy a set-top converter or get an HD TV. I'd think many people looking for a new TV in the near future will end up choosing an HD set over analog for that reason. That said, I'm far from an expert on HD tech (or on public opinion for that matter), so what do I know?

On an unrelated note, the new Wii Rayman game is crazy as hell and features some whacky rhythm-based, bunny-related mini-games. Good times can be had.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 11:01 pm
by papalazeru
The Garbage Man wrote:
Chairman Kaga wrote:
ThisIsTheGirl wrote:
The Garbage Man wrote:Because the Title III--Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act enacted by the U.S. government set "a firm date of February 17, 2009 for the cessation of Analog broadcasts."


...but is that the same as HD TV?

For example, I can receive digital TV broadcasts through a set-top box on my 20-year old TV - but that's not the same as HDTV, for which I would obviously require a new TV set.

No it's not. TV broadcasters will be required to transmit in digital. Most will shift to HD but an HD tv will not be necessary to view a digital broadcast only a converter box to change the digital signal into an analog one. It has nothing to do with HD.


You're right, but my point was that the government is pushing for HD transmission on all broadcast channels, which will require the public to either buy a set-top converter or get an HD TV. I'd think many people looking for a new TV in the near future will end up choosing an HD set over analog for that reason. That said, I'm far from an expert on HD tech (or on public opinion for that matter), so what do I know?

On an unrelated note, the new Wii Rayman game is crazy as hell and features some whacky rhythm-based, bunny-related mini-games. Good times can be had.


You guys are really missing the point here.....with the HD stuff.. HD is only in the UK becuase Murdoch forced it through, we didn't agre to HD standards (we agreed to a standard but we decided against it)....we went with DVB. Because Mrudoch owns everything he thinks he can get away with it. Don't let him. The reason we changed to digital was 'supposedly' because we would get a wide expanse of channels in less band than terrestrial thus leaving them to sell off the airwave to mobile companies and fuck with our brains some more (though selling airwaves seems like a ludicrous IP anyway). HD takes up the same bandwidth as terrestrial (slightly more) so what was the fucking point? At least when I lose anaolgue signal with my aerial I can just move it about and gauge when the picture gets better, with digital is so hit and miss its disturbing. I reckon we will all be force onto cable viewing which in turn will mean we can be monitored through all our viewing pleasure....1984.....1984.........switch off the ads.....lets make sure that only good tv stays...dont fall asleep through big brother, turn over before you go to bed.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 11:02 pm
by papalazeru
Oh yeah...the Wii....I still well up for that.

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 10:00 am
by The Ginger Man
So, is anyone around these parts planning on trying to get a Wii today? I'm thinking about it, but in Manhattan, I'm sure my chances are long gone. Maybe Amazon...but who knows. Might just wait.

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:01 pm
by sleepflower
papalazeru wrote:
The Garbage Man wrote:
Chairman Kaga wrote:
ThisIsTheGirl wrote:
The Garbage Man wrote:Because the Title III--Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act enacted by the U.S. government set "a firm date of February 17, 2009 for the cessation of Analog broadcasts."


...but is that the same as HD TV?

For example, I can receive digital TV broadcasts through a set-top box on my 20-year old TV - but that's not the same as HDTV, for which I would obviously require a new TV set.

No it's not. TV broadcasters will be required to transmit in digital. Most will shift to HD but an HD tv will not be necessary to view a digital broadcast only a converter box to change the digital signal into an analog one. It has nothing to do with HD.


You're right, but my point was that the government is pushing for HD transmission on all broadcast channels, which will require the public to either buy a set-top converter or get an HD TV. I'd think many people looking for a new TV in the near future will end up choosing an HD set over analog for that reason. That said, I'm far from an expert on HD tech (or on public opinion for that matter), so what do I know?

On an unrelated note, the new Wii Rayman game is crazy as hell and features some whacky rhythm-based, bunny-related mini-games. Good times can be had.


