Gabriel

Well, no, the trak ball cannot be used as a general purpose replacement controller. It does not function at all for the vast majority of the games in the 5200 library. As already mentioned, it works best for Centipede and Missile Command. It works very well for Millipede too, even if the game hasn't been optimized for trak ball use. Of the other games it works with, it either boils down to a matter of taste, or you wonder why in hell someone at Atari thought the game would benefit from trak ball control. Pole Position is one that may or may not benefit from trak ball control depending on the player. Defender is definitely one where you wonder what someone was smoking when the subject of trak ball compatibility came up. Slightly off on a tangent, I find it odd that Star Wars Arcade supposedly doesn't support the trak ball. It seems like a perfect game to do so.

They are definitely cool.

CPUWIZ speaks correctly and succinctly.

Either the 5200 detects the trak ball or the trak ball sends different kinds of signals to the 5200. I think it's the latter, since games have to be programmed with the trak ball in mind. And if you think $50 is bad, you should have tried to get one while they were new. I have vivid memories of trying to get my mom to get me one back in 1983, only for her to balk at the $80 price tag.

I sent the check today. Hopefully soon I'll be seeing how the Stargate proto plays on a real 5200.

RPGs are probably a pretty sure bet. RPG gamers are already a fanatical bunch. Then there are the Square loonies who, much like the Neo Geo fans, gather their forces together to arbitrarily increase the secondary market values of all the Square games. While they'll never be able to put a dent in the more common titles, like FF 7, 8, 9, and Tactics, they can, and will, be able to drive up the prices of the other less common (but nowhere near rare) titles. Shooters enjoyed a renaissance on the PS1. Sadly, most of these titles had short print runs and short shipments. And there are die hard shooter fans dying to play some of them. Then there are the late release games. I think some of the non-shooter based Agetec budget series will be mildly rare in the future. I've hardly seen any of them anywhere. Then there are things like Qix Neo, which I would have missed if not for internet boards. And right now is a nice time to be looking for PS1 games. Even relative rarities are easily found. If the recent lists are to be believed, I'm still regularly coming across R7s.

Maybe I shouldn't have interjected my personal experiences with the X-Box. I probably could have phrased things with a much more neutral connotation. Maybe I shouldn't have shared my speculations on a thread whose only real purpose would be to solicit other people's speculations. It's one thing to say, "I don't agree with your observations." It's quite another to say: AFAIK, I have not made personal attacks against anyone on these boards. That is a trend I hope to continue. Therefore, since I strongly dislike being called a liar, I'm adding all of your usernames to my ignore list. I suggest you do the same with my username.

I'd venture to say the Game Boy Player is the best reason to own a GameCube.

I included Ms. Pac Man. Does my list count?

MK Trilogy would have made my list as well, but, to tell the truth, I like MK a lot more before the Run button and pattern kombos were introduced. Who is your favorite MK Trilogy character? I played Sindel the most. Something about nagging people to death.

Currently, I'm playing the holy living shit out of Romance of the Three Kingdoms IX (PS2). I've also developed a pretty big affection for Space Attack (Atari 2600). However, will I play those a year from now? I don't know. Incidentally, Soul Calibur is literally the ONLY reason I've bothered to keep a working Dreamcast around. Since the sequel came out, I hardly ever play the original, and the DC just sits there unused except for the odd attempt to play Project Justice. So, maybe Soul Calibur doesn't belong on my list. However, I think the hundreds of hours I played it and the hundreds of hours I play the sequel earns it a spot on my list.

If it's on a Sony system, I love it. If not, I hate it. ... What? In no particular order: Dark Wizard (SegaCD) Romance of the Three Kingdoms II (NES, SNES, Genesis) Missile Command (Atari 2600) Ms. Pac Man (too many versions to list) Shining Force CD (SegaCD) Front Mission 3 (PS1) Defender (Atari 5200) Mortal Kombat II (SNES, Genesis, 32X) Tempest 2000 (Jaguar, PS1) Soul Calibur (DC) I don't include any games exclusively from the present generation of consoles or those that I've only played for the first time in the past couple of years. Plus, it's just based on the games I'm thinking of right at this moment.

Not really a reply, but I was browsing around and came upon this. It doesn't support my hypothesis that the X-Next will use memory cards, but it does allege that the new Microsoft console will not have a hard drive. http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0...Enbv%5E,00.html It also alleges that the new console will NOT be backwards compatible. I've read this somewhere before. I'd be very surprised if this were true. It seems to go completely against the primary objective which has been stated for the X-Box, which is that the console solely exists to build a customer base for the sequel system. History shows us that if consumers can't play their old games on it, then they don't embrace it as easily and therefore don't upgrade as fast as the producer desires.

::sigh:: Do you mind if I ignore that last part after the elipses? I'm honestly not trying to flame. It's just that the X-Box in general makes me ranty. And I find it amusing that the hard drive, the primary thing X-Fans praise, might be excised in favor of a very memory cardish sounding solution. As for my rant, they are my experiences. Reality is shaped by our perceptions and experiences. Therefore, my reality says that I've seen more than my fair share of broken X-Boxes. Now, I've been called a "fanboy". Truthfully, I don't have any extreme dedication to any system. When I purchase a game, it's like this: 1) If I have a choice, I tend to buy games for my PS2, because I like the controllers much more than the other systems'. In the case of Soul Calibur II, I didn't follow this axiom, and I purchased the GameCube version and the X-Box version. I ended up realizing that the GC version was fantastic, while the X-Box version had pretty graphics, but loose controls and Tood McFarlane's ego. Therefore, I got rid of the X-Box version. I also got Star Trek: Shattered Universe for the X-Box instead of the PS2. The reviews are WAY off the mark on this one. It's actually pretty fun. 2) If I see an exclusive game for any of the three consoles, I buy it if it interests me. The only difference is that I keep the idea in minde that my experience tells me that my X-Box is likely to die. So, I weigh the idea of owning the game against the idea of owning it for a system which will break and that I won't replace. If it doesn't break, I'm golden. If it does break, then I have a $50 coaster. Yeah, maybe I'm unlucky. Maybe others are unlucky. Maybe Waco got the most piss poor shipment of X-Boxes ever. Maybe my PS2 will die tomorrow just as I'm wiping out Cao Cao's army in RotTK9. Maybe a big fat hermaphrodite with a Flock of Seagulls haircut and only one nostril will barge in and steal my lucky glow in the dark snorkel. Still doesn't change the announcement that allegedly the X-Next won't have a hard drive in it. I think I've said enough times why I think it won't. Why do you think it won't have one?

Time will tell. I interpret that he is using "CD" as a catch all term for the DVD drive. And, yes, this isn't a statement from Microsoft, but it is a statement supposedly from the CEO of a company who would presumably know a little more about the inner configuration of the X-Next than the man on the street considering his company is developing stuff to act as a storage medium. But, if the statement is untrue, and the X-Next WILL have some kind of internal storage, then M-Systems has performed a very large faux pas that may be very bad for them. Truthfully, I don't see Microsoft allowing a contract company to reveal information like that unless it were true (and all their competitors knew anyway). And add on components sell just fine when there is a reason to own them. After all, controllers are perhipherals, and they sell so well that multiple companies jump on the bandwagon to manufacture controllers for nearly every system. Sony achieved almost complete market penetration with their memory cards. Coleco did very well with their 2600 adaptor, because it allowed people upgrading to a Colecovision to use their old Atari libraries. Perhipherals don't sell well when there is no reason to own them. Why should I buy a Sega CD? Kris Kross Make My Music Video? I'll pass. Why should I buy a 32X? What does it do for the games I already own? Nothing? And I have to buy Virtua Racing all over again? I paid $100 for it before, I'll pass. Why should I buy a RAM upgrade for my N64? Two games use it? Hold me back! On second thought, I'll just dump this console and get a newer one. In the case of a potential memory card and no internal storage, there is a compelling reason to buy the perhipheral. You can't save your data otherwise. Considering modern games, this would be a required device. You can say that consumers won't go for that. However, people said that consumers wouldn't go for systems with only one controller and no pack in game. It didn't stop the real consumers from running out and purchasing whatever was available anyway.

The neat thing about the term "fanboy" is that it implies that I am irrationally FOR something and irrationally AGAINST something or everything else. Now, I suppose you could interpret my rant as being pro-Sony and anti-Microsoft. However, the real thought going through my mind was more along the lines of pro-decently-constructed items and anti-defective-pieces-of-shit. So, yes, I am a fanboy. I expect $200 to $300 pieces of electronics to not break after just a couple of months of their intended use. The term you were probably looking for was "hater". But, that's not really accurate, because I have gone through the effort, which I shouldn't have had to go through in the first place, to keep an X-Box around. There are few games I feel are worth playing on it, but the ones that do exist are fun with friends. So, no, I'm not a "hater" for hate's sake. And, getting to the next subject, since my numbers do somewhat cast a poor light on me, I'll explain them. I got the hours of use of my friend's PS2 at 16 per day, because I assume he sleeps 8 hours each day, and works 8 other hours each day. I know for a fact, since I spend long visits with him that his regular routine is pretty much have the PS2 either have a game playing or a DVD running at all times. So, it was an approximation, and possibly hyperbole. It is undeniable that he has owned the system for 3 years and that the same system has seen extremely heavy use, which was the primary point I was attempting to convey with the estimation. Looking at my records, I'm on my 4th X-Box. The first one lasted the longest. Then it broke due to not being able to read any disc. That was clearly the drive. The next two broke, and booted to a blank screen. I was told this was because of the hard drive. The last one died precisely one week before the expiration of my service contract. When you've had to go through the returns process as much as I have, it all tends to blur together. I'm posting my informal opinion on an internet forum. I made it clear that I was letting my biases be on the surface for everyone to see. I also made it clear that this subject puts me into rant mode. If you want to subject that to the same kind of rigorous accuracy of figures and facts, then I can't say that I give a damn. Short version of what I think this means without the biases against the physical construction of the X-Box? Microsoft wants to make money instead of lose it (duh). They've also realized that selling a console at a loss in order to make it up on software sales is a stupid way to do business and an insane myth. They're looking for ways to cut costs on a new console. Having a perhipheral which is the data storage device not only eliminates costs in the base console, but also drives new sales. It isn't too much of a stretch to say they've also looked at the history of the Sony Playstation and Playstation 2 and have seen that nearly all owners of those consoles own one or more memory cards. Perhipherals don't sell, indeed. Perhipherals will sell fine when there is a reason or need to own them. Remember also that Microsoft supposedly polled the desires of gamers to come up with the X-Box. The result were controllers that have been almost universally regarded as horrible (and have effectively disappeared from shelves) and a console which has been in the red ever since its release. Something tells me that the desires of gamers don't matter much to Microsoft right now. (Damn. That's a lot of text. Too wrapped up in this today, I think.)

Above, I quote the quote that heavily implies the X-Next's storage medium will be a perhiperal. In the sentences directly preceeding it, this is said: "Microsoft has taken the hard disk out of its Xbox. The only thing left will be a CD; that’s all." (Bolded text is actually bolded in the article) If all that will be left is the CD, then that pretty much flat out says that the storage medium will be some sort of external device. Like I've already said, it may not be true, but I have no problem believing this development.

OK, I have to take a deep breath, I'm too ranty today. inhale. exhale. inhale. exhale. You'll have to excuse me. I get like this nearly everytime I talk about the X-Box. When I bought mine, I was lucky enough to push the sales guy until they sold me a service plan. Take that in for a moment. I had to force a store to give me a service plan. When was the last time that happened? I've returned 3 or 4 X-Boxes. It's enough that I've lost count. So, I'm on my 4th or 5th now. Luckily, this one has lasted 7 months. But it's already starting to show inklings of problems. I'm not alone. The size of the X-Box installed user base is small enough that it's difficult to find a fellow owner, but when I do it's always the same story. Their box died on them after 3 to 6 months. As for the PS2, I write that system's unreliability as mostly propaganda. Sure, the inital run seemed to have some serious problems. Unlike the X-Box, these problems were quickly corrected. And, I've never seen a salesman miss a chance to try and push a service plan on a PS2. If it were truly as unreliable as people say, then no one would sell service plans on them. Practically everyone I know has a PS2. Consider that for a moment. Out of about 3 or 4 people who I've met who have owned X-Boxes, ALL of them ended up with a defective systems. Out of several dozen people I know who own PS2s, NONE of them have defective systems. One of those people even keeps his PS2 running about 16 hours a day (he plays it during nearly all of his free time, and has it play DVDs all night long while he sleeps), and has owned it for nearly 3 years. I don't doubt that there are people who have had defective PS2s. However, I feel it has been blown completely out of proportion. All that just lets you know my personal bias. As I mention, I own an X-Box. It's an impressive piece of hardware when it works. I even like one or two games in its libary. But, Microsoft has realized that the harddrive was a poor decision. Sadly, they don't care about the fact they have a notoriously defective system. All they care about is that the harddrive prevents potential perhipheral sales. Consumers lose. And the article makes it fairly clear that the new storage device will be a separately purchased item. X-Next owners should not expect any kind of internal storage on the system. It could be untrue, but I doubt it.

Because, of the several that I've owned, that's about how long they last before the hard drive or DVD drive dies. The people that I've talked to say the most common failure is the hard drive giving up the ghost. For this reason, the chain stores that I've spoken with people from have given employees instructions to NOT, under any circumstances, sell a service plan with an X-Box. Too many of them come back and the store doesn't get reimbursed for the dead systems. In any case, that was just my bile coming out. Look at it from this perspective: 1) The vast majority of the X-Box owners do not have broadband or Live, the only methods to download content. Edit: Meaning you have to have a broadband connection or Live to effectively use the online features of the X-Box, unless you are a M4D h4><><0r. I think it's safe to say that the people who hack their boxes or do all the wierd things to avoid LIVE are only about 1 or 2 percent of the entire X-Box owning populace. 2) This trend will likely continue. Most X-Next owners will probably not have broadband connections either, unless it is a pre-requisite for the console. In fact, most polls on the subject show that even among hardcore gamers, it is a distinct minority that even have any inclination to play online. 3) Barring this extra content that the majority of gamers have no access to, the only thing left is game saves. I doubt many X-Box users have even used 0.01% of their hard drives. The hard drive is overkill. I even have a few music files on my current X-Box just for grins and I haven't made the slightest dent in it. 4) How many people use their X-Boxes as a stereo? What games really make use of the music files the system can save? Out of the games I've seen and played (not the whole library, admittedly, but over 2 dozen at least), I know of exactly ONE where this is possible. I think that qualifies as a little used feature. 5) The hard drive is losing Microsoft money that could be made by selling a memory card device. Changes are in the air at Microsoft. The X-Box was a console that the market, by and large, did not want, yet billions of dollars have been spent pushing it down everyone's throat. Microsoft has learned from Hollywood successes like Batman, even the most marginal of products can sell in large numbers if you throw enough advertising behind it. But, in Microsoft's case, the costs outweigh the results. People with vested interests in this are not happy at these events. Microsoft is going to have to start making some money on their consoles or they're going to need to stop flushing cash down the toilet. If Microsoft is going to spend the money to be the number one game console, they need to produce results, not be in a race with Nintendo to try to stay out of 3rd place in a three man race. That's not just me saying that. That is the sentiment of people who want Microsoft investigated because of the X-Box fiasco. It's all about money. It doesn't matter if you're Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, Sega, or whoever. The X-Box harddrive is one of many factors helping Microsoft lose money. It doesn't matter if you want it, or if I want it, or if anyone wants it. If it isn't "cost effective" no one will get it.

This doesn't surprise me. The hard drive is a liability, not an asset, on the X-Box. It's usually the first thing to break down on the console, and it's not like the console is a well put together piece of electronics anyway. Microsoft has probably had hundreds of thousands of returns of their console just because of the craptacular hard drive crashing. Microsoft is in the red on the X-Box even without customers returning a known defective product. As the article states, it doesn't make sense for Microsoft to have a hard drive on the X-Box. Even the smallest of drives would last the entire life of the console (about 3 months) with gigabytes to spare for even the hardest of hardcore gamers. Microsoft wants some of those lucrative perhiperal sales that Sony has going on with the memory cards. Do you think they wanted the X-Box memory cards to sit on shelves collecting dust? Hell no. A new system which relies on separately sold memory cards, or whatever other storage device used, will make the red a little less prominent on the next Microsoft box. "At some point, when users want to save their e-mail messages, copy music, or anything like that, the only storage they’ll have is what we give them. It’s worth hundreds of millions to the company, spread over a few years, and we’ll be the main supplier for it; and I hope the sole supplier." I even predict they'll copy Nintendo. First they'll release a crappy storage device that will only hold the smallest handful of game saves, and then they'll follow that up later with a larger storage device after the userbase has already invested in the dinky one.

Thankee. Now, at least I know what to look for. Odd that I'd miss a SegaCD cased game. I've owned a PS1 since launch day, and pickings were pretty slim those first few months. Edit: Of course, I was a poor bastard/financially challenged person back then. That could have something to do with it. Just like I entirely missed the entire lifespan of the Neo Geo Pocket. What game is that on the third row, fourth column?

An R0 supposedly means the game was never released. In this case (and many others in this list), it's probably just a placeholder to indicate that no one has any idea how rare/common the game is. I have a used/scratched copy. It plays fine, but won't show the opening movie/demo. If you don't press start fast enough to get past that part, then the game locks up. I definitely don't see the game that often "in the wild," so I haven't been able to secure a replacement. On EBay it seems to go for around $25 used/opened. By comparing it to other games on the list, it's probably a R3 to R5. My personal experiences would place it at a R5, but it may be just highly sought after.

I've NEVER even seen Raiden Project. Not even a picture of the case. Of course, it may just be me not looking hard enough.

I saw Guilty Gear (R7) in the local GameStop and was going to buy it, but some employee had already stolen it. I have Raystorm and Return Fire (both R7). I've seen a Viewpoint recently. I should have snagged it. The thing is, I had a MUCH harder time getting Raycrisis: Series Termination than I did finding Raystorm. But Raycrisis is listed as a R3 and Raystorm is listed as a R7? Otherwise, a big chunk of my library of games are R4 and R5. I'm not sure how accurate that list is, but, for the moment, it makes me feel pretty good about my horde of PS1 games.