You guys are really missing the point here.....with the HD stuff.. HD is only in the UK becuase Murdoch forced it through, we didn't agre to HD standards (we agreed to a standard but we decided against it)....we went with DVB. Because Mrudoch owns everything he thinks he can get away with it. Don't let him. The reason we changed to digital was 'supposedly' because we would get a wide expanse of channels in less band than terrestrial thus leaving them to sell off the airwave to mobile companies and fuck with our brains some more (though selling airwaves seems like a ludicrous IP anyway). HD takes up the same bandwidth as terrestrial (slightly more) so what was the fucking point? At least when I lose anaolgue signal with my aerial I can just move it about and gauge when the picture gets better, with digital is so hit and miss its disturbing. I reckon we will all be force onto cable viewing which in turn will mean we can be monitored through all our viewing pleasure....1984.....1984.........switch off the ads.....lets make sure that only good tv stays...dont fall asleep through big brother, turn over before you go to bed.


Why oh why oh why do you always go over the top? HD is better quality than SD, which you can get on sky and NTL (unsure but this may still only be trials). What the BBC and government are doing with the analogue switch off is different to HD coming in, seperate operations. HD is here because people want it. DVB is here for a multitude of reasons, yes some people want it, but not all want the switch off. The main reason that we will have to go cable or sky for HD is that there is not enough bandwidth even when we have analogue switch off. Apparently at current rates only 4 HD channels could be broadcast is HD when analogue is freed up.

As for DVB and reception, I had mixed experiences. My parents get great reception on terrestrial, though hardly get any channels on DVB. The weirdest part is that they thought they needed a DVB capable TV even though they pay for NTL and are going to continue to do so, though they only switch it on if the terrestrial or DVB hasn't got good picture! Personally I would go for the guaranteed approach immediately.

The other experience is at my old flat. Had no TV reception for years, then as soon as I get a digital box, woosh! loads of clear channels.

Will have to see how it goes, atleast they are doing it in stages.

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:02 pm
by sleepflower
Oh and I want a Wii, they look fantastic, though once you buy one, plus game and extra controller, it comes to £255. I cannot afford one that way. I really only want it for multiplayer stuff.

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:34 pm
by Chairman Kaga
So how many points do the virtual console downloads cost?

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:39 pm
by unikrunk
My only issue with the Wii is that I play video games when I am feeling lazy; if I wanted to have to throw my hands all over the place it would mean I have energy, and if I have energy I would not be laying around gaming.

Seriously, it looks cool and all, but I don't want to exercise when I am playing video games.

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:45 pm
by Chairman Kaga
Then why are you in this thread?

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 1:06 pm
by unikrunk
Chairman Kaga wrote:Then why are you in this thread?


Because I wanted to talk about the Wii...Columbo. :wink:

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 1:45 pm
by Flumm
I don't know if this is old news for those who are interested and signed up to teh IGN's and such, but youtube is pretty flooded with all sorts of things across all the platforms at the minute, and considering the inclinations of a lot of the older Ninty buyers, I thought this was one of the more revealing things I've seen...

Shopping on the Wii

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 3:04 pm
by Fried Gold
unikrunk wrote:
Chairman Kaga wrote:Then why are you in this thread?


Because I wanted to talk about the Wii...Columbo. :wink:


Now a Columbo based game on the Wii would be awesome.

*Wave controller anti-clockwise to ask suspect just one more thing.
** Wave controller clockwise and push A to talk about Mrs Columbo.

PostPosted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 3:36 pm
by unikrunk
Fried Gold wrote:
unikrunk wrote:
Chairman Kaga wrote:Then why are you in this thread?


Because I wanted to talk about the Wii...Columbo. :wink:


Now a Columbo based game on the Wii would be awesome.

*Wave controller anti-clockwise to ask suspect just one more thing.
** Wave controller clockwise and push A to talk about Mrs Columbo.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA