Is It a Landslide at This Point?

[Felizginato12]

I mean really...can anyone say that this console war is a real close tie? I'm just trying to see if anyone thinks the same as I (sorry just curious).

Let's look at the PS3...

Exspensive console with features knocked off of other consoles (the Wii's motion controls and that virtual sim like thing they have that is similar to the Miis). And it really does have **** for games.

The only game i'm mad that I won't be able to play is MGS4 but I can deal with it. What is even worse is that Sony is loosing most of it's blockbuster franchises like GTA and FF. Not to mention the PS3 doesn't have much for online games right now.

Then there is the Wii...

Yeah it's fun but when is Nintendo gonna understand that it either needs to:

A) Release it's big titles on time.

or

B) Get with the times and put some mature games on there and give us some decent onlince play.

Yeah the Wii has some nice features. Some games are amazing (Super Mario Galaxy, MP3, SSBB (not out yet but soon)) and the classic Nintendo titles you can download are great but I can't help but have that foreboding feeling that the Wii is gonna suffer the Gamecube's fate.

But when I look at the 360 I see very few flaws.

It's available at a reasonable price. It comes with plenty of console features that are to be expected (actually all of them). The marketplace has some nice downloads (Geometry Wars, Marathon, DOOM) and the online play is unbeatable.

Plus the 360 has the best list of games so far. Halo 3, CoD 4, Mass Effect, Bioshock, The Orange Box, Crackdown, Gears of War are all great. And there are some 360 games I can't wait to be realesed (Dead Space, Borderlands, RE5 (which will be amazing)).

And the 360 is nabbing a bunch of Sony titles like GTA and the new FFs coming out.

But idk...it could all turn around if Sony can secure some better exclusive games or if the Wii can adapt to the modern gamer.

So what do you guys think?

[valadil]

But when I look at the 360 I see very few flaws.


Red Ring of Death is a pretty serious flaw. Supposedly newer 360s are better, but the original bunch had a 30% failure rate. Every so often I hear about a customer who is on his 5th or higher XBOX. Even worse are the ones who can't get customer service to replace theirs. Unless that gets better I can't justify buying one.

[Rutee]

You can kill a man with Microsoft Consoles.

Also, I find intense amusement that most of your games.. are PC games ported to the X-Block, not console games strictly. Granted, the X-Block is cheaper then a non-playskool computer (I have a tonka one, for reference; I'm not knocking anyone with playskool computer).

Also, not to be the bearer of bad news, but your Nintendo Characterization is about how many years old now? Let's see....

...wow. I feel old all of a sudden. Let's just say "If you can speak from personal experience that Nintendo only allows for kiddy games, you probably know the Safety Dance"

PS3 is expensive, but.. it's got some pretty good games coming, as well as already out. Disgaea 3 and KH3 tipped the scales from me. X-Block is probably the system I'm least interested in, but.. I think I'll be getting one if budget allows. Just.. it's the one last on my list. Really, why would I limit myself for anything but budget?

...Oh right, there's time. ._.

[Felizginato12]

Well I don't see Red Ring affecting as many people as it used to, not nearly as many. But with Microsoft's full warranty if that bad luck does come across you at least it is free to fix.

lol and you can't kill a man with a PS3? It looks like something that Darth Vader would pilot.

And as far as I know Halo 3, CoD 4, GoW, Bioshock, Mass Effect, and the upcoming games I mentioned aren't PC ports...

The fact that it has been pointed out that Nintendo only allows kiddie games doesn't make it less of a flaw. As I said it will probably end up like the GCube. A few great games but then it will fizzle out and die.

And I don't see anything great coming for the PS3 besides the average weabo anime RPG that gets all the fanboys wet and (as said) MGS4. And the only thing PS3 has now are games shared with the 360, the new Rachet and Clank, and Resistance. Unless you have a dragon fetish I wouldn't count Lair...

Hell, sony even lost the new Devil May Cry game.

And the few people who can't get their 360's replaced are the unlucky ones who bought the console on first release and just recently got Red Ring.

And you can't deny Sony has **** for online play and online play is probably the form of nearly limitless replay value. Even if you hate Halo you got a number of other 360 games for online and not just shooters (even though they tend to be the best).

I don't know about you but even if the only games on the 360 were Bioshock and Mass Effect I would still favor it over any other consoles.

Give me a game with a great story based around objectivism or a game with an epic sci-fi game world over Trauma Center and your run-of-the-mill bad FF copy pasta.

[Green Bean]

You know, calling it a landslide for the 360 is a bit hasty when they're almost three million units behind in sales compared to the Wii.

[Gungnir]

Seems to me that arguing over consoles is like arguing over politics. It pretty much depends completely on your personal viewpoint, and noone ever gets anywhere. I'm happy with my 360 since I'm a Bungie fanboy, happy with my Wii because its fun to play with, and I'm sure that once I get a PS3 I'll be happy with it too.

A few things though. I've heard that the PS3 is actually doing quite well with its online contingent, and there's apparently a pretty high concentration of good downloadable content. Secondly, while the board auto-censors you, it also automatically docks off respect points from anyone who sees expletives in your posts. Thirdly, isn't it weeaboo?

[Dumbledore lives]

Of the games mentioned only Halo 3 and Mass Effect are exclusives. Call of Duty is on the PS3 and possibly the PC and Bioshock and Gears are also on the PC. I think that, unlike the gamecube, the Wii is innovative enough that it will be a good system for a long while, plus it is backward-compadable unlike the gamecube. You can get all the great gamecube games and still play them on the wii, plus you can buy NES, SNES, and N64 games. The Wii is still a strong contender and has sold more than the 360.

Not that I have anything against the 360. I love mine and it has some awesome games with lots of online support and the Arcade is pretty good where the Playstation's is... lacking. I just don't like the PS3, it seems to expensive, not many good exclusives, Resistance is about it now, and the new units aren't even backwards compatible! That's right, they made a cheaper PS3 that's not backwards compatible. I'm not sure where I heard this but it represents my opinion, the PS3 is an expensive paperweight.

[Felizginato12]

Seems to me that arguing over consoles is like arguing over politics. It pretty much depends completely on your personal viewpoint, and noone ever gets anywhere. I'm happy with my 360 since I'm a Bungie fanboy, happy with my Wii because its fun to play with, and I'm sure that once I get a PS3 I'll be happy with it too.

A few things though. I've heard that the PS3 is actually doing quite well with its online contingent, and there's apparently a pretty high concentration of good downloadable content. Secondly, while the board auto-censors you, it also automatically docks off respect points from anyone who sees expletives in your posts. Thirdly, isn't it weeaboo?


Ahhh.. thank you for the correction. Bare with me I haven't had to use that word in a long while xD.

I do hear that the PS3 is doing well with downloadable content. But hell, give me H3 over anything that the PS3 has for online any day.

And i'm not arguing persay i'm just trying to exspress my opinion while at the same time backing up the facts that all of the claims said in this forum that bash the 360 either aren't true (example being thinking that all 360 games are ports or that the red ring is still very common place).

And i'm not looking for respect. I don't think that my manners and etiquette affect the validity of my opinions.

And yes the Wii is fun to play with *insert penis joke here while it's not too late* and I agree it has potential.

I should have been more specific. I was just thinking that on terms of content, popularity, and sales the 360 is the top contender and that the future looks brighter for the 360. Yes the PS3 will get better (hopefully because I use to be a Sony fan) but I doubt that Nintendo has much more room in the market place besides in the handheld market.

[Felizginato12]

[QUOTE=Dumbledore lives;3844935]Of the games mentioned only Halo 3 and Mass Effect are exclusives. QUOTE]

Gears was an original 360 game with a ****ty PC port and Bioshock was originally slated for console release. And I know CoD4 is not exclusive but it proves the 360's strong 3rd party support.

And yes the Wii has sold more then the 360 but I never said it didn't. I know that it's price and family friendly content attract the casual gamer (which makes up for most of the gaming population).

[Trazoi]

You've mentioned why the Wii is doing so well at the moment: it appeals the most to the casual market, which forms the bulk of gamers out there. That's why it's selling like hotcakes. The main question is whether this success will translate into game sales, or whether a handful of games are all these players need.

From what you've described it sounds like the Xbox 360 is the perfect system for you, and that's great; but it's a mistake to think all other gamers have the same tastes as you. I'm more a fan of the classic Nintendo gameplay, which is why I've currently only got a Wii console. Maybe once I've got the time for more games I'll get an Xbox 360 as well, but the Wii is enough for me right now.


Seems to me that arguing over consoles is like arguing over politics. It pretty much depends completely on your personal viewpoint, and noone ever gets anywhere. I'm happy with my 360 since I'm a Bungie fanboy, happy with my Wii because its fun to play with, and I'm sure that once I get a PS3 I'll be happy with it too.
Except it's perfectly reasonable to be happy with all the consoles; if you said you were happy with all politicians, then people would think you're weird. :smallsmile:

[Rutee]

The fact that it has been pointed out that Nintendo only allows kiddie games doesn't make it less of a flaw. As I said it will probably end up like the GCube. A few great games but then it will fizzle out and die.
You completely, utterly misread my post. I was telilng you that kiddy only personifications of Nintendo are about 10 years old.


And you can't deny Sony has **** for online play and online play is probably the form of nearly limitless replay value. Even if you hate Halo you got a number of other 360 games for online and not just shooters (even though they tend to be the best).
I can pretty easily deny it, as you haven't really substantiated it. You just said it doesn't exist.


I don't know about you but even if the only games on the 360 were Bioshock and Mass Effect I would still favor it over any other consoles.
And I can still play Bioshock on my PC.



Give me a game with a great story based around objectivism or a game with an epic sci-fi game world over Trauma Center and your run-of-the-mill bad FF copy pasta.
Rogue Galaxies on PS2, which is indeed old.

But yeah, if you want Space Opera, Japan doesn't seem to like making games of it, so I can see why you'd have problems with their consoles. I just find it unlikely that it's your only taste, somehow.



Gears was an original 360 game with a ****ty PC port and Bioshock was originally slated for console release. And I know CoD4 is not exclusive but it proves the 360's strong 3rd party support.
Actually, ports don't prove much at all. And, [Citation Needed] on the Bioshock bit, since that company's always been into PCs.

[Ominous]

It is a landside...for PCs. The Xbox 360 has the One (Red) Ring, the Wii has Mario Galaxy, Legend of Zelda and that's it (while these are great games, they're not enough), and the PS3 is the punchline of a really bad joke.


Also, not to be the bearer of bad news, but your Nintendo Characterization is about how many years old now? Let's see....

...wow. I feel old all of a sudden. Let's just say "If you can speak from personal experience that Nintendo only allows for kiddy games, you probably know the Safety Dance"


"We can dance if we want to..." God, now I have it running through my head.

[Krytha]

The thread title is misleading. Anyone who is following unit sales knows that the Wii is leading in "a landslide", but the OP seems to mistakenly think that the 360 is. So is it a landslide for the 360? Not a snowball's chance in hell.

[Albub]

I'd have to say that, despite hating sony with a passion, PSO is nearly as good as XBL, and free as a button. Wii has way more sales, and I can't see 'em slowing down anytime soon. Game, set and match anyone?

X360 has the best games library for "hardcore" gamers thus far, and for the most part the multi-platform releases have been a fair shot better for the 360 than their PS3 counterparts as far as I've been told... Of course, PC trumps all.

The biggest factor in the Sony/Microsoft best-of-seven playoff series is accessibility. 360 is cheaper, and more people have it. Were I to consider buying a console now, I'd take 360 on the grace of the fact that I have around a dozen friends, plus a number of acquaintances who have 360s and XBL. I know of 3 people with a PS3 in my area, and don't like any of them. There, decision was practically made for me.

Wii, I'd get on the graces of it being chep as a blep, with twice the entice. Download classic games out of the intertubes? You betcha! Play with your hands, not your fingers? OMGRLY?!!1!2 n0 wai! Next to no online play? checkdizzle fo' shizzle.

The blep has the worst graphs -- and like, a four button controller -- but it's the same price as a wii, so If I avoided nintendo on principle, and had to be careful about getting bud (no beer here, just use your imagination, you'll get it), it's the game-brick pour moi.

[Rutee]

No, PCs lose far too hard, as far as I'm concerned. Too many FPS, far, far too much spent on upgrades (A Console is much cheaper, in the long term, but there's a much bigger up front cost), and absolutely unverifiable sales.

[Ominous]

The thread title is misleading. Anyone who is following unit sales knows that the Wii is leading in "a landslide", but the OP seems to mistakenly think that the 360 is. So is it a landslide for the 360? Not a snowball's chance in hell.

If I had to choose one out of the three, I'd go with the Wii.

[Trazoi]

No, PCs lose far too hard, as far as I'm concerned. Too many FPS, far, far too much spent on upgrades (A Console is much cheaper, in the long term, but there's a much bigger up front cost), and absolutely unverifiable sales.
Actually, there are some stats on PC game sales, at least for the US. This GamaSutra story (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17110) lists the NPD Group stats for PC game sales in 2007: $910.7 million, or 36.4 million units. The figure is going down, while the total figures for the game industry in the US for 2007 ($17.9 Billion) was up by 43%. That doesn't look good for the PC, although it must be noted that those figures don't include online sales and the lucrative downloadable casual game market.

To put those sales in perspective, the Guitar Hero franchise sales has just topped $1 Billion; the sales of Guitar Hero games alone has topped the combined 2007 US PC games sales.

[Felizginato12]

Yes I know the title was misleading. Sales wise I agree and realize that the Wii wins in this department.

And the reason I say the PS3 online is not as good as the 360's is because I can't think of any exclusive PS3 game that can beat an exclusive 360 game in the online department. The fact that I can't be given a good exclusive PS3 title with superior online play is enough to prove my point thus far.

I have no problem with japanese consoles. As I said; I was a huge Sony fan. But genre excluding I believe that Mass Effect is better then any game that you can name for the PS3.

And while the company that made Bioshock worked for PCs (making System Shock) they released the Bioshock trailer on the 360 before any other place. And despite whether or not it was intended for console release (I don't remember an offical announcement that Bioshock would be released on both platforms) the PC is not a console and the subject is about the console wars.

I'm not saying ports prove much but you can't say that all 360 games are ports when it's not true.

And I think people are starting to see me now as a hater of all other consoles.

I think the Wiii is fun and Nintendo can still make a classic game if they want to. Sony can come up with some great original IPs but the delay is huge right now. As I am concerned the most well rounded console would be the 360. The sales are nice, the console is great, the games are the best out there right now...

And I stand behind the 360 because it is proving that it can take thunder away from the more veteran contenders in the video game market. The fact that the PS3 is loosing many exclusives proves this.

Since sales have nothing to do with the future outcome of these companies I wont say the Wii is winning in a landslide. All three companies make the big bucks so it is now a factor of which can provide the best games. When all is said and done the future of games will be turned away from the casual gamer and more towards the avid game fan. Onlline play and deep creative games are proving this.

And lets not start a Safety Dance sing a long....80's should have never happened to the music scene.

So in a nutshell...

I agree the Wii beats 360 sales.

I think the 360 is still the top contender when you add up all of it's aspects (from sales to gameplay it all adds up to be (in my opinion) better then the other consoles).

I believe that the PS3 online has nothing against XBL. Again i'm not talking sales or subcribers wise but quality wise. You cannot beat a console that has Halo when it comes to online.

The Wii is a bunch of fun but half the games seem to be gimmicks to use motion controls. And Nintendo needs to bring back alot of the fans that have moved on because of Nintendo's laziness in creating good exclusives.

And until next year I don't expect to see any huge change in the quality of PS3 games.

[Felizginato12]

Actually, there are some stats on PC game sales, at least for the US. This GamaSutra story (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17110) lists the NPD Group stats for PC game sales in 2007: $910.7 million, or 36.4 million units. The figure is going down, while the total figures for the game industry in the US for 2007 ($17.9 Billion) was up by 43%. That doesn't look good for the PC, although it must be noted that those figures don't include online sales and the lucrative downloadable casual game market.

To put those sales in perspective, the Guitar Hero franchise sales has just topped $1 Billion; the sales of Guitar Hero games alone has topped the combined 2007 US PC games sales.

Let's try to leave the PC out of this since it is not a console and people buy the thing for other uses besides playing WoW (though this may depend on the person you are talking about xD)

[kpenguin]

And lets not start a Safety Dance sing a long....80's should have never happened to the music scene.i

I like Safety Dance...

[Felizginato12]

You completely, utterly misread my post. I was telilng you that kiddy only personifications of Nintendo are about 10 years old.



Apologies for misreading.

But even so I see almost no mature appeal in the Nintendo department.

OOOOO WOWOWZZ NINTENDO GOTS RE4!!???!!

Wait...Sony stole that too...

Not that i'm bashing RE4 but really I was shocked when I saw that being realesed.

Nintendo is not "kiddy" exclusive they just lack most of the mature games that matter (CoD4, Assassin's Creed, GTA, ect.)

[Felizginato12]

I like Safety Dance...

Fine...you can sing...but nobody else...:smallmad:

xD

[Felizginato12]

You completely, utterly misread my post. I was telilng you that kiddy only personifications of Nintendo are about 10 years old.



And isn't "completely, utterly" a bit redundant?

[kpenguin]

Fine...you can sing...but nobody else...:smallmad:

xD

We can dance if we want to
We can leave your friends behind
'Cause your friends and if they don't dance
Then they're no friends of mine

:smalltongue:

[Ominous]

And lets not start a Safety Dance sing a long....80's should have never happened to the music scene.

I happen to like '80s music.

[kpenguin]

I happen to like '80s music.

Like most types of music, '80s music has its hits and its cacophonies.

[Felizginato12]

I happen to like '80s music.

eh...some is okay. The Cure, The Police, some metal bands...

But not hair metal...or new wave Duran Duran or Flock of Seagulls crap.

Thank god Nirvana came along.

Anyways back on subject...we were singing the Safety Dance I believe...

[Tom_Violence]

"We can dance if we want to..." God, now I have it running through my head.

Ditto. Damn the lot of you!


I have no problem with japanese consoles. As I said; I was a huge Sony fan. But genre excluding I believe that Mass Effect is better then any game that you can name for the PS3.

This seems to be the basis for a lot of your argument, that games on the 360 are somehow leagues ahead of games on other consoles, almost by definition. Whether or not this may be true is irrelevant, because it makes arguing against you impossible, since all you have to say is "feature X of console Y doesn't matter, nor do any of the 360's failings, because Mass Effect makes the 360 perfect." Tut tut.

Basically, if you're going to insist on a discussion based purely around 'quality' then you'll go nowhere, as no one is going to be talking the same language. "Doesn't the 360 have a landslide of quality?" Does that even make sense in terms of something that someone can agree with?


Since sales have nothing to do with the future outcome of these companies I wont say the Wii is winning in a landslide. All three companies make the big bucks so it is now a factor of which can provide the best games. When all is said and done the future of games will be turned away from the casual gamer and more towards the avid game fan. Onlline play and deep creative games are proving this.

Sales have nothing to do with the future outcome of companies? Huh? What on earth are you basing that on? Are you assuming that console companies make money regardless of the quality of their games, and that games will be produced irrespective of how much money they will make? Seems pretty dubious to me. Also, your claim that focus will shift towards avid game fans seems highly questionable to me, as the rise and rise of franchises such as The Sims and the Wii's 'everyone friendly' policy speak highly against that. Also, it could quite easily be argued that the popularity of online games, from a production point of view, can be attributed to the amount of revenue they bring in, not to how 'hardcore' they are. Finally, lets take a look at the leading online game. I dare say WoW's world domination-like success is not because Blizzard chose to cater to avid gamers over the casual type - quite the opposite.


And lets not start a Safety Dance sing a long....80's should have never happened to the music scene.

Well, this is just a daft thing to say. You may as well say that the horse-drawn carriage should never have happened to the transport industry.

[Felizginato12]

*This seems to be the basis for a lot of your argument, that games on the 360 are somehow leagues ahead of games on other consoles, almost by definition. Whether or not this may be true is irrelevant, because it makes arguing against you impossible, since all you have to say is "feature X of console Y doesn't matter, nor do any of the 360's failings, because Mass Effect makes the 360 perfect." Tut tut.*


This happens to be an opinion and I do not present them as facts. Also Mass Effect was but one example and you would notice that if you were able to point out the other games a mentioned. And I do not say that the failings of the 360 do not matter but I say the games make up for it. I have never played a game with a story like Bioshock or a game that is as addictive as Oblivion or a game that is so fun with friends I can play for hours like Halo 3.



*Basically, if you're going to insist on a discussion based purely around 'quality' then you'll go nowhere, as no one is going to be talking the same language. "Doesn't the 360 have a landslide of quality?" Does that even make sense in terms of something that someone can agree with?*


I know nobody will be talking the same language that is why it is an OPINION of mine. I suppose nobody understands the concept of an opinion on these boards. I happen to believe that the quality of the 360 games are better then other console games and I happen to believe the 360 is a better console for this reason.




*Sales have nothing to do with the future outcome of companies? Huh? What on earth are you basing that on? Are you assuming that console companies make money regardless of the quality of their games, and that games will be produced irrespective of how much money they will make? Seems pretty dubious to me. Also, your claim that focus will shift towards avid game fans seems highly questionable to me, as the rise and rise of franchises such as The Sims and the Wii's 'everyone friendly' policy speak highly against that. Also, it could quite easily be argued that the popularity of online games, from a production point of view, can be attributed to the amount of revenue they bring in, not to how 'hardcore' they are. Finally, lets take a look at the leading online game. I dare say WoW's world domination-like success is not because Blizzard chose to cater to avid gamers over the casual type - quite the opposite.*


I did not say the sales of A company do not matter but these particular ones. Five years from now millions will still buy the new playstation. Ten years from now people whill still buy the new Nintendo console. It is no huge worry that these companies will go out of business because they have stood the test of time already. I believe that the console wars will be shifted towards making casual gamers into avid gamers. WoW was my example because I believe it is turning the casual gamer into the avid gamer. You can't deny this when you take into consideration how much time must be put into WoW and that the average player is an addict. This points out my belief that games are appealing towards casual gamers and turning them into avid gamers but I could be wrong.



*Well, this is just a daft thing to say. You may as well say that the horse-drawn carriage should never have happened to the transport industry.*


lol you just want to pick apart everything I say don't you?

How bout you use this against me? I believe that Pedophilia is just fine as long as the pedophile does not act upon his or her urges. It is a sexual preferance just like bisexuality or homosexuality.

Plus I was just speaking in extremes. I don't like the music but I realize that with out the ****ty music that dominated the market at the time there would be no urge to destroy the new scene which is where the grunge movement came along.

And if the 80s did not happen we would probably still be listening to punk rock and classic 70s rock. lol excuse me if I do not think the age that brought us The Bangles or Aha is great...

lol I swear everyone here has their ****ing business suites on.

[Tom_Violence]

I know nobody will be talking the same language that is why it is an OPINION of mine. I suppose nobody understands the concept of an opinion on these boards. I happen to believe that the quality of the 360 games are better then other console games and I happen to believe the 360 is a better console for this reason.

Fair enough. In that case, in the vacuum that is your opinion, the 360 rules all. However, in the outside world, your single opinion does not a landslide make. In the Land Of Shared Opinions the console war still has an element of closeness to it.


I did not say the sales of A company do not matter but these particular ones. Five years from now millions will still buy the new playstation. Ten years from now people whill still buy the new Nintendo console. It is no huge worry that these companies will go out of business because they have stood the test of time already. I believe that the console wars will be shifted towards making casual gamers into avid gamers. WoW was my example because I believe it is turning the casual gamer into the avid gamer. You can't deny this when you take into consideration how much time must be put into WoW and that the average player is an addict. This points out my belief that games are appealing towards casual gamers and turning them into avid gamers but I could be wrong.

It is a fallacy to assume that past successes guarantee future success. In 10 years time Nintendo might not even be making consoles - look what happened with Sega. And Microsoft have joined the game only recently, so who's to say that some other company might not jump in and oust someone? If what you're trying to say is that a company has to do more than just sell consoles in order to be successful then I'll agree, but that's a very different thing to saying that the sales of consoles are meaningless.

I will deny that 'console wars' will focus on making casual gamers into avid gamers. First off, the casual gamer pays as much for a title as the avid fan, regardless of how much time they spend playing it. This is as true for subscription-based online games, since you pay monthly, not by the hour. Secondly, there are people out there that will never become avid gamers, no matter how hard companies try, simply because people have too much else going on in their lives. In the real world people have jobs, families, hobbies, etc., and while they may enjoy the occasional bit of gaming they are not going to sacrifice these other things. Thirdly, and this may be my most debatable premise, there are more people out there willing to play 'casual' games than just 'hardcore' games (though god only knows how you define the two). Combine 1, 2, and 3 and you can reach the conclusion that casual gamers are a resource enormous enough to not be ignored, and there would be no point in trying to change them into something else.

Let us apply this to good ol' World of Warcraft. #1 is easy - WoW doesn't use a pay-as-you-go service. Evidencing #2 properly would take some hefty empirical work but imagine the following scenario: currently, WoW can be enjoyed in a casual manner, a player doesn't need to sink most of their day into it in order to enjoy it (that's not to say that no one does, mind). But if WoW suddenly changed and actually required a huge commitment, I would expect player numbers to fall, as many people just cannot keep up with that. This also address the "average player is an addict" issue, which frankly seems somewhat absurd to me. #3 is kinda answered above - a large amount of WoW's success can be attributed to its appeal to the casual market. Millions upon millions of people play this game across the world, dwarfing player numbers of nearly every other game. Where did these players come from? Not solely the hardcore quarter, that's for sure.

[Dihan]

The fact that it has been pointed out that Nintendo only allows kiddie games doesn't make it less of a flaw.

You obviously haven't seen No More Heroes.

[Jibar]

You obviously haven't seen No More Heroes.

When I first saw the trailer, I actually made a thread here called "Who says I'm for kids now?"
It's sad that with Resident Evil Zero, the Remake, Umbrella Chronicles and 4 Wii Edition being exclusive, Killer7, Manhunt 2, No More Heroes and other titles being released, and often gaining a lot of attention, people still dismiss Nintendo.
It get's sadder when I realise that even some of the real big hits for the console, Twilight Princess, Prime 3: Corruption, Red Steel, were not meant for kids, yet people still gloss over them.

[Mando Knight]

The Wii's numbers for 2007 were catastrophically strong... my local Wal-Mart had imposed a 1 Wii/customer limit... for Christmas '07.

Furthermore, most of the top-selling video games last year were Nintendo. Pokemon DP took two of the top 10 for several months straight, and Metroid Prime 3, Twilight Princess, and Super Mario Galaxy weren't slackers, either.

On top of that, the Wii out-sold the X-Box 360 both in 2007 and in their overall lifetimes, even though the 360 got a year's headstart.

Don't tell me that the Wii is going to end up in the bottom of the pack when you're faced with that.

[Drascin]

Furthermore, most of the top-selling video games last year were Nintendo. Pokemon DP took two of the top 10 for several months straight, and Metroid Prime 3, Twilight Princess, and Super Mario Galaxy weren't slackers, either.

Ah, yes, Super Mario Galaxy. Obviously a game that no hardcore gamer (like, say, anyone who has been gaming for 17 years straight and has tried pretty much every platform under the sun since the NES :smallamused: ) would play and love, despite the amazing playability, the oodles of nostalgia playing straight to them, and the general awesomeness. Or Pokémon, certainly a game so easy to master and lacking in competitive value at all. And Metroid Prime is so obviously meant for people who have never touched a controller in their lives, as is Killer 7.

...and I think I just blew up my new sarcasm detector. Damn it. I keep forgetting to get the thing away before going on these tirades.

So, short version: I'm about as hardcore as one can be, and I love my Wii. As Mando Knight says, thepower of numbers is with Nintendo. And the casual market is largely unaware other consoles exist.

So yeah, it might be called a landslide. Just not in the direction you're thinking :smalltongue:

[Felizginato12]

Fair enough. In that case, in the vacuum that is your opinion, the 360 rules all. However, in the outside world, your single opinion does not a landslide make. In the Land Of Shared Opinions the console war still has an element of closeness to it.


A man's opinion is his own and nobody elses. I do not agree 360 rules all but I think it is the better of the three. Once again I have stated the title is misleading.



It is a fallacy to assume that past successes guarantee future success. In 10 years time Nintendo might not even be making consoles - look what happened with Sega. And Microsoft have joined the game only recently, so who's to say that some other company might not jump in and oust someone? If what you're trying to say is that a company has to do more than just sell consoles in order to be successful then I'll agree, but that's a very different thing to saying that the sales of consoles are meaningless.


Sega was only big at certain times and even then I believe that Nintendo was more successful. I believe that Microsoft has enough experience and support to not fall into the rut that Sega has but who the hell knows. And I agree that the sales are not meaningless but when you compare these three consoles and which will come out on top I simply believe you can't compare sales since all three sell millions. It would be different if we were comparing the DS the N-Gage and a Hand-Held Football video game but we are comparing three large companies who are all experienced in the technology market and regardless will still sell well in the future years.



I will deny that 'console wars' will focus on making casual gamers into avid gamers. First off, the casual gamer pays as much for a title as the avid fan, regardless of how much time they spend playing it. This is as true for subscription-based online games, since you pay monthly, not by the hour. Secondly, there are people out there that will never become avid gamers, no matter how hard companies try, simply because people have too much else going on in their lives. In the real world people have jobs, families, hobbies, etc., and while they may enjoy the occasional bit of gaming they are not going to sacrifice these other things. Thirdly, and this may be my most debatable premise, there are more people out there willing to play 'casual' games than just 'hardcore' games (though god only knows how you define the two). Combine 1, 2, and 3 and you can reach the conclusion that casual gamers are a resource enormous enough to not be ignored, and there would be no point in trying to change them into something else.


Casual gamers play hardcore games despite of the competition between others. I'm certain the majority of people who play online FPS are casual gamers but I believe that more and more gamers are getting hooked. I'm not saying that in the future everyone will become avid gamers but I think it is a strong market that the companies have to appeal to. It's blockbusters like God of War, Final Fantasy, Halo, Mario, Metroid, Call of Duty, and others that draw in the casual and avid gamers and make them one. For example, I was surprised Bioshock sold so well. I thought only avid game fans would make up the majority of the buyers but even casual gamers are getting in on these more in depth games. Simply I believe that the line between the two is bluring quickly.

And I don't believe that companies are changing the casual gamer but they are changing themselves. People want competitive games. People want games with complex story lines. People want games with enough meat to play for a while despite how much they actually play. For example, when video games first started it would be hard to call anyone a hardcore gamer as all could be considered a casual gamer. Now that games are longer and have more features people play longer and become more of an addict.



Let us apply this to good ol' World of Warcraft. #1 is easy - WoW doesn't use a pay-as-you-go service. Evidencing #2 properly would take some hefty empirical work but imagine the following scenario: currently, WoW can be enjoyed in a casual manner, a player doesn't need to sink most of their day into it in order to enjoy it (that's not to say that no one does, mind). But if WoW suddenly changed and actually required a huge commitment, I would expect player numbers to fall, as many people just cannot keep up with that. This also address the "average player is an addict" issue, which frankly seems somewhat absurd to me. #3 is kinda answered above - a large amount of WoW's success can be attributed to its appeal to the casual market. Millions upon millions of people play this game across the world, dwarfing player numbers of nearly every other game. Where did these players come from? Not solely the hardcore quarter, that's for sure.

Okay I agree on this one except I use the statement before to defend the fact that WoW has turned casual gamers (or at least many of them) into hardcore gamers. I know a number of people who werent into games that much but they played WoW 24/7. I agree, some play casually but many get hooked and start getting into it more and more. I know WoW doesn't require that commitment but the game design makes it a game to commit to.

But I see what you are saying when you say that some casual gamers wil still be casual gamers and I agree. I just see more and more people getting hooked to video games these days and I personally believe the 360 suites these crossover people well. The games on the 360 are played by casual gamers and hardcore gamers alike (like any other console) but I think the 360 does a better job of converting them into hardcore gamers. and if the future indeed puts more energy (more then is put in now) towards pleasing or making hardcore gamers then I believe that Microsoft has a bright future.

I don't think Nintendo or Sony will die any time soon and I don't think that these consoles have no where to go but down. I think PS3 will have some great exclusives coming out and Nintendo seems to be adapting more and more to the modern gamer (online play, competitive games, ect) and I couldn't be more happier. But as of now I still stick by my opinion that the 360 is a better console since it offers not only all of the next gen features but it is a source for blending both camps of gamers into one.

But who knows? Maybe in a year the PS3 will dominate the online market and Nintendo will start nabbing 3rd party games. Maybe the 360 wiill just barely keep up with quality and sales. I would enjoy seeing the PS3 with some great online games and some huge blockbuster games. I would love seeing Nintendo going online and releasing all of the franchises that made them great at a faster rate. I would love to see both companies growing in sales and quality but once again I believe the 360 is the better contender as of now. Maybe not in the future but as of now.

[Felizginato12]

Ah, yes, Super Mario Galaxy. Obviously a game that no hardcore gamer (like, say, anyone who has been gaming for 17 years straight and has tried pretty much every platform under the sun since the NES :smallamused: ) would play and love, despite the amazing playability, the oodles of nostalgia playing straight to them, and the general awesomeness. Or Pokémon, certainly a game so easy to master and lacking in competitive value at all. And Metroid Prime is so obviously meant for people who have never touched a controller in their lives, as is Killer 7.

...and I think I just blew up my new sarcasm detector. Damn it. I keep forgetting to get the thing away before going on these tirades.

So, short version: I'm about as hardcore as one can be, and I love my Wii. As Mando Knight says, thepower of numbers is with Nintendo. And the casual market is largely unaware other consoles exist.

So yeah, it might be called a landslide. Just not in the direction you're thinking :smalltongue:

Did I say no hardcore gamers would play Super Mario Galaxies? I actually noted it as one of the greatest games on the Wii and one of the greatest games released in a while.

Even though the Wii is slowly making more mature games it does not make up for the fact they can't grab any 3rd party mature games or at least any big blockbuster ones.

And I already stated (if one cares to read) that the title was misleading and that I meant a landslide as a console with the perfect balance of gameplay, sales, and future innovations.

The Wii may sell more but I think it is missing many games that could make it a greater console. And I think that the future of the Wii is not so bright (in quality terms). Don't get me wrong, the Wii is fun as hell but with the track record of the Gamecube near it's final few years makes me worried the Wii may not make it in coming years.

So if you bothered to read my comments and understand that I praise the Wii's big titles you may understand what I am saying.

And please don't flatter yourself. Everyone thinks they are masters of sarcasm since it is the easiest of bad humor to master. :smallwink:

[Felizginato12]

The Wii's numbers for 2007 were catastrophically strong... my local Wal-Mart had imposed a 1 Wii/customer limit... for Christmas '07.

Furthermore, most of the top-selling video games last year were Nintendo. Pokemon DP took two of the top 10 for several months straight, and Metroid Prime 3, Twilight Princess, and Super Mario Galaxy weren't slackers, either.

On top of that, the Wii out-sold the X-Box 360 both in 2007 and in their overall lifetimes, even though the 360 got a year's headstart.

Don't tell me that the Wii is going to end up in the bottom of the pack when you're faced with that.

Let's see...oh yeah.

I already said that I was not specific enough. I do not mean a landslide in sales I mean a landslide in the over all value and quality of the consoles and their games.

See please try and read posts before replying. It seems like Tom Violence is the only one right now who bothers to read and understand my posts before arguing and disagreeing with me so I give kudos to him for doing that much.

And even though I am a true Nintendo fan (which is why I show concern for the future of the company's titles) I suppose I have nothing on the over zealous and utterly faithful might of the average Link dressing, Pokemon addict, Nintendo fan boy.

[Albub]

I wouldn't worry about the future of the wii just yet. PS3, I'd worry. It's not doing so hot sales wise, and by the time all of it's killer games are released, a significant number of gamers will have already bought a more affordable console with a better games library.

[Drascin]

Did I say no hardcore gamers would play Super Mario Galaxies? I actually noted it as one of the greatest games on the Wii and one of the greatest games released in a while.

Even though the Wii is slowly making more mature games it does not make up for the fact they can't grab any 3rd party mature games or at least any big blockbuster ones.

And I already stated (if one cares to read) that the title was misleading and that I meant a landslide as a console with the perfect balance of gameplay, sales, and future innovations.

The Wii may sell more but I think it is missing many games that could make it a greater console. And I think that the future of the Wii is not so bright (in quality terms). Don't get me wrong, the Wii is fun as hell but with the track record of the Gamecube near it's final few years makes me worried the Wii may not make it in coming years.

So if you bothered to read my comments and understand that I praise the Wii's big titles you may understand what I am saying.

And please don't flatter yourself. Everyone thinks they are masters of sarcasm since it is the easiest of bad humor to master. :smallwink:

Oh, I have read your comments. I never post in a thread without having read it whole, unless it's more than about eight pages long, in which case reading every other page generally suffices to give you an approximate picture.

Problem is, not only are your comments solely based on opinion, you don't seem to be getting my point either, so we're doing circles around each other.

Basic points:

1- Nintendo is owning the market big. This one is fact. However, since you admit the title was probably wrong, this might not be relevant - except that a thread's title and OP mark the tone of the whole thread. I'd suggest editing, myself, instead.
2- The "mature" tag you throw around too willy-nilly as a qualifier instead of a mere descriptive, and I personally subscribe to the words of Lewis Carroll on the subject. And I do not feel a console needs "mature" games. If a console has good games that happen to be mature, that's great. If a console has good games that happen to not be mature, that's exactly as great.
3- It is my own opinion that no, Xbox 360 is not the best offer in the market at the moment, as I don't like most shooters, which means I am not interested in a huge chunk of the console's hits. I make an exception for Half-Life and Bioshock due to actually having a story, which can make me forget I am playing a shooter, but those two I already played on PC. Basically, the only things I'm interested at the moment are Mas Effect (and that only half-heartedly), the upcoming Lost Planet, and the almost unknown but good-looking Enchanted Arms.
4- You fear that the Wii will not be able to sustain itself and end up dying. I do not share this fear. In fact,it is my belief that the Wii can only grow from here. I have witnessed the power of this console upon my own family, having motivated a huge chunk of them to try gaming and eventually buy their own Wiis.
4.5- That fear is not only for the console, but for the games. Again, this is a fear I do not share. With Nintendo, you only have two certainties - one, they're not going to make many games. Two, the ones they do make, are going to be awesome. This is something you must realize when buying a Nintendo console. Comes with the package. Therefore, if it's sheer quantity you want, you do not buy Nintendo. This has always been so, however, and can hardly be construed as "dying out". As I'm a man of few good games, this doesn't bother me in the slightest.

From these last two, we can easily deduce that you and I have what can be called an irreconcilable opinion difference, so any attempt to discuss would probably end up in us going "no it isn't!" "is too!" "is not!".

And lastly: I do not flatter myself, nor do I consider myself a master of sarcasm. In fact, the mere concept of me flattering myself is enough for the accompanying irony detector to start sparking worryingly - what with that inferiority complex I'm trying to get treated out of and all that :smallamused:. Sarcasm detectors react to quantity, not quality, much like you seem to be doing. And I was putting quite a lot of sarcasm in there, since what is usually conveyed by a silent, sneering glance needs to be over the top sarcasm to even be perceived.

Oh, and about that last part of your reply to Mando - cosplay is hella fun even if I haven't done Link (mostly because it's too common), Pokémon is awesome, and yeah, I could probably be called a fanboy, since I have tried pretty much every console and then decided that it's generally Nintendo the one that gives me the best bang for my buck, so I'm going to stick for them - call it fanboyism if you will, but I've been ripped off enough in my life to be thankful when a business provides me with good service for my money, and I have no problem to do some word-of-mouth publicity for them. 'Tis the same way I'm a Nippon Ichi fanboy - when a company's bad games can be counted on one hand despite having done a lot of them, you just learn to trust them. So maybe you should have directed that to me :smalltongue:

[Malic]

Well just statistically speaking the PS3 cost's sony 400-500$ per unit sold. And not to mention the Xbox 360 has cost Microsoft an estimated 1 billion dollars so far.

Link:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/07/06/microsoft_red_ring_death_charge/

Also the Wii and Pc are the best :smallbiggrin:

[Mc. Lovin']

B) Get with the times and put some mature games on there and give us some decent onlince play.


Oooh be careful if you ever say that and a nintendo follower hears they get personally offended at start quoting all the mature games the Wii has at you:

Resdent Evil

And ... uh ...

[Hermit]

What I have surmised from the argument presented here is that provided I set my own goalposts as to what consists of a landslide victory for a console, I can pretty much decide anything wins. :p Honestly, it's like I've stumbled onto /v/ by accident.

Rabid console fanboyism is entirely pointless. I myself own a Wii and a PS3, and my brother has a 360. Unsurprisingly, every one has its own merits and drawbacks, as well as its own set of exclusive games worth playing. the 360 is a great console, if marred by hardware issues, but personally I'd never own one because most of its games worth playing come to the PC eventually (Even Halo 3 will eventually, although despite being a huge FPS fan I've never really taken to Halo. They're ok games, but nothing special). That said I still think it's a very good console.

Sony gets bonus points for a free online service, and I've certainly enjoyed playing Warhawk and Resistance online just as much as I have Halo 3. Likewise Uncharted and Ratchet and Clank are two fantastic PS3 exclusives which, should you ever get the chance, I suggest you try. As for the Wii it's had some impressive titles which you seem to ignore. Galaxy leads that pack obviously but Super Paper Mario, Metroid Prime 3, RE4 Wii, and Twilight Princess are some great games out so far. You seem to forget that the 360 has had an extra year on the market; as such developers are more familiar with the technology, and many of the key exclusives are now out. The real acid test will be to see where both the Wii and PS3 stand in a year's time.

[Raroy]

This thread just sounds like you saying that you like the 360 for its content and everything else is fine. The title is misleading and doesn't really have anything to do with your post. Really now, this thread is meaningless. You say that the xbox 360 fits to your taste and that it doesn't suck at all. Did anyone say it sucks? I don't see any rabid fanboyism around these parts. If the thread was "Which console is your favorite and why" then we might have gone on without all the arguments that go around in endless circles because of people saying things that they should have worded differently.

[Rutee]

Well just statistically speaking the PS3 cost's sony 400-500$ per unit sold. And not to mention the Xbox 360 has cost Microsoft an estimated 1 billion dollars so far.

What the!? Where did you get these numbers? Sony has always, ALWAYS made a profit on every unit sold. The PS3 had a high initial overhead, just like the PS2, but those overheads reduced the costs of production, on a per-unit basis. I'm pretty sure that at worst, Microsoft is breaking even on a unit-basis as well. This myth that people lose money on the production costs of a console almost entirely rests on the Sega Saturn, the N64, and IIRC, the Gamecube. It was NEVER Industry Standard.

[Ronsian]

If I recall correctly, Sony was losing lots of money on each console sold (100 something dollars?). They were only going to make it back off games (they're 60-70 dollars right?). I dunno, but I don't see them getting out of the hole soon.

Edit: The PlayStation 3's initial production cost is estimated to have been US$805.85 for the 20 GB model and US$840.35 for the 60 GB model; however, they were priced at US$499 and US$599, respectively. The high manufacturing costs meant that every unit was sold at a loss of approximately $250 contributing to Sony's games division posting an operating loss of ¥232.3 billion (US$1.97 billion) in the fiscal year ending March 2007. In April 2007, soon after these results were published, Ken Kutaragi, the head of gaming at Sony, announced plans to retire. Various news agencies, including The Times and The Wall Street Journal reported that this was due to poor sales, whilst SCEI maintains that Kutaragi had been planning his retirement for six months prior to the announcement.

Taken from wikipedia, it later states that production costs have recently declined. As of January 2008, it now costs 400$ to produce.

[Rutee]

If I recall correctly, Sony was losing lots of money on each console sold (100 something dollars?). They were only going to make it back off games (they're 60-70 dollars right?). I dunno, but I don't see them getting out of the hole soon.

I guarantee you Sony is making money on each unit sold. The thing is, they tend to spend a HUGE chunk of cash on building things like chip foundries. Microsoft and Nintendo use off-the-shelf parts, last I heard. They profit, but not as much per unit as Sony does. Sony produces at least part of the actual hardware of the PS3 themselves though; That means they have lower production costs (This is what we call Vertical Integration, as a note (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_Integration)) because they don't pay a third party for the labor of producing a chip.

I'll grant, I can't find proof offhand, but I'm not being presented with any either, so..

[Triaxx]

While I wouldn't call it a landslide just yet, the Wii was reported as reaching it's five million sold mark in Japan six weeks faster than the PS2. So it's outselling Sony's own greatest console on it's home turf.

[Veridian]

Hm...I don't own any of the 'next gen' consoles myself (though I plan to buy a Wii just to play Super Smash Bros Brawl when it finally comes out), but I've looked at it this way:

The 360 is aimed at shoot-em-up and fighting game fans. Many of their best selling titles fall into these categories, though I hear much less about other genre games. Does this make 360 owners 'hardcore' gamers? Not really, it just means that there's a lot of people who worship Halo, etc. That's fine, and I'm sure the 360 can offer other quality games too.

The Wii is targeted at the casual gamers more than FPS junkies. I've seen a fairly wide variety of games for it (perhaps not so much on FPS), so it seems well rounded. True, there's not too many 'mature' games available, but since when was a game judged good soley because it was a gore-filled slugfest? I play games for gameplay, not blood and guts. The Wii is selling very well because it's targeted at everyone, rather than one area of the market. It might not appeal so much to FPS/fighting game fans due to the 360 being 'better' at those.

The PS3 doesn't have many games yet, but graphically it seems superior to the other two. No doubt that the shallow masses who believe graphics makes a game awesome will flock to it, once the price becomes less absurd. Problem is, until that happens, I don't think very many good games will be released, as companies will make more profit marketing their games on the 360 and Wii, but it certainly has the potential to be a good console.

So, am I trying to take sides here? Certainly not. I'm just trying to give the opinion of someone who doesn't own any of the consoles, but enjoys playing games. Obviously, I don't claim that my opinion is right, but I'm merely trying to get a message across to the console fanboys/girls that their console is not the only good one. All three consoles have potential, though one has yet to really flourish yet.

I play games for the gameplay and entertainment factors, so I'd easily consider any of them. Were I to buy one, I'd likely get a Wii (discounting the fact I want to play Brawl), because I'm not really into FPS/beat-em-ups, and my purse can't afford a PS3.

[Mando Knight]

I guarantee you Sony is making money on each unit sold. The thing is, they tend to spend a HUGE chunk of cash on building things like chip foundries. Microsoft and Nintendo use off-the-shelf parts, last I heard. They profit, but not as much per unit as Sony does. Sony produces at least part of the actual hardware of the PS3 themselves though; That means they have lower production costs (This is what we call Vertical Integration, as a note (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_Integration)) because they don't pay a third party for the labor of producing a chip.

I'll grant, I can't find proof offhand, but I'm not being presented with any either, so..

This article (http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/12/sony-cuts-playstation-3-production-cost-in-half/) seems to show otherwise, at least on the cheaper model. Sure, they have halved the production costs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PS3) since the release, but they still aren't making a huge per-unit profit.

The Wii, however, seems to be attracting developers thanks to its lower per-game production costs. Lucasarts, for instance, decided to add Wii to its list of supported systems for Force Unleashed about half a year ago, before which it was 360, DS, and PS3 only.

The Wii also has Brawl coming up...

[Malic]

Darn Mando King beat me to it :smallamused: Anyway I agree when Brawl hits shelves it's gonna sell like hotcakes. Also my family is trying to find a Wii but it seems that all the stores near here are sold out aswell as online. While stores have a lot of stock for both of the other consoles.

P.S. You can't be a hardcore gamer and not know about (or play) Mario games.

P.S.S. Anyone who can find a place to buy them online please do so and then link me to it. (I want the regular price too none of that 700$ crap)

[Felizginato12]

Oh, I have read your comments. I never post in a thread without having read it whole, unless it's more than about eight pages long, in which case reading every other page generally suffices to give you an approximate picture.

Problem is, not only are your comments solely based on opinion, you don't seem to be getting my point either, so we're doing circles around each other.


Okay okay. Agreed. Apologies for thinking you wouldn't read the posts.



Basic points:

1- Nintendo is owning the market big. This one is fact. However, since you admit the title was probably wrong, this might not be relevant - except that a thread's title and OP mark the tone of the whole thread. I'd suggest editing, myself, instead.


I was going to at one point but I thought it to be pointless now.



2- The "mature" tag you throw around too willy-nilly as a qualifier instead of a mere descriptive, and I personally subscribe to the words of Lewis Carroll on the subject. And I do not feel a console needs "mature" games. If a console has good games that happen to be mature, that's great. If a console has good games that happen to not be mature, that's exactly as great.


Trust me, I agree with this entirely. I would be just fine if the 360 made E rated games with the quality of Super Mario Galaxies or any classic Nintendo franchise. I just think that many of todays most daring and innovative games are rated mature and Nintendo's policy makes it so that Wii owners cannot get many of these games. For example, look at all of the attention the Gcube got when RE4 came out. It was a great game umong all others and was an innovative game at it's time.



3- It is my own opinion that no, Xbox 360 is not the best offer in the market at the moment, as I don't like most shooters, which means I am not interested in a huge chunk of the console's hits. I make an exception for Half-Life and Bioshock due to actually having a story, which can make me forget I am playing a shooter, but those two I already played on PC. Basically, the only things I'm interested at the moment are Mas Effect (and that only half-heartedly), the upcoming Lost Planet, and the almost unknown but good-looking Enchanted Arms.


Ah, but there are some great non shooters for the 360. Umong the great 3rd party titles may I add games like Blue Dragon are actually pretty good. And enchanted arms is fun yet unbalanced at times. And Halo has a great story, Bungie just decided that it must be told in the countless pages of Halo novels. But really, Halo has a great story. Gears on the other hand...



4- You fear that the Wii will not be able to sustain itself and end up dying. I do not share this fear. In fact,it is my belief that the Wii can only grow from here. I have witnessed the power of this console upon my own family, having motivated a huge chunk of them to try gaming and eventually buy their own Wiis.


It was just a guess of mine. I'm basing it off of the Gamecube really. In teh next year if the Wii can push out some blockbusters I may change my mind but for now I worry a bit. But not as much for the PS3.



4.5- That fear is not only for the console, but for the games. Again, this is a fear I do not share. With Nintendo, you only have two certainties - one, they're not going to make many games. Two, the ones they do make, are going to be awesome. This is something you must realize when buying a Nintendo console. Comes with the package. Therefore, if it's sheer quantity you want, you do not buy Nintendo. This has always been so, however, and can hardly be construed as "dying out". As I'm a man of few good games, this doesn't bother me in the slightest.


Okay okay I can understand that. When I had a Gamecube 90% of my games were old ones. Mario Sunshine, Metroid Prime, Tales of Symphonia (great game btw). I just started getting pissed because in it's last years Nintendo basically abandoned the console and good looking games (like Killer 7) were not as great as I wished.




From these last two, we can easily deduce that you and I have what can be called an irreconcilable opinion difference, so any attempt to discuss would probably end up in us going "no it isn't!" "is too!" "is not!".


Okay then. Agree to disagree :smallbiggrin: .



And lastly: I do not flatter myself, nor do I consider myself a master of sarcasm. In fact, the mere concept of me flattering myself is enough for the accompanying irony detector to start sparking worryingly - what with that inferiority complex I'm trying to get treated out of and all that :smallamused:. Sarcasm detectors react to quantity, not quality, much like you seem to be doing. And I was putting quite a lot of sarcasm in there, since what is usually conveyed by a silent, sneering glance needs to be over the top sarcasm to even be perceived.


Good point then. Apologies for my previous comment. And apologies for not have reading the srcasm meter manual (hey thats some sarcasm OMGOMG). But in all honesty sorry if I insulted you in any way.


Oh, a

and about that last part of your reply to Mando - cosplay is hella fun even if I haven't done Link (mostly because it's too common), Pokémon is awesome, and yeah, I could probably be called a fanboy, since I have tried pretty much every console and then decided that it's generally Nintendo the one that gives me the best bang for my buck, so I'm going to stick for them - call it fanboyism if you will, but I've been ripped off enough in my life to be thankful when a business provides me with good service for my money, and I have no problem to do some word-of-mouth publicity for them. 'Tis the same way I'm a Nippon Ichi fanboy - when a company's bad games can be counted on one hand despite having done a lot of them, you just learn to trust them. So maybe you should have directed that to me :smalltongue:

Pokemon is a guilty pleasure of mine as well...I still get wet thinking about how badass my Snorlax was...*sigh* good times.

[Felizginato12]

This thread just sounds like you saying that you like the 360 for its content and everything else is fine. The title is misleading and doesn't really have anything to do with your post. Really now, this thread is meaningless. You say that the xbox 360 fits to your taste and that it doesn't suck at all. Did anyone say it sucks? I don't see any rabid fanboyism around these parts. If the thread was "Which console is your favorite and why" then we might have gone on without all the arguments that go around in endless circles because of people saying things that they should have worded differently.

Already acknowledged.

[Felizginato12]

What the!? Where did you get these numbers? Sony has always, ALWAYS made a profit on every unit sold. The PS3 had a high initial overhead, just like the PS2, but those overheads reduced the costs of production, on a per-unit basis. I'm pretty sure that at worst, Microsoft is breaking even on a unit-basis as well. This myth that people lose money on the production costs of a console almost entirely rests on the Sega Saturn, the N64, and IIRC, the Gamecube. It was NEVER Industry Standard.

I think he meant as of now Sony is not making a profit which I would expect from sunch an exspensive piece of technology and somewhat lackluster sales.

And I do feel bad for Microsoft (probably why there stock went down like 5 points about a month or two ago). But serves them right for not making sure everything is as it should be.

[Felizginato12]

Hm...I don't own any of the 'next gen' consoles myself (though I plan to buy a Wii just to play Super Smash Bros Brawl when it finally comes out), but I've looked at it this way:

The 360 is aimed at shoot-em-up and fighting game fans. Many of their best selling titles fall into these categories, though I hear much less about other genre games. Does this make 360 owners 'hardcore' gamers? Not really, it just means that there's a lot of people who worship Halo, etc. That's fine, and I'm sure the 360 can offer other quality games too.


I would like to see more RPGs on the 360 but I don't think shooters are for hardcore gamers. I just think they are more addictive because of their online competition thus turning players hardcore gamers (or at least some of them).



The Wii is targeted at the casual gamers more than FPS junkies. I've seen a fairly wide variety of games for it (perhaps not so much on FPS), so it seems well rounded. True, there's not too many 'mature' games available, but since when was a game judged good soley because it was a gore-filled slugfest? I play games for gameplay, not blood and guts. The Wii is selling very well because it's targeted at everyone, rather than one area of the market. It might not appeal so much to FPS/fighting game fans due to the 360 being 'better' at those.


I don't think gore makes a good game but once again many of this years greatest games were rated M based on the fact that they tried to be somewhat realistic I suppose. And I still see half of the Wii games as gimicks to use Nintendo's newest piece of "innovative" technology.



The PS3 doesn't have many games yet, but graphically it seems superior to the other two. No doubt that the shallow masses who believe graphics makes a game awesome will flock to it, once the price becomes less absurd. Problem is, until that happens, I don't think very many good games will be released, as companies will make more profit marketing their games on the 360 and Wii, but it certainly has the potential to be a good console.


I agree the PS3 could be amazing. With the right games.




I play games for the gameplay and entertainment factors, so I'd easily consider any of them. Were I to buy one, I'd likely get a Wii (discounting the fact I want to play Brawl), because I'm not really into FPS/beat-em-ups, and my purse can't afford a PS3.

I agree with this as well. I would actually love to get my own Wii isntead of bumming it off my friends. And I as well cannot afford a PS3 (nor do I want it as of now).

And I need brawl. Just like all of you nerds out there :smalltongue:

[Mando Knight]

Darn Mando King beat me to it :smallamused: Anyway I agree when Brawl hits shelves it's gonna sell like hotcakes.

Thanks for the title upgrade.:smallwink:

Brawl's not even out yet and the hotcakes are selling like Brawl, not the other way around:smalltongue: It was 3rd place out of Amazon.com's video game bestseller list when I pre-ordered it.

The Wii's motion controls will get better over time... look at the DS. Its touch screen wasn't used as well early on, but now it is a massively popular and successful system.

[Artanis]

So...how many 360s have been sold in Japan? I would be surprised if it was very many, given how abysmally the original XBox did there.


Edit: After doing some checking, the numbers are pretty much as I expected. The 360 seems to hold a decent lead (2 millionish) over the Wii in America, but has sold pretty much nothing in Japan. This means the Wii has a pretty decent lead over the 360 in terms of worldwide sales.

So to answer the OP, no, it's NOT a landslide by ANY stretch of the imagination. I don't think there's been a console race this close since the SNES barely edged out the Genesis, and even with that being the case, the 360 is losing despite the OP's assertions. The only place it's a landslide is in Japan, where surprise surprise, the 360 might as well not even be on the market.

[Joran]

Console Wars are still ongoing. You can't really judge until some of the hardest hitting console exclusives like Metal Gear Solid 4, Final Fantasy XIII, and Super Smash Brothers Brawl launch.

Personally, I think Nintendo wins, just based on sales. Every console they sell makes a profit; they haven't had to make any price reductions compared to the other companies and even then they can't keep them on the shelves.

Also, don't forget, Sony staked its PlayStation empire on Blu-Ray. It seems that Blu-Ray is winning, so a large portion of whether the PS3 is a success in Sony's eyes are if Blu-Ray wins and how many Blu-Ray discs are sold.

P.S. No love for the Nintendo DS? 65 million sold, and still selling more than any other console.

[Athaniar]

Console gaming died with the N64. Can any game match Ocarina of Time? Goldeneye? Super Mario 64? Perfect Dark? Didn't think so. I'll stick with what I'm writing this post with. And that's a PC.

[Felizginato12]

So...how many 360s have been sold in Japan? I would be surprised if it was very many, given how abysmally the original XBox did there.


Edit: After doing some checking, the numbers are pretty much as I expected. The 360 seems to hold a decent lead (2 millionish) over the Wii in America, but has sold pretty much nothing in Japan. This means the Wii has a pretty decent lead over the 360 in terms of worldwide sales.

So to answer the OP, no, it's NOT a landslide by ANY stretch of the imagination. I don't think there's been a console race this close since the SNES barely edged out the Genesis, and even with that being the case, the 360 is losing despite the OP's assertions. The only place it's a landslide is in Japan, where surprise surprise, the 360 might as well not even be on the market.

Ummm....

Seen my earlier post? The one where I admitted the title is misleading and then I explained what I meant?

Yeah.

And I already said that the DS is selling like crazy. I know this. I swear you say one thing wrong and the Nintendo fanboys will get ya :smallwink:

And honestly I don't see the Blu-Ray as much of a threat right now. It will take another year or two for it to finally beat out HD and even so there will be many people just using DVDs. And by the time Blu Ray is the default choice either the 360 will have adapted or a new Microsoft console will be out.

So let me restate this one last time.

Title is misleading.

I THOUGHT it would be pointless to change it since I expected everyone to have read my explanation of what I meant.

I'm not basing the landslide off of sales but game quality, innovative gameplay, console quality, sales, and future expectations in which case I think the 360 comes out on top. I think it has better games right now and has a bright future. Also the sales aren't too shabby. And I only worry about Nintendo's Wii because it may fall to the weaknesses of the 64 (no disc drive) and the weaknesses of the Gamecube (no online, poor 3rd party support, poor overall support in it's final years).

So please understand that before the next greasy Nintendo Crusader starts waving his master sword and blurting out "NINTENDO WIIIII SELLS MOR DAN 360 ITSSS WINNING I DONT EVEEEN HAF 2 RED UR OTHER POOSTS LOLOLOLOLOL".

No offense to those fanboys who actually understand what the conversation is about now.

[Felizginato12]

And a question...

In all seriousness is it true that Japanese people get really bad motion sickness from FPS?

I read it in Game Informer a long while ago and I suppose that would make sense.

But I did hear the 360 is selling better then the Xbox did in Japan. Not much better but its a start.

Thats really the only complaint (when it comes to games) that I can think of. The 360 lacks any really good RPGs (beyond Enchanted Arms, Blue Dragon, and Oblivion that is).

But Fallout 3 looks great..can't wait til' that is released.

[Felizginato12]

Thanks for the title upgrade.:smallwink:

Brawl's not even out yet and the hotcakes are selling like Brawl, not the other way around:smalltongue: It was 3rd place out of Amazon.com's video game bestseller list when I pre-ordered it.

The Wii's motion controls will get better over time... look at the DS. Its touch screen wasn't used as well early on, but now it is a massively popular and successful system.

True. I would like to see some better use of the motion controls besides OMG THERE IS GLASS IN THIS GUY'S HEART PULL IT OUT!!!!1111oneoneoneone.

lol that game sucked.

[Jibar]

Go play Resident Evil 4: Wii Edition. All the perfection of the Gamecube title, but better. It's one of the greatest uses of the Wii controls yet, and all good Resi fans will agree if Resi 5 doesn't make it to the Wii, then Capcom have obviously lost their senses.


no online


I would actually rate these as some strengths of the Gamecube.
Online mode is being forced down our throats by Microsoft and leading to more and more designers implementing some method of online play into their game, without including an offline co-op.
For some people like me, I much prefer to load up a co-op offline game and actually speak to my friend in person than speak through a microphone while also having to deal with some of the jerks who play online.
Right now, Dead or Alive 4 and Kane and Lynch get the most play on my 360, because they mercifully have offline mode. All my other games need me to be online to play with people.
Contrast that with the Wii. Marvel Ultimate Alliance, Super Mario Galaxy, Resident Evil Umbrella Chronicles, Wii Sports, Wii Play, Rayman Raving Rabbids. They're getting a lot more play than Kane and Lynch or DOA4, because they're all offline.
Hell, Super Smash Bros Brawl is going to have an online mode, and I can guarantee you I'm barely going to touch it. I'll be too busy with three of my friends jamming away in my living room and having a blast.
Online is cool and all, but sitting and playing with friends in one room is always superior to playing online.
I think the Wii is going to win through all this, not just due to sales, but due to being friendlier. The other two really alienate you, through payment for online gameing and ridiculous price tags, while the Wii is that nice friend who everybody likes who says stuff like "Hey, I was just gonna go grab some lunch, wanna come with? I'm buying." or "Hey, you a little short for that? Don't worry, I'll cover ya."

[Artanis]

Ummm....

Seen my earlier post? The one where I admitted the title is misleading and then I explained what I meant?

*etc*
My apologies. I went to look up the numbers out of curiosity, and kinda lost track of the original purpose in the process :smallfrown:



But I did hear the 360 is selling better then the Xbox did in Japan. Not much better but its a start.
Yeah, the numbers I looked up were a bit better than the numbers for the original XBox. There's been something like half a million 360s sold in Japan, which is still pathetically small, but AFAIK is nonetheless enough to beat the original XBox.

[Mando Knight]

Console gaming died with the N64. Can any game match Ocarina of Time? Goldeneye? Super Mario 64? Perfect Dark? Didn't think so. I'll stick with what I'm writing this post with. And that's a PC.

Twilight Princess, Metroid Prime 3, Super Mario Galaxy.

A fantastic Legend of Zelda, an FPS with intuitive controls, and a 3D Mario game. Point-by-point, the N64 is beaten out by the Wii.

If that isn't enough, then just wait for Goldeneye and Perfect Dark to be released on the VC. The other two already have been.

[Indon]

I don't think there can be a landslide - the Wii and 360 are, essentially, working in almost entirely different markets, and really aren't competing. The PS3 is a nonentity in the conversation.

The Wii is a console game - it's inexpensive and geared towards a base of solid multiplayer games which are good for parties and such. It has no competition in this. None.

The 360 is a specialized gaming rig - it's essentially a computer, but since it has a lot less functionality, it doesn't cost as much. The 360 is catering to the hardcore gaming audience in a way Nintendo just isn't bothering to do, and is primarily competing with the PC.

The PC is the PC. It doesn't matter how well any non-computer does in gaming, there'll still be millions of people who own PC's who will like to play games, but will own PC's for different reasons. Computers are ubiquitous in our society.

So they all appear to be doing well for themselves, at what they're each built to do. Of the three, only the 360 seems to be at all threatened by anyone else's success, but the 360 appears to be doing well competing against PC gaming.

[Tom_Violence]

And I already stated (if one cares to read) that the title was misleading and that I meant a landslide as a console with the perfect balance of gameplay, sales, and future innovations.

Yikes, the 360 is a perfect balance now? Future innovations are a silly thing to base an argument around, and one that I won't get into as my crystal ball is currently out for repair. Sales its failing on, as many have pointed out. So its gameplay that it all comes down to, I guess.


but with the track record of the Gamecube near it's final few years makes me worried the Wii may not make it in coming years.

Lets contrast this with some other statements:


we are comparing three large companies who are all experienced in the technology market and regardless will still sell well in the future years.
...
I don't think Nintendo or Sony will die any time soon and I don't think that these consoles have no where to go but down.
...
Nintendo seems to be adapting more and more to the modern gamer
...
Five years from now millions will still buy the new playstation. Ten years from now people whill still buy the new Nintendo console. It is no huge worry that these companies will go out of business because they have stood the test of time already.

Now, I'm confused. What exactly are you saying? That the Wii might sell less in future years? (Seems pretty obvious to me - every console does that, largely cos once someone has one, they don't need another!) I think we can all agree that regardless of the successes of these consoles none of these companies are going to go bankrupt over this, so you can't mean that either, and you explicitly state that neither Nintendo nor Sony are going to 'pull a Sega' and end up having to drop out of the console game. Or do you mean that the entire Wii market will collapse or peter out eventually? (Seems very unlikely to me, given current success, and again is based on wild speculation of future events for no reason.)

I think that the problems a lot of people are having with this thread are twofold. First, the title and initial post are indeed somewhat arrogantly written (stating that your favourite console is the best and that you think everyone should obviously disagree is always going to ruffle some feathers. Its like those people that make a very simple statement and then 'qualify' it with the phrase "'Nuff said" - its just asking for trouble). Secondly, the entire 'debate' rapidly collapsed into simple opinion of the "I believe such-and-such is best and that is all that matters" variety, rather than the potentially interesting weighing of pros and cons that it could have been.


I would actually rate these as some strengths of the Gamecube.
Online mode is being forced down our throats by Microsoft and leading to more and more designers implementing some method of online play into their game, without including an offline co-op.
For some people like me, I much prefer to load up a co-op offline game and actually speak to my friend in person than speak through a microphone while also having to deal with some of the jerks who play online.
Right now, Dead or Alive 4 and Kane and Lynch get the most play on my 360, because they mercifully have offline mode. All my other games need me to be online to play with people.
Contrast that with the Wii. Marvel Ultimate Alliance, Super Mario Galaxy, Resident Evil Umbrella Chronicles, Wii Sports, Wii Play, Rayman Raving Rabbids. They're getting a lot more play than Kane and Lynch or DOA4, because they're all offline.
Hell, Super Smash Bros Brawl is going to have an online mode, and I can guarantee you I'm barely going to touch it. I'll be too busy with three of my friends jamming away in my living room and having a blast.
Online is cool and all, but sitting and playing with friends in one room is always superior to playing online.
I think the Wii is going to win through all this, not just due to sales, but due to being friendlier. The other two really alienate you, through payment for online gameing and ridiculous price tags, while the Wii is that nice friend who everybody likes who says stuff like "Hey, I was just gonna go grab some lunch, wanna come with? I'm buying." or "Hey, you a little short for that? Don't worry, I'll cover ya."

Excellent point. Making people pay more just to play with their friends is cheap and nasty, and I love the Wii for not forcing such things. I remember the days when you could pile 4 of your mates around a keyboard and play hotseat games on the PC. Whatever happened to that fun?

[Felizginato12]

Yikes, the 360 is a perfect balance now? Future innovations are a silly thing to base an argument around, and one that I won't get into as my crystal ball is currently out for repair. Sales its failing on, as many have pointed out. So its gameplay that it all comes down to, I guess.


Yes that is what i'm talking about. Also I believe that when the red ring is fixed and over with sales will steady out again.



Lets contrast this with some other statements:



Now, I'm confused. What exactly are you saying? That the Wii might sell less in future years? (Seems pretty obvious to me - every console does that, largely cos once someone has one, they don't need another!) I think we can all agree that regardless of the successes of these consoles none of these companies are going to go bankrupt over this, so you can't mean that either, and you explicitly state that neither Nintendo nor Sony are going to 'pull a Sega' and end up having to drop out of the console game. Or do you mean that the entire Wii market will collapse or peter out eventually? (Seems very unlikely to me, given current success, and again is based on wild speculation of future events for no reason.)


I didn't mean sales figures but the quality of the Gcube games went down hill and Nintendo somewhat abandoned it. Hell the last really good game released on the console was Twilight Princess.



I think that the problems a lot of people are having with this thread are twofold. First, the title and initial post are indeed somewhat arrogantly written (stating that your favourite console is the best and that you think everyone should obviously disagree is always going to ruffle some feathers. Its like those people that make a very simple statement and then 'qualify' it with the phrase "'Nuff said" - its just asking for trouble). Secondly, the entire 'debate' rapidly collapsed into simple opinion of the "I believe such-and-such is best and that is all that matters" variety, rather than the potentially interesting weighing of pros and cons that it could have been.


I agree that it really is not uch of a debate (nor did I intend to make it one). Also I said I made the thread to see what other people thought. I did not say that my opinion makes it the best but that I believe it is the best (in quality) right now.



Excellent point. Making people pay more just to play with their friends is cheap and nasty, and I love the Wii for not forcing such things. I remember the days when you could pile 4 of your mates around a keyboard and play hotseat games on the PC. Whatever happened to that fun?

I wish the 360 would give free online. I suppose that since so many people play XBL Microsoft found a big profit in that market. Plus it's only like what? 5-6 bucks a month?

[Felizginato12]

My apologies. I went to look up the numbers out of curiosity, and kinda lost track of the original purpose in the process :smallfrown:


No problem.



Yeah, the numbers I looked up were a bit better than the numbers for the original XBox. There's been something like half a million 360s sold in Japan, which is still pathetically small, but AFAIK is nonetheless enough to beat the original XBox.

Like I said, I think the 360 needs some good RPGs. But now that I know the 360 is gettingthe new FF games that may be a ray of hope for them in the RPG (and maybe the japanese) market.

[yabo]

To me, any game that matters will cross release, but, as a whole I see this:

PS3:
HDMI (need I say more?)
DVD upscaling to 1080p
Blu-ray standard... NOT extra cost. (just read CNET to know who won that one)
Wifi built in. (granted, not on the cheap one)
FULL backwards compatibility.


Xbox 360:
HDMI on the most expensive one...
upwhat?
HD DVD.... the betamax of the new century!
Whatfi?
plays *some* xbox games... yay.


My 42in 1080p TV thanks Sony for thinking of it. =p

[Daze]

But now that I know the 360 is gettingthe new FF games that may be a ray of hope for them in the RPG (and maybe the japanese) market.

And how do you know this?

Last I checked (in an interview with some square guys a few weeks back) FFXIII would still be a Playstation exclusive.

As a PS3 owner (and judging by this thread, the only one in the conversation), I have to take exception to the perception that it's a weak or dying console.

For one thing it was a year behind in it's development compared to the other systems and this year of 2008 is when it's gonna start hitting it's stride. Metal Gear & FF & Devil May Cry are gonna be huge blockbusters for Sony (among others).

Also...in some of the other list of games I've been reading on here
that are supposedly exclusive to Xbox... ummm..they're not. They either are also on the PS3 (COD4, Oblivion, Orange Box most notably) or are on PC (Bioshock, Mass Effect). The only worthwhile exclusive the Xbox has is Halo 3, which frankly I find to be the most overrated game series of all time.

XBOX has good online capabilities of course (for a fee)... but PS3 will have Home (and still be free). 2nd Life type stuff is hugely popular.... that alone is gonna sell consoles. And so far I've found PS3 online to be just fine. No lag at all with my CAT6 ethernet connection... some things could be improved a bit (communication for one), but I'm confident that will be worked out. Did I mention it was free?

Also, you can't brush the Red Ring of Death off so easily... that's had a huge effect on consumer confidence (as indicated by declining sales #'s). Fact is, my 80GB PS3 runs beautifully... and the pricing now is getting a lot more even. There's still a lot of PS2 owners who haven't upgraded yet and I have the feeling they're not gonna want to waste their current libraries on a differing system... nor on a system which has shown a major flaw (an as of yet unfixed flaw from what I understand).

Give it a few years and then worry about determining a "winner". Could it be MS? Sure it can... but more than likely I think you'll see Sony evening things up a bit... probably even taking the lead. Especially given that Blu-Ray is almost surely the winner of the next-gen format war (rightly so, it's miles ahead of HD-DVD... we already got screwed once with VHS beating out Beta... lets not do that again).

I won't comment much on the Wii as I feel it's an awesome little invention, but not a true next-gen console. I'm more of a solo-gamer anyway, not many friends coming by to game... so it's wasted on me regardless. But Nintendo deserves whatever success they get, glad to see them still around and kicking. The world would not be the same without Mario, Link and friends.

Oh... and last but not least (and not really relevant, but just to say...) Playstation controllers are just so much better than Xbox's... makes me wonder who work in MS's ergonomic quality department... giant handed, dyslexic mind flayers?

EDIT:
To me, any game that matters will cross release, but, as a whole I see this:

PS3:
HDMI (need I say more?)
DVD upscaling to 1080p
Blu-ray standard... NOT extra cost. (just read CNET to know who won that one)
Wifi built in. (granted, not on the cheap one)
FULL backwards compatibility.


My 42in 1080p TV thanks Sony for thinking of it. =p

I agree with both your point about games that matter... and your TV loving the PS3... heh... funny :)

[Rogue 7]

Console gaming died with the N64. Can any game match Ocarina of Time? Goldeneye? Super Mario 64? Perfect Dark? Didn't think so. I'll stick with what I'm writing this post with. And that's a PC.

Don't know about Goldeneye or Perfect Dark (never played them much), but in my humble opinion, Twilight Princess and Galaxy both at least equal if not exceed Ocarina of Time and Mario 64.

[kpenguin]

Don't know about Goldeneye or Perfect Dark (never played them much), but in my humble opinion, Twilight Princess and Galaxy both at least equal if not exceed Ocarina of Time and Mario 64.

Well, in my opinion, Ocrania of Time beats Twilight Princess, but Super Mario Galaxy is the best platformer ever.

[Rogue 7]

It's fairly close either way between the two.

[Athaniar]

I really don't think there is a better FPS than Perfect Dark or Goldeneye. And I've played Half-Life 2.

[Hermit]

Don't know about Goldeneye or Perfect Dark (never played them much), but in my humble opinion, Twilight Princess and Galaxy both at least equal if not exceed Ocarina of Time and Mario 64.

I'd put OoT and TP on a roughly equal pegging. But then I consider Wind Waker to be superior to both, which usually means my opinion is just ignored :p

Galaxy is definately better than 64 too. It'll be a tough one to beat I think.

[Drascin]

Well, in my opinion, Ocrania of Time beats Twilight Princess, but Super Mario Galaxy is the best platformer ever.

I wholly subscribe to this opinion, too. Seriously, Mario 64 was a breakthrough, a point of innovation, and a great game, but, from a purely gaming perspective, Galaxy is just better. Better designed, better , more satisfying. And this is coming from a guy who got the 120 Stars in 64, then restarted the game and got them again just to replay it (and try to beat it in as little time as possible). Which reminds me, I really should hurry my friend to give it back, because I have to get that last star (goddamned rabbits and their stupid snowy capsule thingy) soon - or I'm going to be awfully out of practice when I do get it and go for the speedrun.

Twilight Princess... well, it's a very good game, but it suffers from a series of problems that make it lag behind Ocarina or Wind Waker in terms of development. Though it is raised a lot in my eyes by the single fact that it has Midna in it, and Midna is the best character to ever appear in a Zelda game :smallwink:.

[Triaxx]

What problems? Other than the dungeons getting shorter towards the end of course.

Personally, I'd like to see a Zelda game with thirty, ten-hour long dungeons. And a world map to match.

[Darken Rahl]

Red Ring of Death is a pretty serious flaw. Supposedly newer 360s are better, but the original bunch had a 30% failure rate. Every so often I hear about a customer who is on his 5th or higher XBOX. Even worse are the ones who can't get customer service to replace theirs. Unless that gets better I can't justify buying one.

Don't buy one, for real.

Mine has been in for repairs longer than it has been at my house.

[JabberwockySupafly]

*SNIP*

What is even worse is that Sony is loosing most of it's blockbuster franchises like GTA and FF. Not to mention the PS3 doesn't have much for online games right now.

Then there is the Wii...

Yeah it's fun but when is Nintendo gonna understand that it either needs to:

A) Release it's big titles on time.

or

B) Get with the times and put some mature games on there and give us some decent onlince play.

*SNIP*




Regarding the above lines... Final Fantasy XIII & Vs. XIII are PS3 Only, also Star Ocean 4, Valkyrie Profile 3, and most other "Flagship" Squeenix titles have all been announced as PS3 exclusives. Also, look up White Knight Chronicles/ White Knight Story / Shirokishi Monogatari in terms of amazing RPGs that are also PS3 exclusive. What has 360 gotten other than Mass Effect in terms of RPGs? Oh yeah Blue Drags-on & Lost Blah-ditty. Sony will always have better RPGs, because Japanese publishers hate taking a risk on a system that sold like crap in their home country. Multi-port? No problem, but console exclusives? They just don't do it. And not everyone honestly cares about the multi-player aspects of a game. If I want to play an FPS multi-player, I use my computer, because let's face it, console FPS' feel so clunky and I hate aim assist. Gimme a Mouse & WASD anyday.

Also, while PS3 doesn't have the massive plethora of mediocre content that the 360 has for download, it has original PSX titles that you can not only download, but put on your PSP and play on the go.

Also, several other things you excluded: PS3 Online is FREE, Blu-Ray Player that doesn't cost an extra $150 AUD, and oh yeah, my favourite (I use it all the time) remote play. FF7/Star Ocean 2/Metal Gear Solid 1 still not on the PS Store? Pop the disc in the PS3, hit remote play. Go to Starbucks or any other area with a wireless access point (or even your living room if you just do a local connection!), and play said PSX game as it gets streamed to your PSP from the comfort of your home. I love being able to sit down at a wifi spot and just suddenly start playing the original Silent Hill or Parasite Eve.

As for the Wii? No Mature Content?... I don't mean to sound like a jerk but... AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... Three Words: No. More. Heroes. Also, Resident Evil 4: Wii Edition (i know, it was released on other consoles as well...), and Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles. There are others on the way. Also, Wii does have online play available. Mario Striker's, Pokemon Battle Revolution, and again, there will be other titles on the way.

I also work at a game store, and I get at least one customer a week who brings in a busted 360, and Microsoft can't, or won't, keep up with the demand. We're out of replacement consoles where I work, and I work for a rather large Australian games store.

I've owned all three consoles mentioned here,and in all honesty the 360 isn't a bad console if they can get the bugs out of it, but it is not the best console. That is user preference. I personally enjoy the handhelds above any console, PSP especially. I love my PS3, but there's not many titles out right now that I want to play. Although in the next 3 months about 40 really good titles are going to be coming out for it. I also think the Wii is great fun and personally can't wait for Monster Hunter 3 to come out on it (as long as the control scheme works correctly...), and I owned a 360, but got the RRoD (Red Ring of Death) and so yeah... wasn't very happy that Microsoft refused to replace it, and then one week later put out an extended warranty. After I had traded mine in for store credit.

But don't sit there and bash on the PS3 & the Wii without having some facts and substantial amounts of time invested into them before making a snap judgement that simply because another console has been out longer that it has already won the console war. People are buying up PS3s now simply because they have dropped in price a bit, and it costs as much to get a normal Blu-Ray player, so why not get a console with it for free? They were around 750-800 AUD and are now around 680 AUD, only 100 more than a 360 here.

So let's see here.. for 100 AUD more, I get a far more stable console, I get a blu-ray player, free multiplayer online, a system which I can upgrade the hardware on when they make upgrades instead of having to buy a whole new system *coughelitecough*, something that can do remote play with my PSP, oh, and free wireless connection to my router... instead of having to pay 170 AUD for an adapter.

See, I can make it sound like the 360 is going to fail miserably and die off with not a bang, but a whimper. It won't, it's a strong console in it's own right, and will do fine once they figure out how to completely destroy the RRoD problem. And when they do that, I will probably buy another one.

[Mr.Moron]

Regarding the above lines... Final Fantasy XIII & Vs. XIII are PS3 Only, also Star Ocean 4, Valkyrie Profile 3, and most other "Flagship" Squeenix titles have all been announced as PS3 exclusives.

Star Ocean 4? Valkyrie Profile 3? Ack! Horrible news, now I know I have to buy a PS3. What's next? Final Tactics II:"Yes, an actual, actual sequel.".

*sigh*.


That said I've always found the concept of the "Console War" rather silly, at least as it exists in the community. Really folks, no need to get so uppity. Some platforms have games you like, others don't. As an extension to the previous statement: You won't like some things on certain platforms other people do.

That said, I haven't had much of a chance to get my hands on current generation stuff. Heck only I recently finished my to-play list of PS1 games. I did get to play my friend's wii for a bit when he visited recently. I like it better than I did the gamecube when I first got my hands on that system.

EDIT: The gamecube turned out pretty neat after it was all said and done.

[Nerd-o-rama]

If you're still calling Nintendo "kiddie", go play No More Heroes, please. It's one of those immature mature games in the vein of GTA (but more of a traditional action game than a free-roamer) that manages to be quite fun despite excessive blood and adult content. It's certainly not kiddy.

I'm sure there's plenty of other stuff in the Wii's library that can count (many of them multiplatform), I'm just on the casual side of gaming nowadays, and don't really care.

Anyway, all I can really say about the console wars right now is that Sony has shot itself in the foot repeatedly with the PS3. Overpriced, unreliable, underproduced, an underwhelming feature list compared to its competitors, and a dearth of quality exclusives. The biggest problem of all those, of course, being the price tag. I'm certainly not buying one until it drops into the $200-300 range and they shore up their quality control, which should happen in another year or so.

The frontrunners are the Wii and the 360. I prefer the Wii personally; it's got a number of awesome exclusives (due to Nintendo's perennial advantage in first-party content), is inexpensive, and at least pretends to be innovative instead of being the same thing only bigger (and don't discount online sales of hundreds of classic cartridge games either). The 360 has more raw power, online multiplayer content, and contracts with a lot of lucrative studios like Bungie and Bioware. I'd say these two are pretty even; although Nintendo has better console sales, Microsoft could pull ahead in game sales when the console market saturates (and the fix their goddamn hardware).

All I really have to say is that if Nintendo wrapped their head around online multiplayer and lured away a few more third party studios (the latter of which is highly unlikely due to a company culture stretching back all the way to the 80's), they'd be unstoppable. As it is, this round is still up in the air.

[Mando Knight]

The 360 has more raw power, online multiplayer content, and contracts with a lot of lucrative studios like Bungie and Bioware.

Uh, heard of Sonic Chronicles: The Dark Brotherhood? It's being developed by Bioware for the Nintendo DS...

The Bioware co-founders recently stated that they were excited about the Wii and would gladly develop for the system. (Nintendo Power V225, page 41)

Also, Wikipedia said something about an unsolicited Halo DS pitch by Bungie...

...and Assassin's Creed for the DS...

The flat-out winner in the "console wars" is... Nintendo DS, by both sales and game quality. (no 1080p, but come on, the screens are only ~4" wide...)

[Nerd-o-rama]

Nintendo has successfully maintained its monopoly on handhelds, yes. Perhaps because their strategy of marketing innovation and savings over power applies even better there?

Also, Bioware developing for Nintendo? I was unaware of this "Sonic Chronicles" thing. If I can get Mass Effect for the Wii, I'll declare Nintendo winnar right there (I'm not a huge Halo fan).

On an mostly unrelated No More Heroes note, Shinobu is a bitch to fight.

[Setra]

also Star Ocean 4
They're making Star Ocean 4? AWESOME!

As to the original topic, the console war is a joke. In terms of sales, the Wii is winning, but sales almost never matter to the individual. People buy what they wanna buy.

If I want to buy a system with a bunch of jRPGs then what's wrong with that? What if in my opinion Mass Effect is worse than Final Fantasy Tactics? Your opinion is only your opinion, and I can easily act as arrogant as you are or worse, because I am awesome.

I hate how people get so worked up over a bunch of games. We're supposed to ENJOY them, not fight over which is better. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A BETTER GAME, PEOPLE WILL ALWAYS HAVE DIFFERENT TASTES. If you do not insult someone for thinking spinach tastes like crap, or likewise for liking it, then why do you do so for things like games?

[Mando Knight]

I was unaware of this "Sonic Chronicles" thing.

Sonic Chronicles is the official name for the Sonic the Hedgehog RPG. Yes, Sonic's his name and speed is his game, but he's going RPG. It did wonders for Mario...

[Mr.Moron]

What if in my opinion Mass Effect is worse than Final Fantasy Tactics?

It's not an opinion that Final Fantasy Tactics is better than most games. It's just one of those facts of life people sometimes refuse to accept. (I kid, I kid... sort of).

[Nerd-o-rama]

Sonic Chronicles is the official name for the Sonic the Hedgehog RPG. Yes, Sonic's his name and speed is his game, but he's going RPG. It did wonders for Mario...
Man, I was hoping the title was a coincidence. Ah, well. It can't be any worse than some of the recent platformers.

But seriously. Mass Effect. Wii. Now.

[Daze]

Anyway, all I can really say about the console wars right now is that Sony has shot itself in the foot repeatedly with the PS3. Overpriced, unreliable, underproduced, an underwhelming feature list compared to its competitors, and a dearth of quality exclusives. The biggest problem of all those, of course, being the price tag. I'm certainly not buying one until it drops into the $200-300 range and they shore up their quality control, which should happen in another year or so.

Unreliable? The PS3 has no reported problems... mine works fine and so does everyone else's. The 360 on the other hand...

Underproduced? Go to the store, you want a PS3? There's one to buy. The Wii on the other hand...

Underwhelming feature list? Dude... Blu-ray, DVD upscaling, Free online, arguably the most "next-gen" of all the next-gen systems.

Dearth of quality exclusives? They got plenty on the way... gotta give Sony some time to catch up as they were the last one released.

Price tag? PS3 is the most expensive, which will perhaps keep it out of some gamer's hands unfortunately. But if you look at the value when compared with the 360, it's no contest. Especially if you add on the Beta-like HD-DVD optional drive and wi-fi tot he XBox, then we're talking the same price anyway.
But if you're waiting for a $200 PS3, you're not being fair... that wont happen til we see the PS4 and XBox 720.

I'm not trying to down the 360... but for my hard-earned $$, it's the PS3 all the way.

EDIT: and also... Bungie is no longer attached to Microsoft. They're back to a true 3rd party company.

[Jibar]

Unreliable? The PS3 has no reported problems... mine works fine and so does everyone else's. The 360 on the other hand...

In the early days it overheated like a furnace. They still have the danger of it. It's why it has a curved top, so you can't put anything on top of it that'll make it catch fire.


Underproduced? Go to the store, you want a PS3? There's one to buy. The Wii on the other hand...

Funny story, they're unsold. The Wii on the other hand...


Underwhelming feature list? Dude... Blu-ray, DVD upscaling, Free online, arguably the most "next-gen" of all the next-gen systems.

Blu-Ray does appear to be winning at this point, though I would like to ask just how many people out there are actually buying Blu-Ray disks right now, or even have a Blu-Ray player. I wanna buy a games console, not an entertainment unit. I have other technology for a reason.


Dearth of quality exclusives? They got plenty on the way... gotta give Sony some time to catch up as they were the last one released.

Yeah, but exclusives for the PS3 are a rarer and rarer thing, and what exclusives they've got are kinda short.


Price tag? PS3 is the most expensive, which will perhaps keep it out of some gamer's hands unfortunately. But if you look at the value when compared with the 360, it's no contest. Especially if you add on the Beta-like HD-DVD optional drive and wi-fi tot he XBox, then we're talking the same price anyway.
But if you're waiting for a $200 PS3, you're not being fair... that wont happen til we see the PS4 and XBox 720.

What's the point of paying so much, when you can get a lot of the same games, cheaper, on a cheaper console? There's no denying this part of the PS3. They messed up bad with the pricing.


EDIT: and also... Bungie is no longer attached to Microsoft. They're back to a true 3rd party company.

Why does that matter anyway? Bungie haven't put out anything good since the Marathon games.

[Daze]

In the early days it overheated like a furnace. They still have the danger of it. It's why it has a curved top, so you can't put anything on top of it that'll make it catch fire.

The original PS3's did run a bit hot, but they've sinced improved the cooling on the new 80gb and 40gb models. Also... people were dopey and put them in closed up entertainment centers, hence enhancing the heat problem. I keep mine on a shelf all by itself, and haven't had any heat issues. Just like you're careful with your PC about heat, you need to be careful with these next-gens as they are heat-heavy. And for the record.. the 360 gets pretty darn hot too.




Funny story, they're unsold. The Wii on the other hand...
No arguments here... I was just saying they weren't "underproduced" as Nerd-O-Rama claimed. As far as the Wii, they WERE underproduced in order to help boost demand, as much as Nintendo tries to deny it.




Blu-Ray does appear to be winning at this point, though I would like to ask just how many people out there are actually buying Blu-Ray disks right now, or even have a Blu-Ray player. I wanna buy a games console, not an entertainment unit. I have other technology for a reason.
That's absolutely your decision. But personally if I can buy something that is a great gaming console AND a next-gen disc player for $500, rather than a single console for $400 and a seperate disc player for $600... I will. Just makes economic sense.
As far as who is actually buying blu-rays (or HD-DVD's for that matter). Not many.... Yet. If you have a crazy awesome 1080p TV, then yes.. you buy Blu-rays. If you own a standard def television? than why upgrade? But it's really a matter of time... next-gen discs are here to stay, and personally I'm glad the superior Blu-Ray will most likely win the format war.




Yeah, but exclusives for the PS3 are a rarer and rarer thing, and what exclusives they've got are kinda short.
*shrug* That's an opinion..not fact. In general, 3rd party exclusives are rarer across the board, but Sony will still have the Lion's share. Especially in the coming year... if you hate jRPG's, then you may not care... But it's hard to scoff at the likes of FF and MGS.




What's the point of paying so much, when you can get a lot of the same games, cheaper, on a cheaper console? There's no denying this part of the PS3. They messed up bad with the pricing.
Well by that logic, I should just sell my PS3 and go back to an Atari or NES as I hear their games are quite cheap nowadays. The games are NOT cheaper on the 360 btw.. still $60 last i checked. And as established, the PS3 is $100 bucks more (less if you upgrade the elite to almost equal the PS3).
Sony absolutely didnt mess up with their pricing. They are LOSING money on each console sold. The PS3 is a true next-gen system, and sometimes you pay for progress. The 360 on the other hand is just a souped up XBox 1.5, I have a PC which is already capable of doing the things it does. My PC is NOT the equal of the PS3 however (close, but not quite)




Why does that matter anyway? Bungie haven't put out anything good since the Marathon games.

No arguments here ;)
I wonder if they'll do another Marathon though? Could be interesting...

I've also heard on the rumor mill that Sony is trying very hard to lock up Bethesda for the next ES. Dont quote me on that though... but admittedly, I'm salivating at the thought.

[Tom_Violence]

If you're still calling Nintendo "kiddie", go play No More Heroes, please. It's one of those immature mature games in the vein of GTA (but more of a traditional action game than a free-roamer) that manages to be quite fun despite excessive blood and adult content. It's certainly not kiddy.

Y'see, this I don't really agree with. To me, GTA was as about as 'adult' as an Itchy and Scratchy cartoon. That is to say, its about as grown-up as a 14-yr old who thinks that punching fake hookers is 'edgy'.

Now, to me, a game being 'adult' has nothing to do with how much blood and guts it has, but rather to do with the level of sophistication involved. It is for this reason that I rank games like Planescape: Torment as 'adult', despite the lack of blood, guts and flying limbs, and that Mortal Kombat is a game more towards the 'kiddy' side of the spectrum (though not, obviously, all the way there).


THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A BETTER GAME

This is obviously nonsense. If you believed this you would have to say that Daikatana is as good a gane as Half-Life 2, and this is clearly absurd. Moreover, this means that if I made a game that was absolute rubbish, and no one could even understand it to play it, let alone enjoy it, that game would also be as good as Half-Life 2. :smallsigh:

[Daze]

Y'see, this I don't really agree with. To me, GTA was as about as 'adult' as an Itchy and Scratchy cartoon. That is to say, its about as grown-up as a 14-yr old who thinks that punching fake hookers is 'edgy'.

Now, to me, a game being 'adult' has nothing to do with how much blood and guts it has, but rather to do with the level of sophistication involved. It is for this reason that I rank games like Planescape: Torment as 'adult', despite the lack of blood, guts and flying limbs, and that Mortal Kombat is a game more towards the 'kiddy' side of the spectrum (though not, obviously, all the way there).

Well said...

I mean, a parent is obviously gonna disagree with you. But as a gamer, what you say is very true.




This is obviously nonsense. If you believed this you would have to say that Daikatana is as good a gane as Half-Life 2, and this is clearly absurd. Moreover, this means that if I made a game that was absolute rubbish, and no one could even understand it to play it, let alone enjoy it, that game would also be as good as Half-Life 2. :smallsigh:

Back to the favorite old GITP argument. Objectivism vs Subjectivism.
I think what Setra was trying to say is that you cant really down someone who likes JRPG's as opposed to western RPG's (or vice versa). Or someone who prefers puzzle games to shooters... and for that point I agree with him.

You can however definitely say certain games are better than others (for the most part, unless both are really good). Some games are half-assed grabs at money and we all know it... (Transformers, I'm looking at you!!)

[Setra]

This is obviously nonsense. If you believed this you would have to say that Daikatana is as good a gane as Half-Life 2, and this is clearly absurd. Moreover, this means that if I made a game that was absolute rubbish, and no one could even understand it to play it, let alone enjoy it, that game would also be as good as Half-Life 2. :smallsigh:
Let me rephrase, I do not believe people should be patronized for their choice of games. If someone wants to like Daikatana why should we make fun of him?

There is a degree of 'better' or 'worse' but in the end in the end our own tastes heavily outweigh anything else. This is especially true if you include nostalgia, this is why Chrono Trigger is still considered a good game, despite the fact that if you look at it objectively both the story and gameplay could be considered rather subpar by todays standards.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Frankly, even looking at it without nostalgia (as I never owned an SNES or knew jack about Chrono Trigger until about 2004), Chrono Trigger's story and storytelling are still way above average for a console RPG, even today. Gameplay, I'll give to you, although it's still a notch up from its contemporaries in the genre.

Of course, this is all still opinion. Just not nostalgic opinion.


Y'see, this I don't really agree with. To me, GTA was as about as 'adult' as an Itchy and Scratchy cartoon. That is to say, its about as grown-up as a 14-yr old who thinks that punching fake hookers is 'edgy'.

Now, to me, a game being 'adult' has nothing to do with how much blood and guts it has, but rather to do with the level of sophistication involved. It is for this reason that I rank games like Planescape: Torment as 'adult', despite the lack of blood, guts and flying limbs, and that Mortal Kombat is a game more towards the 'kiddy' side of the spectrum (though not, obviously, all the way there).
Yeah, I know what you mean (although GTA San Andreas is semi-sophisticated in its main plot, and NMH shows promise of being at least kinda cerebral underneath the Tarantino levels of blood. I'm getting the feeling that it's as much a critique of the kind of people who play these overly violent games as it is one itself. Japan's big on that kind of story).

Still, going by your definition, shall we scratch No More Heroes and insert The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess?

[Mr.Moron]

Frankly, even looking at it without nostalgia (as I never owned an SNES or knew jack about Chrono Trigger until about 2004), Chrono Trigger's story and storytelling are still way above average for a console RPG, even today.

I disagree. I honestly think that isn't the game's strongest department. It isn't so much the story so much as how appealing the world is. I'd agree the story with the previous poster on the actual story being weak for modern standards, however the stage it takes place on is top notch.

It also has a very cohesive and distinct style. Some games have great game play, some have great visual design, some of have great music. Actually quite a few games have all these things. However with Chrono Trigger everything matched and worked together in way that is very rare.

That said, I still think it gets a bit too much attention relative to what the rest of the 16-bit era had to offer.

[Setra]

Frankly, even looking at it without nostalgia (as I never owned an SNES or knew jack about Chrono Trigger until about 2004), Chrono Trigger's story and storytelling are still way above average for a console RPG, even today. Gameplay, I'll give to you, although it's still a notch up from its contemporaries in the genre.

Of course, this is all still opinion. Just not nostalgic opinion.
Well it really depends on what you're comparing the story to I suppose, and your opinion of what your comparing the story too..

Bleh, too opiniony :smalltongue: , but basically I was comparing it to Shadow Hearts and Xenosaga(And Gears), not Final Fantasy (which of the recent ones it is better than).

[Felizginato12]

Regarding the above lines... Final Fantasy XIII & Vs. XIII are PS3 Only, also Star Ocean 4, Valkyrie Profile 3, and most other "Flagship" Squeenix titles have all been announced as PS3 exclusives. Also, look up White Knight Chronicles/ White Knight Story / Shirokishi Monogatari in terms of amazing RPGs that are also PS3 exclusive. What has 360 gotten other than Mass Effect in terms of RPGs? Oh yeah Blue Drags-on & Lost Blah-ditty. Sony will always have better RPGs, because Japanese publishers hate taking a risk on a system that sold like crap in their home country. Multi-port? No problem, but console exclusives? They just don't do it. And not everyone honestly cares about the multi-player aspects of a game. If I want to play an FPS multi-player, I use my computer, because let's face it, console FPS' feel so clunky and I hate aim assist. Gimme a Mouse & WASD anyday.


Again...

I already said that Microsoft needs more good RPGs. I'm not impressed with the White Knights games but the Square Enix ones coming out do make me a bit jealous. Also, I read a few months back a preview in game informer that the two FF games would be released on the 360. I don't know how true that is now but I think it could go either way since they already released FF online for the 360.



Also, while PS3 doesn't have the massive plethora of mediocre content that the 360 has for download, it has original PSX titles that you can not only download, but put on your PSP and play on the go.


I do agree that the PS3 has some good downloadable games but I would still rather play DOOM, Marathon, and Galaxy Wars over any games the PS3 offers (I still can't believe how adictive Galaxy Wars is).



Also, several other things you excluded: PS3 Online is FREE, Blu-Ray Player that doesn't cost an extra $150 AUD, and oh yeah, my favourite (I use it all the time) remote play. FF7/Star Ocean 2/Metal Gear Solid 1 still not on the PS Store? Pop the disc in the PS3, hit remote play. Go to Starbucks or any other area with a wireless access point (or even your living room if you just do a local connection!), and play said PSX game as it gets streamed to your PSP from the comfort of your home. I love being able to sit down at a wifi spot and just suddenly start playing the original Silent Hill or Parasite Eve.


OH WOWZ MEDIOCRE ONLINE PLAY FO FREE CUZ I DON'T HAZ 5 BUCKKKS A MONTH?!?!?!

And I am talking about a systems original content not old content. If that was the case I would deem the Wii the better console for downloadable classics, PS3 a close runner up for great Playstation games and 360 last for including only the best of the Xbox games in it's compatability list.

I agree, they are nice perks but I would enjoy new and good PS3 games over playing the Playstation games I have beaten countless times.

Also, I don't really see the Blu-Ray as the greatest console addition ever made. I barely know anyone with Blu-Ray or a PS3 at that matter. Also, even if Blu-Ray beats out HD I will still be using DVD for the next for years. Sorry, but paying extra for a movie that looks more realistic isn't that appealing. Hell, I would still be watching VHS if the DVD did not include chapter selection...

And FF7 was overated fanboy so deal with it. (Give me FF8 or 9 instead).



As for the Wii? No Mature Content?... I don't mean to sound like a jerk but... AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... Three Words: No. More. Heroes. Also, Resident Evil 4: Wii Edition (i know, it was released on other consoles as well...), and Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles.


I dd not say there are no mature games, I only said that there are not many. Also, with their lack of mature game interest the Wii loses out on some of last years best games. For example CoD 4 and Assassin's Creed were multi platform games and the Wii did not get them. How fun would Assassin's Creed be on the Wii?

No More Heroes: An excuse for Wii fanboys to justify the fact that in a few years they might be stuck playing Shrek and other movie franchise videogames.

RE4: How long can they milk that cow?




There are others on the way. Also, Wii does have online play available. Mario Striker's, Pokemon Battle Revolution, and again, there will be other titles on the way.


Umm...who the hell plays Mario Strikers? Sounds as about as fun as Mario and Sonic at the olympics (oh wait...).

And Pokemon Battle Revolution? I suppose that would be fun if you liked the same rehashed battles over and over and over...



I also work at a game store, and I get at least one customer a week who brings in a busted 360, and Microsoft can't, or won't, keep up with the demand. We're out of replacement consoles where I work, and I work for a rather large Australian games store.


Maybe Microsoft just doesn't like Australia.

On the other hand I can see that maybe Australia still has infected 360's in their supply because sales (i'm guessing) are not as strong as American 360 sales.



I've owned all three consoles mentioned here,and in all honesty the 360 isn't a bad console if they can get the bugs out of it, but it is not the best console. That is user preference. I personally enjoy the handhelds above any console, PSP especially. I love my PS3, but there's not many titles out right now that I want to play. Although in the next 3 months about 40 really good titles are going to be coming out for it. I also think the Wii is great fun and personally can't wait for Monster Hunter 3 to come out on it (as long as the control scheme works correctly...), and I owned a 360, but got the RRoD (Red Ring of Death) and so yeah... wasn't very happy that Microsoft refused to replace it, and then one week later put out an extended warranty. After I had traded mine in for store credit.


I can understand your distrust in the 360 now. lol, and that situation does suck.



But don't sit there and bash on the PS3 & the Wii without having some facts and substantial amounts of time invested into them before making a snap judgement that simply because another console has been out longer that it has already won the console war. People are buying up PS3s now simply because they have dropped in price a bit, and it costs as much to get a normal Blu-Ray player, so why not get a console with it for free? They were around 750-800 AUD and are now around 680 AUD, only 100 more than a 360 here.


Then should I just not bash the PS3 or Wii or should I tell you not to bash the 360?



So let's see here.. for 100 AUD more, I get a far more stable console, I get a blu-ray player, free multiplayer online, a system which I can upgrade the hardware on when they make upgrades instead of having to buy a whole new system *coughelitecough*, something that can do remote play with my PSP, oh, and free wireless connection to my router... instead of having to pay 170 AUD for an adapter.


And no good games to play...



See, I can make it sound like the 360 is going to fail miserably and die off with not a bang, but a whimper. It won't, it's a strong console in it's own right, and will do fine once they figure out how to completely destroy the RRoD problem. And when they do that, I will probably buy another one.

I think they have solved the problem but they still have infected 360s in the market place. I'm not sure though.

And again, I do see the 360's shortcomings but I just can't see any reason to choose a different console over it when i'm having so much fun playing CoD 4 for hours or replaying Bioshock over and over because the world and story is just amazing.

[Rogue 7]

I dd not say there are no mature games, I only said that there are not many. Also, with their lack of mature game interest the Wii loses out on some of last years best games. For example CoD 4 and Assassin's Creed were multi platform games and the Wii did not get them. How fun would Assassin's Creed be on the Wii?

Meh, that's why I (well, my brothers- it's nice to have siblings with expendable cash) also have a 360. Call of Duty is great- great multiplayer, and a storyine that kicks so much ass, just because it's willing to kill off heroes I mean, you die in a nuclear explosion for god's sake



No More Heroes: An excuse for Wii fanboys to justify the fact that in a few years they might be stuck playing Shrek and other movie franchise videogames.


Or something we play while waiting for the next Mario/Zelda/Metroid game? Or any of the several other franchises that Nintendo has built up and that have sustained it over the years? Nintendo is far and away the best first-party developer, full stop.



Umm...who the hell plays Mario Strikers? Sounds as about as fun as Mario and Sonic at the olympics (oh wait...).

And Pokemon Battle Revolution? I suppose that would be fun if you liked the same rehashed battles over and over and over...

..:smallsigh:... March 9th, my friend, March 9th. Super Smash Brothers Brawl. The single greatest multiplayer game known to mankind, complete with Snake, Sonic, and (my personal favorite), Pikachu:smallbiggrin:. That game alone is worth the cost of a Wii. The Smash Bros dojo seems to indicate that online play will be pretty easy- there's apparantly a "play anyone" button. And out of curiosity, apart from First Person Shooters and RTSs (on PCs, I think), what other games do people really play online?



And no good games to play...

Zelda, Metroid, Mario, No More Heroes, Paper Mario, WarioWare, Wii Sports. We're getting Force Unleashed, Rock Band, and there are numerous others out there if you want to find them (Call of Duty 3 wasn't bad, Trauma Center's apparently good, etc.) Not to mention full backwards compatibility with the Gamecube (Rogue Squadron II, Melee, Windwaker, Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door, Sunshine, Metroid Prime 1 and 2, ect. Admittedly the GC is fairly weak) and an online library from the greatest games developer in history (Mario in all his incarnations, StarFox 64, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong, Mario Kart, Sonic, etc.) Yeah, I think I just disproved your point.



And again, I do see the 360's shortcomings but I just can't see any reason to choose a different console over it when i'm having so much fun playing CoD 4 for hours or replaying Bioshock over and over because the world and story is just amazing.
And we're not asking you to. We're just asking that you recognize that plenty of people have fun on the Wii, and that it has a good library of quality games.

And on a side note, the only way they could improve the Wii is if Nintendo finally announces that, yes, the sequel to Tales of Symphonia WILL in fact be released in America. (Dammit, it's my favorite game ever, Nintendo. You're killing me here!)

[Setra]

Again...

I already said that Microsoft needs more good RPGs. I'm not impressed with the White Knights games but the Square Enix ones coming out do make me a bit jealous. Also, I read a few months back a preview in game informer that the two FF games would be released on the 360. I don't know how true that is now but I think it could go either way since they already released FF online for the 360.Final Fantasy Online (Better known as Eleven) was released on the PC and PS2 YEARS before it hit the 360.


I do agree that the PS3 has some good downloadable games but I would still rather play DOOM, Marathon, and Galaxy Wars over any games the PS3 offers (I still can't believe how adictive Galaxy Wars is).The thing is some people might not agree, just because you may prefer them does not quite mean everyone else does, and certainly doesn't mean it's fact, or better.


OH WOWZ MEDIOCRE ONLINE PLAY FO FREE CUZ I DON'T HAZ 5 BUCKKKS A MONTH?!?!?! OH WOWS I IS ONLY CONSOLE THAT ARE NOT HAVE FREE ONLINE PLAY?!?!?! ALL MY PLAYERS MUST BE STOOPID AND R DUMB!! LAWL ROFL.


I agree, they are nice perks but I would enjoy new and good PS3 games over playing the Playstation games I have beaten countless times. You're lying, you will never enjoy the PS3 because you're too damned biased an arrogant to see beyond your own nose. It is people like YOU who give the Microsoft fanbase a bad reputation.


And FF7 was overated fanboy so deal with it. (Give me FF8 or 9 instead). and you seem to forget that overrated does not mean bad.


No More Heroes: An excuse for Wii fanboys to justify the fact that in a few years they might be stuck playing Shrek and other movie franchise videogames.
Halo 3: An excuse for 360 fanboys to put themselves above everyone else.


And Pokemon Battle Revolution? I suppose that would be fun if you liked the same rehashed battles over and over and over...You mean like in 99.99% games in general? *gasp and shock*


Then should I just not bash the PS3 or Wii or should I tell you not to bash the 360?[quote]You should not bash any console, the people who do are simply insecure with their choices, while I may seem insecure I'm just tired of being unable to discuss videogames without it ending in flames.

This whole THREAD is flame bait and YOU are very likely a troll.

[quote]And no good games to play...Name one good exclusive on the 360.

ALL OF THEM SUCK, because I say so every 360 game sucks, and everyone should get a Wii and a PS3 because I am awesome and my word is law.


And again, I do see the 360's shortcomings but I just can't see any reason to choose a different console over it when i'm having so much fun playing CoD 4 for hours or replaying Bioshock over and over because the world and story is just amazing.
Just because YOU LIKE SOMETHING DOES NOT MEAN OTHERS WILL NOT CHOOSE TO LIKE OTHER THINGS.

My word is law and therefore the 360 sucks.


I can easily act as arrogant as you are or worseStop trying to act as if your opinion is fact, because I like to fight forest fires with nuclear explosives.
Zelda, Metroid, Mario, No More Heroes, Paper Mario, WarioWare, Wii Sports. We're getting Force Unleashed, Rock Band, and there are numerous others out there if you want to find them (Call of Duty 3 wasn't bad, Trauma Center's apparently good, etc.) Not to mention full backwards compatibility with the Gamecube (Rogue Squadron II, Melee, Windwaker, Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door, Sunshine, Metroid Prime 1 and 2, ect. Admittedly the GC is fairly weak) and an online library from the greatest games developer in history (Mario in all his incarnations, StarFox 64, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong, Mario Kart, Sonic, etc.) Yeah, I think I just disproved your point.
He was talking about the PS3

[Felizginato12]

Final Fantasy Online (Better known as Eleven) was released on the PC and PS2 YEARS before it hit the 360.


I know but it might be a sliht sign of Square Enix branching out a bit but I can't be sure.



The thing is some people might not agree, just because you may prefer them does not quite mean everyone else does, and certainly doesn't mean it's fact, or better.


And I stated that my opinion was fact? I said that I would rather play... (keywords I and rather).



OH WOWS I IS ONLY CONSOLE THAT ARE NOT HAVE FREE ONLINE PLAY?!?!?! ALL MY PLAYERS MUST BE STOOPID AND R DUMB!! LAWL ROFL.


I must be a retard to pay five bucks for hours of fun online playing the best that videogames has to offer in multiplayer.



You're lying, you will never enjoy the PS3 because you're too damned biased an arrogant to see beyond your own nose. It is people like YOU who give the Microsoft fanbase a bad reputation.


Oh, lolz dude chill out. who are you to say I will never enjoy the PS3? I'm glad you know me so well to know that I will never play a PS3 even if it turns into a better and greater console. And i'm glad you know me well enough to determine that I am part of some sort of race of people bent on giving Microsoft a bad name.

Seriously what the **** is this gaia?



and you seem to forget that overrated does not mean bad.


Not bad, just not the first FF that comes to mind.



Halo 3: An excuse for 360 fanboys to put themselves above everyone else.


lol I know there are some devoted Halo fans but nothing matches the might of a man who most likely dresses up like Cloud in his spare time. And once again you are taking this entire discussion either too far are too seriously. I am not putting myself above anyone else I am stating what I feel with confidence in my opinion. I'm not gonna say "Yes, I see what you mean and I value and treasure your opinion even if mine differs in anyway. I also apologize if you are offended by my opinions and I will cease letting others no of them if you give me reason to."



You mean like in 99.99% games in general? *gasp and shock*


Ummm...I don't think your percentage is correct sir. For I honestly do not see anything more boring then a console Pokemon game...hell...Pac Man has more variety then that game.



[quote]Then should I just not bash the PS3 or Wii or should I tell you not to bash the 360?[quote]You should not bash any console, the people who do are simply insecure with their choices, while I may seem insecure I'm just tired of being unable to discuss videogames without it ending in flames.

This whole THREAD is flame bait and YOU are very likely a troll.


Okay Karma Police ya got me. I am insecure because heaven forbid I happen to give reasons to why I do not like one thing over another. Did ya also know my birthday was March 12th? Or that my favorite band is The Doors? Come on Big Brother I know your intel must have something on that. And if you are not from the Karma Police you must be an internet vigilante clearing the interwebz of scum and filth. A man who says **** YOU to people who don't greet others with a mile long smile or a tip of the hat.



Name one good exclusive on the 360.


Mass Effect. Halo 3 (multiplayer, not campaign). Gears of War...Bioshock (well it is an exclusive umong consoles which is what we are talking about), Blue Dragon...



ALL OF THEM SUCK, because I say so every 360 game sucks, and everyone should get a Wii and a PS3 because I am awesome and my word is law.


Did I not say that the Wii has some of this year's best games? Did I not praise Super Mario Galaxies or Metroid Prime 3? Did I not say that the future of the PS3 looks brighter with games like Metal Gear Solid 4 and the new FF games? Did I say my word was law or are you too ****ing sensitive to people actually teasing other people? Did I say I was awesome or does the fact that I disagree with the majority people on this board translate into your ****ing ignorant mind that I am being a troll?

Jesus, you are worse then a Catholic at a Gay Bar (which really means something considering the chances of that to be slim...so very slim...)



Just because YOU LIKE SOMETHING DOES NOT MEAN OTHERS WILL NOT CHOOSE TO LIKE OTHER THINGS.


Just because I TYPE IN ALL CAPS DOESN'T MEAN I'M NOT TOTALLY COOL AND THAT I AM SUPER SMOOTH WITH ALL OF THE LADIES.

Protip: caps lock are not the highway to awesome. And you are no vigilante...

And did I once say that others can not choose to like other things? Did I say this once? Does the fact that someone actually has different opinions from others and stands behind those opinions make him a bad person? You don't see me bashing others and calling them arrogant because they stick behind their belief that the 360 is a mediocre console. So learn what the **** you are talking about before you press that button right under the tab and start spouting off your righteous rants.



My word is law and therefore the 360 sucks.

Stop trying to act as if your opinion is fact, because I like to fight forest fires with nuclear explosives.


And one last time...please...chill the **** out dude. I did not once present my ideas as fact I simple stand behind them. Maybe I am not the ideal picture of a person who simple agrees with others when he is an argument or discussion. Maybe for some reason you think that me and the other people on this site are trying to insult and bash one another. So far you are the only person who has risen up in this conversation who has acted like an arrogant ****ing ******* of a powertripping (false sense of power may I add) internet zealot.

So maybe the internetz are not for you sir. Maybe you can't handle opinions outside your own without thinking someone is trying to force them upon you...

[Felizginato12]

Meh, that's why I (well, my brothers- it's nice to have siblings with expendable cash) also have a 360. Call of Duty is great- great multiplayer, and a storyine that kicks so much ass, just because it's willing to kill off heroes I mean, you die in a nuclear explosion for god's sake


Ah but don't forget the cinematic quality. It was simply amazing from start to finish.



Or something we play while waiting for the next Mario/Zelda/Metroid game? Or any of the several other franchises that Nintendo has built up and that have sustained it over the years? Nintendo is far and away the best first-party developer, full stop.


Agreed...really I am thinking about getting a Wii...I just don't want to wait forever for some classic first party games.



..:smallsigh:... March 9th, my friend, March 9th. Super Smash Brothers Brawl. The single greatest multiplayer game known to mankind, complete with Snake, Sonic, and (my personal favorite), Pikachu:smallbiggrin:. That game alone is worth the cost of a Wii. The Smash Bros dojo seems to indicate that online play will be pretty easy- there's apparantly a "play anyone" button. And out of curiosity, apart from First Person Shooters and RTSs (on PCs, I think), what other games do people really play online?


I do agree with this. I always thought that if the Gcube had online just for Mario Kart Double Dash it would be able to rival with XBL. I still think that Nintendo has some franchises that are just so fun and unique that they would blow any 360 game out of the water (if they would be realesed).




Zelda, Metroid, Mario, No More Heroes, Paper Mario, WarioWare, Wii Sports. We're getting Force Unleashed, Rock Band, and there are numerous others out there if you want to find them (Call of Duty 3 wasn't bad, Trauma Center's apparently good, etc.) Not to mention full backwards compatibility with the Gamecube (Rogue Squadron II, Melee, Windwaker, Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door, Sunshine, Metroid Prime 1 and 2, ect. Admittedly the GC is fairly weak) and an online library from the greatest games developer in history (Mario in all his incarnations, StarFox 64, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong, Mario Kart, Sonic, etc.) Yeah, I think I just disproved your point.


Yeah I meant the PS3.



And we're not asking you to. We're just asking that you recognize that plenty of people have fun on the Wii, and that it has a good library of quality games.


But I have. I have stated that the Wii is plenty of fun and combined with the Gcube games has some really great titles. I just don't think the Wii has truely met the potential it could yet (or even come close to reaching it).



And on a side note, the only way they could improve the Wii is if Nintendo finally announces that, yes, the sequel to Tales of Symphonia WILL in fact be released in America. (Dammit, it's my favorite game ever, Nintendo. You're killing me here!)


And if there is a sequal to tales I will definately have a Wii come that time. I love that game...so much fun.

[Albub]

I don't like it when you fight guys.
Just agree that the 360 is good but buggy, with all of it's
"good" games (in actuality 90% of the good 360 games are rather average, like halo and mass effect) being available for PC or straight up falling short of the mark. The PS3 is wasting its potential, big time, but its future looks brighter. The wii is doing everything it should be, and will far exceed the other consoles in terms of success, even if it doesn't sit as dearly in the hearts of some hardcore gamers as the other consoles.

[Raroy]

I believe that the reason people are getting hostile is that you said some things in an aggressive manner and now your apologizing in a way that makes it still a problem. You say some things in an extreme then you move over to the middle when someone comments on it. Your beliefs are not consistent and all you do on the forum is cause problems. I do believe you are a troll because you always get on other people case. I remember you made comments equivalent to "Lol thats stupid" on another thread. You might want to start with respect first and not angry apologizing second.

[Woot Spitum]

I must be a retard to pay five bucks for hours of fun online playing the best that videogames has to offer in multiplayer.I find that position debateable. I don't think the XBOX 360 has the best multiplayer, as once you get past the first-person shooters, there isn't much I see worth getting. Here is a list of shooters I prefer to Halo, listed in no particular order:

Unreal Tournament, Unreal Tournament 2004, Counterstrike, Day of Defeat, Half-Life, Half-Life 2, Medal of Honor:Frontline, Wolfenstein:Enemy Territory, Team Fortress Classic, Team Fortress 2, Doom, Doom 2, Final Doom, Dark Forces, Jedi Knight, Jedi Knight 2(Outcast), Goldeneye 007, Perfect Dark, Quake 3 Arena, Turok:Dinosaur Hunter, Turok 2:Seeds of Evil, Delta Force, Timespitters 2, Timesplitters 3, Battlefield 1942, Star Wars Battlefront.

As you can see, I have plenty of choices when it comes to first-person shooters. Therefore, why should I buy a 360? A 360 is not going to get me Smash Brothers, Mariokart, Wii Sports, Warioware, Warhammer 40,000:Dawn of War, Age of Empires 3, Starcraft 2, or Civilization.

I want a platform with some variety, not one that is going to crank out shooters with an RPG or two thrown in.

If quality trumps quantity, why is Microsoft determined to crank out shooters at such a breakneck pace? I also don't believe that this is a sustainable long-term strategy either, as flooding the market with one genre of games will diminish the profits of individual games.

So if this isn't a landslide in favor of the 360 because of units sold, or system stability(red rings of doom), or going with a few quality games over mass quantities, or long-term strategy, then what is left in favor of calling the console wars a landslide in favor of Microsoft?

[JabberwockySupafly]

Again...

I already said that Microsoft needs more good RPGs. I'm not impressed with the White Knights games but the Square Enix ones coming out do make me a bit jealous. Also, I read a few months back a preview in game informer that the two FF games would be released on the 360. I don't know how true that is now but I think it could go either way since they already released FF online for the 360.


It's untrue. Squeenix stated it's a PS3 exclusive and the 360 won't be getting any Final Fantasy titles beyond XI, at least, none that they have decided on yet.



Rumours surfaced over the internet regarding the possibility of Final Fantasy XIII making an appearance on the Xbox 360. However, on June 5, 2007 Shinji Hashimoto disclosed information to Japanese company Nikkei BP that they are not currently planning on releasing any Final Fantasy titles on the Xbox 360, aside from the Final Fantasy XI MMORPG that is already out on the 360. Hashimoto stated that while Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: The Crystal Bearers is currently in production for the Wii, plans to develop a Final Fantasy title for the 360 are currently "a blank page".






OH WOWZ MEDIOCRE ONLINE PLAY FO FREE CUZ I DON'T HAZ 5 BUCKKKS A MONTH?!?!?!



OH WOWZ I DON'T HAVE A MORTGAGE TO PAY SO I CAN AFFORD 5 BUX A MO?!?!?!?!?... Seriously, you need to get out and actually meet real people and realise not all of us can afford even the little things. Especially here in Australia. For one thing, it costs about 15 a month for XBL. And with your average home mortgage being 350K, every penny helps. So before you open your massive, gaping, disease-ridden maw about something, think.



And I am talking about a systems original content not old content. If that was the case I would deem the Wii the better console for downloadable classics, PS3 a close runner up for great Playstation games and 360 last for including only the best of the Xbox games in it's compatability list.


Again, a lot of the above is purely your opinion. I loved Castlevania: Curse of Darkness & Buffy: The Vampire Slayer for the original Xbox. Neither of them worked on the 360 when I had it. A lot of the games that were backwards compatible didn't work correctly anyways. They could have fixed those things, I don't know, but when I had one, there were a lot of games I considered "best" that weren't on the list. Also, Tekken: Dark Ressurection Online is one of the most addictive things in the world.




Also, I don't really see the Blu-Ray as the greatest console addition ever made. I barely know anyone with Blu-Ray or a PS3 at that matter. Also, even if Blu-Ray beats out HD I will still be using DVD for the next for years. Sorry, but paying extra for a movie that looks more realistic isn't that appealing. Hell, I would still be watching VHS if the DVD did not include chapter selection...

Never said it was the greatest console addition ever. Just thought it's nice to be able to upscale my old DVDs and watch high quality Blu-Ray without spending an extra 150 AUD on top of the original console cost.



And FF7 was overated fanboy so deal with it. (Give me FF8 or 9 instead).


And...where exactly did I say I was a huge fan of FF7? This right here was a massive assumption on your part. I was merely mentioning FF7 because a lot of people on this board consider it a great game. I consider it mediocre, as I did 8 & 9. The last Final Fantasy I really enjoyed was 6, as can be evidenced in real life by the sculpture of Cefka Palooza I have on my computer desk. So again, remember when I flamed you above about thinking before you open your massive, gaping, disease-ridden maw? Yeah, same applies here.






Umm...who the hell plays Mario Strikers? Sounds as about as fun as Mario and Sonic at the olympics (oh wait...).


A lot of people do, judging from the generally high-population of online games going on.



And Pokemon Battle Revolution? I suppose that would be fun if you liked the same rehashed battles over and over and over...

You obviously don't play Pokemon, or at least not against other people, and for that reason I'm not going to go into too great of lengths trying to explain this. Let me put it this way: Playing Pokemon against other, real people is about as varied and technical as playing something like Magic: The Gathering, or any variety of competitive games. Skill levels vary greatly between opponents, and so do the pokemon. over 450 to choose from, and thousands of skills? Yeah, they're going to be so very little difference from fight to fight, eh? (Psst.. that was sarcasm.)



Maybe Microsoft just doesn't like Australia.

On the other hand I can see that maybe Australia still has infected 360's in their supply because sales (i'm guessing) are not as strong as American 360 sales.

Yeah, Microsoft must hate us, you know, because they only contracted the Australian branch of 2K to create Bioshock for them. 360 sales are strong here as well, but the fact of the matter is there are a lot of defective consoles out there. I get people coming in for the 4th, or 5th replacement console all the time.




And no good games to play...

Again, opinion. I like a lot of the PS3 games out there. I think Heavenly Sword is fantastic, for instance. See, a lot of the attributes you are stating for pros and cons are purely opinion, and won't work. I simply put my post in as a bit of response to let you understand how you sounded regarding ravenous fanboyism.

I'm not actually a huge fan of the PS3, 360, or Wii. Like I said in my original post, if I had to choose a "console" system, it would be my PSP. Otherwise I'm way more of a PC guy than anything else. Planescape: Torment firmly cements that in for me.

Yes, I got rude in this post, but that was simply in response to you being blatantly ignorant towards me. I apologise to anyone else who may be offended by what I say. I get a bit on the scathing side when people make assumptions about things, for instance that we all have huge bottomless wallets with which to purchase things, and simply mentioning a game makes you a rabid fanboy of it.

"Do unto others" and all that rot.

[Alex Kidd]

*points at Felziz* Aww look at the little troll. He's so cute with his strawmen, flaming, condescension and insulting apologies.

Seriously guys don't feed the trolls. We all know console fanboys are just bitter pubertal teenage boys whose parents won't buy them the other consoles.

[Setra]

*points at Felziz* Aww look at the little troll. He's so cute with his strawmen, flaming, condescension and insulting apologies.

Seriously guys don't feed the trolls. We all know console fanboys are just bitter pubertal teenage boys whose parents won't buy them the other consoles.
Hey, just because I am a PS3 fanboy doesn't mean that.

I respect other consoles until someone bashes another console (Regardless of console being bashed) then bash their console (even the PS3).

Mostly because I hate the console war.

Not all fanboys are bad, some just give us a bad reputation.

[Felizginato12]

I believe that the reason people are getting hostile is that you said some things in an aggressive manner and now your apologizing in a way that makes it still a problem. You say some things in an extreme then you move over to the middle when someone comments on it. Your beliefs are not consistent and all you do on the forum is cause problems. I do believe you are a troll because you always get on other people case. I remember you made comments equivalent to "Lol thats stupid" on another thread. You might want to start with respect first and not angry apologizing second.

Not in an aggressive manner but I do look to take things to the extremes. Either that or I enjoy making jokes about other consoles (and I could do the same for the 360).

And I do not make apologies I just realize when i'm either A) proven wrong. B) Someone has made a good point. or C) If someone misunderstood something I said.

I don't ever remembering making a "lol thats stupid" comment and if I did I was most likely either joking around or speaking in a satrical sense. I do it with my friends as well. Someone may suggest something and then I go "LOLZ THATS STUPID OMG" (pronouncing the lol and omg as real words).

Also, I am not a trol if what I say makes people made. If I try to make people mad then feel free to call me a troll. If I ever seem like I am insulting someone then please (for the most part) do not take it that way. If I say something like fanboy or if I say something when I obviously have no reason or proof to back up what i'm saying i'm just joking. Yes my sense of humor is a bit...how can I say this...a bit centered around "teasing" (but to a more extreme).

And why should I respect anyone here? I do not dislike anyone here nor do I love anyone here. Yeah, plenty of people on here are cool but I don't even know them. I don't respect the people here because I really do not know them...I understand that it is polite to not go online starting a thread and tossing F yous and other insults around but I have not done that. I just think some people on here take it too seriously. There are other people who flat out disagree with me (like Tom Violence) but manage to not get worked up over my comments.

[Felizginato12]

It's untrue. Squeenix stated it's a PS3 exclusive and the 360 won't be getting any Final Fantasy titles beyond XI, at least, none that they have decided on yet.


Okay thanks for clearing that up for me. Good thing Sony can keep hold of FF.






OH WOWZ I DON'T HAVE A MORTGAGE TO PAY SO I CAN AFFORD 5 BUX A MO?!?!?!?!?... Seriously, you need to get out and actually meet real people and realise not all of us can afford even the little things. Especially here in Australia. For one thing, it costs about 15 a month for XBL. And with your average home mortgage being 350K, every penny helps. So before you open your massive, gaping, disease-ridden maw about something, think.


Jesus, 15 bucks...I can see why you don't play XBL. I wouldn't either if it was 15$.

Disease-ridden? Christ dude sounds like you must know me pretty well to make such a statement...don't get so serious it is an online conversation about videogames. And wouldn't you feel bad if I actually had oral herpes?



Again, a lot of the above is purely your opinion. I loved Castlevania: Curse of Darkness & Buffy: The Vampire Slayer for the original Xbox. Neither of them worked on the 360 when I had it. A lot of the games that were backwards compatible didn't work correctly anyways. They could have fixed those things, I don't know, but when I had one, there were a lot of games I considered "best" that weren't on the list. Also, Tekken: Dark Ressurection Online is one of the most addictive things in the world.


Again, I have stated that they are my opinions so if you cannot understand that then go ahead sir alert the mods to drag me away.



Never said it was the greatest console addition ever. Just thought it's nice to be able to upscale my old DVDs and watch high quality Blu-Ray without spending an extra 150 AUD on top of the original console cost.


Didn't say that you thought it was the greatest console addition ever. Once again just settle down and don't take what I say too seriously.



And...where exactly did I say I was a huge fan of FF7? This right here was a massive assumption on your part. I was merely mentioning FF7 because a lot of people on this board consider it a great game. I consider it mediocre, as I did 8 & 9. The last Final Fantasy I really enjoyed was 6, as can be evidenced in real life by the sculpture of Cefka Palooza I have on my computer desk. So again, remember when I flamed you above about thinking before you open your massive, gaping, disease-ridden maw? Yeah, same applies here.


lol you must be the most insecure person I know on the interwebz...dude I was teasing you. Settle down and lay off the steroids.

And I have never played number 6. Is it really that great? I heard it was fairly good.






A lot of people do, judging from the generally high-population of online games going on.


lol...Mario passes to Luigi...Luigi passes to Bowser...Bowser passes it to...Mario...passes it to...Bowser....OH GOD HE JUST KICKED THE BALL AND IT TURNED INTO A FIRE BALL!



You obviously don't play Pokemon, or at least not against other people, and for that reason I'm not going to go into too great of lengths trying to explain this. Let me put it this way: Playing Pokemon against other, real people is about as varied and technical as playing something like Magic: The Gathering, or any variety of competitive games. Skill levels vary greatly between opponents, and so do the pokemon. over 450 to choose from, and thousands of skills? Yeah, they're going to be so very little difference from fight to fight, eh? (Psst.. that was sarcasm.)


Great multiplayer does not generaly make up for a crappy single player experience. This being the reason I do not enjoy Halo 3 as much as I hoped...Campaign wasn't bad but it wasn't great.

And of course I play Pokemon. Red,Blue,Gold,Silver,Stadium,Stadium 2, Saphire, Ruby, Green, Diamond, Pearl, hell I even tried Colloseum (spl?).

I just dislike console pokemon games in general. I don't know...the experience doesn't translate well to the console.



Yeah, Microsoft must hate us, you know, because they only contracted the Australian branch of 2K to create Bioshock for them. 360 sales are strong here as well, but the fact of the matter is there are a lot of defective consoles out there. I get people coming in for the 4th, or 5th replacement console all the time.


...wow...do you...do you not experience teasing or jokes enough to take it as such?



Again, opinion. I like a lot of the PS3 games out there. I think Heavenly Sword is fantastic, for instance. See, a lot of the attributes you are stating for pros and cons are purely opinion, and won't work. I simply put my post in as a bit of response to let you understand how you sounded regarding ravenous fanboyism.


Opinion...how many times have I typed that word thus far on this thread?



I'm not actually a huge fan of the PS3, 360, or Wii. Like I said in my original post, if I had to choose a "console" system, it would be my PSP. Otherwise I'm way more of a PC guy than anything else. Planescape: Torment firmly cements that in for me.


They why enter a conversation about the console wars?



Yes, I got rude in this post, but that was simply in response to you being blatantly ignorant towards me. I apologise to anyone else who may be offended by what I say. I get a bit on the scathing side when people make assumptions about things, for instance that we all have huge bottomless wallets with which to purchase things, and simply mentioning a game makes you a rabid fanboy of it.

"Do unto others" and all that rot.

I suppose that fanboy comment just ruined your life or something...I apologize for it...I didn't know you were so offended by being called a fanboy...

And yes you did get rude in this post...makes me...sorta...angry...OFFENDED EVEN!...

I SWEAR TO GOD IF YOU OPEN YOUR DISEASE, HERPY INFECTED, BLEEDING, PUS FILLED, MAW AGAIN IMA GONNA RIP IT OFF AND USE IT AS AN ASHTRAY AS I SMOKE A WHOLE CARTON OF CIGS YOU MUTHER ****ING ****** YOU DISEASE SPAWNED FROM HELL YOU SCUM OF THE STREETS I HATE YOUUU!!!!!!!!!!....

(pssstt...sarcasm).

[Felizginato12]

*points at Felziz* Aww look at the little troll. He's so cute with his strawmen, flaming, condescension and insulting apologies.

Seriously guys don't feed the trolls. We all know console fanboys are just bitter pubertal teenage boys whose parents won't buy them the other consoles.

Why would my parents buy me a 360 over a Wii? The Wii is cheaper...so I must have asked for a 360.

And if everyone (or at least 50%) of the people on here are really a bunch of insecure persons I might as well be a troll just because my opinions and teasing send people into a maelstrom of angry fits and pounding on the keyboard.

Go hunt trolls elsewhere Kidd...really...join Gaia.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

If I may put in my two cents?

In my opinion, it is irrelevant which of the newest consols are winning the battle... I'd never play any of 'em, even if you gave 'em to me for free

Wii ... no thanks, I'd rather not look like a complete moron while trying to play my game... and rather not risk destroying random things in the room if the controller slips out of my hand. Good idea, decent system, but implimentation stinks on dry ice. You'd have figured they'd have learned their lesson from the Power Glove flop...

PS3 ... Blu Ray is going the way of Beta... i.e. dying before it truely gains life. In other words, you paid waaaaaay too much money for a piece of garbage. Your best bet is to purchase every blu ray movie that came out... all what, dozen at most of them? Because they will almost certainly give you more entertainment value than, say, actually playing games written for it. Meanwhile, try and find some after-market accessory that'll keep it from overheating and catching on fire, and try to find a fix for the CPU that, while powerful, is cludgy and wired wrong.

X-Box 360... ahh yes, I save the worst for last. To promote the X-Box 360, he took PC games and made them for the X-Box 360 FIRST, as an attempt to get people to get the 360 so they can play them six months before everyone else with a halfway decent computer can. Thus, those who favor the 360 can try to claim 'they aren't PC ports because they came out for the 360 first'. It still doesn't change the fact that they were originally intended for the PC and got slated for the 360 first. Red Ring of Death aside (that being the Blue Screen of Death v 2.0), perhaps it has escaped you that it has a Software Operating System. Yes, it runs on a stripped down version of XP, with a different GUI. That means viruses that work on your PC might work on your 360 (depending on which security vulnerabilities they exploit and what portions of the OS they attack). I can't wait for some jerk to realize this, hook their 360 up to their Router, download a virus for the 360, and transmit it throughout x-box Live. Oh yes, I almost forgot, desipte the fact that it has the most powerful CPU, because of their cludgy OS, it actually has LESS effective computing power, because half the damn CPU is taken up dealing with the Bill Gates brand OS.

Of the three consols, the only one I might even consider getting is the Wii, and that ONLY for the ability to grab all the old titles I played on my NES so many years ago and play them again. Assuming I won't have to use the dipstick controller... if someone gave it to me for free... I guess. The other two... I'd probably either refuse it entirely, or throw it away.

[Felizginato12]

I find that position debateable. I don't think the XBOX 360 has the best multiplayer, as once you get past the first-person shooters, there isn't much I see worth getting. Here is a list of shooters I prefer to Halo, listed in no particular order:

Unreal Tournament, Unreal Tournament 2004, Counterstrike, Day of Defeat, Half-Life, Half-Life 2, Medal of Honor:Frontline, Wolfenstein:Enemy Territory, Team Fortress Classic, Team Fortress 2, Doom, Doom 2, Final Doom, Dark Forces, Jedi Knight, Jedi Knight 2(Outcast), Goldeneye 007, Perfect Dark, Quake 3 Arena, Turok:Dinosaur Hunter, Turok 2:Seeds of Evil, Delta Force, Timespitters 2, Timesplitters 3, Battlefield 1942, Star Wars Battlefront.


Oh how I love Timesplitters...

Anyways...if I could just name off any year old games and say a console sucks because of not having them I wouldn't be playing any next gen consoles. I understand that many of those FPS up there are better then Halo but again, this is a next gen conversation.



As you can see, I have plenty of choices when it comes to first-person shooters. Therefore, why should I buy a 360? A 360 is not going to get me Smash Brothers, Mariokart, Wii Sports, Warioware, Warhammer 40,000:Dawn of War, Age of Empires 3, Starcraft 2, or Civilization.


Actually the 360 is getting a new Civ game and I can't wait.



I want a platform with some variety, not one that is going to crank out shooters with an RPG or two thrown in.

If quality trumps quantity, why is Microsoft determined to crank out shooters at such a breakneck pace? I also don't believe that this is a sustainable long-term strategy either, as flooding the market with one genre of games will diminish the profits of individual games.

So if this isn't a landslide in favor of the 360 because of units sold, or system stability(red rings of doom), or going with a few quality games over mass quantities, or long-term strategy, then what is left in favor of calling the console wars a landslide in favor of Microsoft?

The 360 has plenty of variety...if you don't like shooters and some RPGS go buy the 3rd party games for the 360.

And I just hope that Microsoft doesn't burn out all of it's good games too soon.

And I already stated I am basing this off mostly of quality. And I would rather have a console with Bioshock then a console with a bunch of gimmick games flooding its ranks of good games.

But I think the long term strategy (if I understand it is to release blockbusters far apart to boost sales when the console is down) won't work too well or it is just very risky...the Gamecube is a great example...I sold that damn thing because Twilight Princess got pushed back a few years.

[Felizginato12]

If I may put in my two cents?

In my opinion, it is irrelevant which of the newest consols are winning the battle... I'd never play any of 'em, even if you gave 'em to me for free


Why? Why enter a conversation about next gen consoles if you hate next gen consoles?



X-Box 360... ahh yes, I save the worst for last. To promote the X-Box 360, he took PC games and made them for the X-Box 360 FIRST, as an attempt to get people to get the 360 so they can play them six months before everyone else with a halfway decent computer can. Thus, those who favor the 360 can try to claim 'they aren't PC ports because they came out for the 360 first'. It still doesn't change the fact that they were originally intended for the PC and got slated for the 360 first. Red Ring of Death aside (that being the Blue Screen of Death v 2.0), perhaps it has escaped you that it has a Software Operating System. Yes, it runs on a stripped down version of XP, with a different GUI. That means viruses that work on your PC might work on your 360 (depending on which security vulnerabilities they exploit and what portions of the OS they attack). I can't wait for some jerk to realize this, hook their 360 up to their Router, download a virus for the 360, and transmit it throughout x-box Live. Oh yes, I almost forgot, desipte the fact that it has the most powerful CPU, because of their cludgy OS, it actually has LESS effective computing power, because half the damn CPU is taken up dealing with the Bill Gates brand OS.


Last time I checked Halo 3, Oblivion, Mass Effect, CoD 4, Blue Dragon, Enchanted Arms, and all of the other games I mentioned are not PC ports.

And I can't consider Bioshock a PC port if it was released simotaneously (spl?) on the 360. And when was it stated that Halo 3 or Oblivion was to be a PC game first? Why release the first two Halos on the console and decide the PC would be the best place for the next one? Maybe someone realized that was a dumb idea and released it on the 36o itself.

And if someone finds out how to transfer viruses to the 360 I believe there will be (if not already) a good defense against it. They already handled the original methods of cheating on the Xbox (and those who got around it were swiftly banned) but if a virus does hit the online market and it is not stoped then I will surely (and rightfuly) change my alliance with the 360.

[Tom_Violence]

And why should I respect anyone here? I do not dislike anyone here nor do I love anyone here. Yeah, plenty of people on here are cool but I don't even know them. I don't respect the people here because I really do not know them...I understand that it is polite to not go online starting a thread and tossing F yous and other insults around but I have not done that. I just think some people on here take it too seriously. There are other people who flat out disagree with me (like Tom Violence) but manage to not get worked up over my comments.

You should respect people out of simple common courtesy, and if you can't manage that then you shouldn't be allowed to communicate with people. That applies over the internet as much as it does in real life. That's not saying that you have to like people or anything like that, but you ought out to show respect for them just as you'd expect them to show respect for you. 'Discussions' that are mostly full of people insulting each other and not listening to anyone else's point of view are pointless.

Also, I think you need to realise that how things may sound to you in your head are not always how these things are going to be understood by others, especially over the internet where people have only the text to go on. You write in a very antagonist way, so don't be surprised when people think you're insulting them. Also, you throw around words like 'fanboy' and 'lol' and the like an awful lot, which are generally the hallmarks of the immature, and such people are often prone to throwing their toys out of the pram, so to speak. So once again, tidy up your language use and people will doubtless have a lot fewer problems with you.

[Raroy]

Tom violence has explained what I meant. Also, your sense of humor is very bad. It's not funny if your the only one laughing. In fact, it's sadistic and not a very good way to get people to like you. Crap like that is what made me tell people I hoped they die horrible painful deaths and got me kicked out of school. You may want to stop with the antagonism and just say what you mean.

[JabberwockySupafly]

Just to clarify something:


I'm not actually that upset. Usually while I am typing this, I'm doing it in between fights on Brave Story: New Traveller (great classic RPG for the PSP, btw, if anyone hasn't played it. good fun!), so I'm not even giving this my full attention. As I have explained in both of my posts, I simply post in the same manner you do, to make you understand how you sound like such a ravenous fanboy. Trying to do a bit of a mirror effect, is all.

I don't know you enough to care about you, thus I don't know you enough to like or dislike you. I just find such blind fanboyism to be a bit of an irritant.

If people can't just sit back and enjoy whatever they want to enjoy whether it be in video games, books (except Eragon. People who read Eragon need therapy...this was a joke as well), or even religion, then all is lost in the world.

So, basically, to sum it all up, as I said in my original post, it was done to basically make the 360 sound like it was just a huge, terrible failure and would eventually fall apart at the seams. It hasn't, and it won't. I simply did it to try and make you see how much of a rabid fanboy you sounded. Apparently it didn't work, and I shall know better from the experience.

As I said, I will be getting a new one once all the bugs are worked out, and I can afford it. Which means months of saving up, or trying to ninja it on to the credit card without the other half finding out. Which is highly unlikely because she watches that thing like an Orwellian Government.

[Malic]

And again, I do see the 360's shortcomings but I just can't see any reason to choose a different console over it when i'm having so much fun playing CoD 4 for hours or replaying Bioshock over and over because the world and story is just amazing.

You know they're both on the computer aswell. That means you can't say that they rule for the Xbox0r. Just throwing that out there since the 360 has no console exclusive games. (Except for Halo but it will be for the Pc in a couple months...)

[Krade]

The best console wars rundown EVAR!!! (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/zeropunctuation/1383-Zero-Punctuation-Console-Rundown)

This whole site is pure force-fed awesome. I humbly and forcefully suggest that EVERYONE visits it every wednesday for updates. It hasn't been around very long, so there's not much of an archive, but due to it's aforementioned awesomeness, I'm sure it will be around for quite some time.

[Malic]

The best console wars rundown EVAR!!! (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/zeropunctuation/1383-Zero-Punctuation-Console-Rundown)

This whole site is pure force-fed awesome. I humbly and forcefully suggest that EVERYONE visits it every wednesday for updates. It hasn't been around very long, so there's not much of an archive, but due to it's aforementioned awesomeness, I'm sure it will be around for quite some time.

Wow...You arn't kidding.

[JabberwockySupafly]

Zero Punctuation = Instant Win.

[Felizginato12]

Okay let me just post this to clear plenty of things up.

First off I apologize for offending anyone with my sense of humor. I myself realize that it can be...a bit rude or offensive (but I really wouldn't say sadistic). Yes, I do like teasing others and I can see a few instances on here where I went beyond teasing and I would like to say sorry.

Also, I otherwise wouldn't care but people think that since I used the word fanboy and the term lol a bit that i'm immature in a way. I doubt that people would say this unless they knew I was infact 15. I don't really see how the word fanboy makes me immature but I know that lol is a stupid term to use but it's a lot quicker to type that then *laugh* or something like that.

Also, my idea of respect is probably not the "respect each other" kind of term. When I hear respect I think of the kind that you give to someone who has been through something tramatic or who has done something to help you. So when I say I don't think I shouldn't respect someone I don't mean that I disregard their opinions (because there are plenty of good points made in this thread) but that I don't care if I offend them or if they take something the wrong way. I'm not going out of my way to make people mad but then again I don't care so much if I do. And so far I think alot of people have been taking things the wrong way...

Except on the LARP thread...I mean c'mon...has anyone looked up a LARP video on Youtube? It's ****ing hilarious seeing that stuff...

But back on topic.

I know my title is misleading and I mean to say that I think the landslide is a total combination of quality, future, price, and sales. And this is a thread about consoles not PCs so stop bringing them up. And those who say that Halo is the only original 360 game they obviously have never heard of Mass Effect, Enchanted Arms, Condemmed, Blue Dragon, and others. And even if these games are to be ported to a PC this is a conversation about consoles. We are comparing A console to B console so leave the PCs out of this.

And i'm not a ravid 360 fan for defending my point on different fronts. I do find some flaws in the 360 and below I will show my summary of what I believe every console has going for it.

Wii: I believe the Wii can be a lot of fun. It has some great first party games and the controls can be very ingenious. The downloadable classics is just a great bonus which I believe give the Wii the best online market. However, I think the Wii has too many throw away games floating around and the system is greatly underpowered when compared to other consoles. Also, I see that Nintendo is trying to reach out to some shred of mature games but if they cannot incorporate the modern gamer into their target then they may start to loose popularity later down the line and suffer the fate of the Gcube in it's final days.

PS3: Honestly, I see the PS3 as a waste of good potential. Yes, the Blu-Ray is a nice touch I suppose and the online options show potential as well as the downloadable market. I just think that Sony is being lazy with it's games and taking too long to release any good ones. If they cannot hold onto their first party games (which they sem to be losing to Microsoft slowly but surely) and if they cannot crank out some blockbusters I see Sony falling behind in this console war. But I cannot deny the jealousy I will have when MGS4 or God of War 3 comes out.

360: I believe that the 360 is the better console out right now. Yes, the red ring was a major problem that has started to be fixed and the 360 also needs some more RPGs if they wanna capture that huge market. I do think that the 360 could also benefit from some more games for the casual or younger audience but the games that they have are just great. Bioshock, Halo 3, Mass Effect, CoD 4, Gears of War, Enchanted Arms, Blue Dragon, Oblivion and all of the other great games that they have coming in the future really fortify my trust in the console's quality. Also, the online play is just great. Whether you are a serious or casual gamer you can find fun in the mostly shooter batch of console exclusives that have online play and you can find fun in the other 3rd party games that the 360 have. I believe that the 360 really has a bright future and it's perks (HD player, Online, Marketplace, and all of the little stuff) are just fine. The only thing that I worry about is that they may have brought out all of the big guns too soon and the 360 may fall behind when the Wii and exspecially when the PS3 start getting steam later this year.

I still believe that some are taking my opinions much too seriously. When I back up something I like I tend to stick to what I believe in and point out every little fault in everything else. I wouldn't call myself a fanboy since I would love to have a Wii and maybe a PS3; i'm just not compelled yet to do so. The reason I keep dragging this on is either because people misunderstand what I have said or because they are simply taking this conversation too seriously.

and @Jabberwocky

I don't agree that your reflection of me would be wholly accurate. Maybe you were taking it to the extremes but eitherway I would like to just say that firstly I don't think i'm as much of a tyrant as people seem to make me. Yes, i'm a bit more committed to my opinion and I do get mad when people come in the conversation stating things that have already been said dozens of times. Also many people think I hate all other consoles which is not true. The Wii is fun and the PS3 could be great. But right now the 360 really catches that sort of balance between quality and quantity.

Secondly, I aplogize for offending the people here (for the most part). I will make sure to tone down my somewhat black humor for this board.

And lolz at the Eragon thing and I agree with you.

Anyways I am not trying to fully retake everything I said just make them a bit more clear.

[Malic]

And this is a thread about consoles not PCs so stop bringing them up. And those who say that Halo is the only original 360 game they obviously have never heard of Mass Effect, Enchanted Arms, Condemmed, Blue Dragon, and others. And even if these games are to be ported to a PC this is a conversation about consoles. We are comparing A console to B console so leave the PCs out of this.


Blarg. You have awakened me from my slumber-ish state. Consoles are just dumbed downed Pc's if you think of it. With better controls and free online play (or you can pay to play with Xbox 360 owner's) The future of gaming is the Pc's seeing as games are made with them them. Also almost everyone already has one. And we have things like steam...And did I mention superior graphics as well...also if you have a glitch and want a quick fix you don't have to boot up a pc and search it up seeing as your already on one :smalltongue:

On a side note I'll admit the Xbox 360 have a couple of games but not many that are really that good. Well the ones on your list anyway (don't know about Condmmed or Enchanted arms so exclude them from previous statement) Although I do like Halo for it's Machinima ability and thats about all...

[Rogue 7]

Ugh. I hate the controls on the PC. Not to mention, it's primarily a work and internet box for most people. Running games on the PC to that level costs more, gives significantly fewer opportunities for in-house multiplayer, and slows down the computer of anyone who doesn't use it for pure gaming. I saw a statistic somewhere that Guitar Hero alone outsold PC games- that seems inaccurate, so I wouldn't trust it, but I think the general idea that the PC is not the future of gaming is sound.

[JabberwockySupafly]

*snip*
Bioshock, Halo 3, Mass Effect, CoD 4, Gears of War, Enchanted Arms, Blue Dragon, Oblivion and all of the other great games that they have coming in the future really fortify my trust in the console's quality.

*snip*


Not trying to start up any more arguments, just wanted to let you know that both Enchanted Arms & Oblivion are available for PS3, and they do actually look (and I mean visually look) marginally better, otherwise they play exactly the same barring some marginally (less than a second in some instances) better loading times. One of the perks of working in a game store is you see a lot of "side-by-side" comparisons of games that come out on multiple platforms. Now, I must go. DMC4 comes out this Friday here in Oz and I have much salivating, wringing of the hands, and muttering "my precious" to do!

[Woot Spitum]

Oh how I love Timesplitters...

Anyways...if I could just name off any year old games and say a console sucks because of not having them I wouldn't be playing any next gen consoles. I understand that many of those FPS up there are better then Halo but again, this is a next gen conversation.I never said the 360 sucks. I just named a lot of enjoyable shooters I already own to illustrate the point that I don't really need any more shooters, and that without the shooters, the 360 (in my opinion) doesn't really stand out as a more attractive option than getting a Wii or PS3, or simply buying a current graphics card. And yes, Timesplitters owns.:belkar:


Actually the 360 is getting a new Civ game and I can't wait.

The 360 has plenty of variety...if you don't like shooters and some RPGS go buy the 3rd party games for the 360.

And I just hope that Microsoft doesn't burn out all of it's good games too soon.I have found plenty of quality PC games for a better price than even used 360 games. In the past year I have purchased Psychonauts, Beyond Good & Evil, The Bard's Tale, and The Baldur's Gate II Collection. Every single one of these games cost me less than ten dollars. True, I could have bought the first three for the XBOX, but then I would have had to buy an XBOX, and STILL paid more money for each. (On an unrelated, I HIGHLY reccomend Psychonauts. XBOX, PS2, PC, it doesn't matter what platform. It is one of the most hilarious and creative games I have ever played.)[/QUOTE]


And I already stated I am basing this off mostly of quality. And I would rather have a console with Bioshock then a console with a bunch of gimmick games flooding its ranks of good games.

But I think the long term strategy (if I understand it is to release blockbusters far apart to boost sales when the console is down) won't work too well or it is just very risky...the Gamecube is a great example...I sold that damn thing because Twilight Princess got pushed back a few years.I have heard that Bioshock is incredible. But I joined the boycott of Bioshock over the SecuRom fiasco, and I intend to see it through.

The Gamecube was killed by a lack of third party support. It lacked that support primarily because it just didn't sell enough systems. The Wii on the other hand, has been selling plenty of consoles, and developers will flock to any system that can do that.

[factotum]

I have found plenty of quality PC games for a better price than even used 360 games. In the past year I have purchased Psychonauts, Beyond Good & Evil, The Bard's Tale, and The Baldur's Gate II Collection. Every single one of these games cost me less than ten dollars.

Trouble is, if you're buying old cheap games, you're not buying the newly-developed offerings...and if you don't buy the newer games, where are the next generation of "old cheap games" coming from? Yes, it's nice to be able to buy and play older games on a PC, but ultimately you're not supporting the PC gaming industry as a whole by doing so.

[Malic]

Meh, I personoly don't see the controls worth while on consoles. I just can't stand not controling it 100% (The wii's to fidgety) That's for an Fps. Then you have strategy game that can't be fun unless you have hotkey's which you really can't on a console seeing as their arn't many buttons. Then there's the community.

We have modder's, scripter's, and mapper's. (Then 4 chan :smalleek: ...but they aren't that bad) That means we get custom content out the wazu. Some of its bad, some of it stinks, and then some of it owns the game it was modded from so much it acctually warrents you to buy the game if just to play the mod. Then you have actual custom game type's instead of just turning gravity down and increasing your speed...

Also auto-aim is for noobs :smalltongue:

[valadil]

Consoles are just dumbed downed Pc's if you think of it. With better controls and free online play (or you can pay to play with Xbox 360 owner's) The future of gaming is the Pc's seeing as games are made with them them. Also almost everyone already has one. And we have things like steam...And did I mention superior graphics as well...also if you have a glitch and want a quick fix you don't have to boot up a pc and search it up seeing as your already on one :smalltongue:


A lot of people like dumbed down. No really, having to memorize the specs for your computer is more than most people want to do, but you have to do that if you're going to buy PC games that run on your machine. It's even more complicated now that manufacturers put minimal, recommended, and sometimes optimum specs on the box. I've seen a lot of friends, including one with a Masters degree in CS, simply fail at buying games their computer can run. If my machine is in between minimal and recommended, I've been known to (when no demo is available) download a copy, just to see if the game will run before I make my purchase. This is not an issue with a console. Period.

It's just easier to know that that mysterious little fun box is a Wii or an Xbox or a PS3 and buy games accordingly. (Not to mention that it's easier for developers who know exactly what machine they're coding for.)

[Krade]

Meh, I personoly don't see the controls worth while on consoles. I just can't stand not controling it 100% (The wii's to fidgety) That's for an Fps. Then you have strategy game that can't be fun unless you have hotkey's which you really can't on a console seeing as their arn't many buttons. Then there's the community.

Here is the most valid point of PC superiority. The whole genre of RTS should be barred from consoles. The best controls I've ever encountered on a console strategy game was Alien vs. Predator, and that game was lackluster at best (and unless you are playing as the aliens, ridiculously hard).

[Woot Spitum]

Trouble is, if you're buying old cheap games, you're not buying the newly-developed offerings...and if you don't buy the newer games, where are the next generation of "old cheap games" coming from? Yes, it's nice to be able to buy and play older games on a PC, but ultimately you're not supporting the PC gaming industry as a whole by doing so.Well, I can't afford a new graphics card at the moment and GeForce FX 5300 can only handle so much. I would really like to get The Orange Box, Oblivion, and Jade Empire, but I don't have the money for it.

[Tom_Violence]

Just a couple of points here,


Also, I otherwise wouldn't care but people think that since I used the word fanboy and the term lol a bit that i'm immature in a way. I doubt that people would say this unless they knew I was infact 15. I don't really see how the word fanboy makes me immature but I know that lol is a stupid term to use but it's a lot quicker to type that then *laugh* or something like that.

The reason 'fanboy' is often seen as an immature term is because of the way it is generally used in arguments as a 'straw man'. More often than not it is used to refer to someone not as a simple fan, but as the 'foaming at the mouth obsessive' type. And that kind of arguing is just immature all round.

Also, you're on the internet. Its not a race. Type out your words because otherwise you're just giving off the impression that your posts weren't worth taking the time to write properly, so why should anyone bother reading them?


Also, my idea of respect is probably not the "respect each other" kind of term. When I hear respect I think of the kind that you give to someone who has been through something tramatic or who has done something to help you. So when I say I don't think I shouldn't respect someone I don't mean that I disregard their opinions (because there are plenty of good points made in this thread) but that I don't care if I offend them or if they take something the wrong way. I'm not going out of my way to make people mad but then again I don't care so much if I do. And so far I think alot of people have been taking things the wrong way...

This is something that you clearly need to work on. You should care if you offend people, and you should care if people take things the wrong way. The first because otherwise people aren't going to want to talk to you, and the second because even if they try and discuss things with you, they're going to have a lot of trouble working out what on earth you mean. Yes, people have taken a lot of things the wrong way here, but I think that's your fault and not their's, because you've been less than clear throughout.


the PC is not the future of gaming

This amuses me, since the vast majority of games are designed on PCs. So oddly enough the PC is the past, present and future of gaming, as without it you have nothing. This holds not just for the actual games themselves, but all the modding etc. that is done to them as well.

[Mando Knight]

Consoles are just dumbed downed Pc's if you think of it.

And PCs are dumbed down supercomputers, if you think about it... just, you know, expanding the argument...

What if we had the chance to run a game on this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_%28supercomputer%29) thing? Like, Crysis or something? (barring the fact that it runs Linux and would need a specialized port to make use of its architecture...) Now I want petabyte storage...

Anyways, Tom_Violence has a good point about the development of games... I wonder if it would be possible to get an emulator running on Windows such that it can read XBox 360 games?

[Rogue 7]

Once again, I am disappointed that this forum does not have a rolling eyes smiley. Everything is done on computers these days. Video games, obviously, are no exception. Computers are the future of everything, but that doesn't mean that we'll play games on them more than on consoles.

[Forthork]

A lot of people like dumbed down. No really, having to memorize the specs for your computer is more than most people want to do, but you have to do that if you're going to buy PC games that run on your machine.

Are consoles simpler? Yes. Do some people prefer simplicity? Yes. If you would like to game on your computer is it that hard to remember processor speed, graphics card's name, and amount of RAM? No. I understand your point, but for most people serious enough about gaming, this is not much of a problem. Consoles are great, but they are becoming more and more like PCs. This would be great, but this generation PCs are actually the same price or cheaper overall (trust me).

I could go on a PC superiority rant if I wanted to, but I don't feel like it and I'm sure nobody else does. But even though I think them superior, that doesn't mean consoles don't have there merit. Five minutes ago, I was playing Guitar Hero 3 on my Wii. I could do that on my computer, but I don't really want to. But I would much rather play Team Fortress 2 for free online, in 1440x900 resolution, with a mouse and keyboard, with mods, and with more than 15 other people online than play on a 360. The occasional shooter is nice, especially for local multiplayer/co-op, but I would prefer more "console-ish" games.

[Malic]

And PCs are dumbed down supercomputers, if you think about it... just, you know, expanding the argument...

In retrospectovision both run the same (OS aside). Except for the massive gap in computing power. And Crysis wouldn't look much better that it would on an 8800gt...come to think of it it wouldn't look like anything since Super computer's tend not to need Graphics Cards.

Also to the guy who said buying a new graphics card would be to expensive you can get one that lets you play Bioshock on high for around 40-50 bucks. Nividia makes some choice cards for not that much. :smallcool:

Mine's an 8400gs (25-30$) and I can play Orange box (Max settings on everything) and Oblivion (Max and Anti-Aliasing set to *4 without lag) Can't run Bioshock on high but it's great for Valve based games seeing as they're on really good terms with Nividia apperently.

[Tom_Violence]

Once again, I am disappointed that this forum does not have a rolling eyes smiley. Everything is done on computers these days. Video games, obviously, are no exception. Computers are the future of everything, but that doesn't mean that we'll play games on them more than on consoles.

You're not the only one. I, for example, would like to use such a thing when arguing that 'the future of gaming' is about more than just what platform most people play games on, but rather where the most significant progressive developments are made. It is so much more than just a simple popularity contest! I'd also use it when pointing out that, since everything comes from the PC, realising things on other platforms by definition waters them down somewhat, as no console software can do more than the device it was designed on. The PC is a wealth of technical possibilities - so much more than any console. No console has anything that cannot in principle be done on the PC, whereas the reverse is not true at all. Rolling eyes indeed.

[Daze]

Would just like to point out something interesting I just read in GamePro magazine...

Lost Odyssey which is the Xbox exclusive from Final Fantasy co-creator Hironobu Sakaguchi (incidently, this may be why people think FFXIII is coming to 360... it's not, you're thinking of Lost Odyssey) is coming out soon.

Just to point to one obvious and un-debatable advantage that Blu-Ray (and PS3) have over their competition.... Lost odyssey will come on FOUR (4!) DVD discs.

I mean seriously people. How can you mock Sony for including Blu-Ray as a base component in their system? They took the same BS criticism we're hearing now back when they made the PS2 a DVD drive instead of a CD drive. Just as now, it allowed developers to create bigger (and better) games.

In terms of Blu-Ray vs. standard DVD (or even HD-DVD), there's no contest in terms of what developers (and modders!) can do with their games. Lost Odyssey for instance, would fit on one Blu-ray PLUS have room left over for additional content.

So forget what Blu-Ray can do for movies... who cares if that never catches on (although it's gonna be nice to have LOTR special edition on one disc instead of taking up a whole shelf on it's own). Let's talk about what Blu-Ray can do for GAMES. Huge data files, additional levels, additional content... it's really a no-brainer.

And now that the PS3 development software is in the hands of all developers (granted they were a bit slow with that, hence XBox & Nintendo's big headstart), it's only a matter of time before we see the quality difference between the 2 systems become apparant.

My prediction... by 2009, developers will be cranking out top flight games for Sony's machine... while Microsoft is made to look very last-gen and average with theirs.

By 2010... Sony will once again be in the dominant market share position.

You heard it here first on GITP forums.

[Trazoi]

Just to point to one obvious and un-debatable advantage that Blu-Ray (and PS3) have over their competition.... Lost odyssey will come on FOUR (4!) DVD discs.

I mean seriously people. How can you mock Sony for including Blu-Ray as a base component in their system? They took the same BS criticism we're hearing now back when they made the PS2 a DVD drive instead of a CD drive. Just as now, it allowed developers to create bigger (and better) games.

In terms of Blu-Ray vs. standard DVD (or even HD-DVD), there's no contest in terms of what developers (and modders!) can do with their games. Lost Odyssey for instance, would fit on one Blu-ray PLUS have room left over for additional content.
Eh... I don't know anything about Lost Odyssey, but I'm not sure I buy into the whole "bigger is better" philosophy of game design. I'm old school enough to remember what games were like back in the nineties, back when games were either on carts or floppy disks. When CD-ROMs hit the scene, finally game developers could use 700MB on a CD, rather than force their games onto 1.44 MB diskettes or 8 MB SNES carts. You'd think game quality would go up dramatically, right?

Instead, what we initially got was the... (shudder)... "interactive movie". This was a warning code to expect a badly pixellated experience that barely qualified as interactive and a movie you wouldn't pay five quid to go see, let alone the fifty they were expecting (or $100 in my country). Blech.

Eventually game companies got back to their senses and started making games much like they did in old days, except now with voice acting or higher res textures, but I'm still wary of any game that touts the number of discs as a selling point. A single DVD can hold a massive amount of data, so if you really need four I'm not sure what they're putting on there.

(Caveat: I don't know anything about Lost Odyssey; for all I know it could be the best game of the decade. But I'm willing to bet that won't be purely for the amount of space it takes.)

[Drascin]

Eventually game companies got back to their senses and started making games much like they did in old days, except now with voice acting or higher res textures, but I'm still wary of any game that touts the number of discs as a selling point. A single DVD can hold a massive amount of data, so if you really need four I'm not sure what they're putting on there.

Graphics, mostly. The millions of polygons that current consoles can move take up a huge amount of space, so consoles will keep needing to go with the biggest capacity available if they want to become shinier and shinier :smalltongue: . This is why a sprite game that takes about 80 MB once everything is decompressed and a game that takes almost a full DVD can be the same length in extreme cases.

Of course, there have been exceptions. There have certainly been games that have taken advantage of the space primarily for content. But generally, just the sheer amount of stuff the game needs for the console to be able to render it is the major cause of space inflation. It's the same in computer games. I still remember when a game took 50 MB to install, and would last me for weeks... and now, every other game has space requirements of 4 Gigs at the very very least, and many of them are actually shorter. Hell, when I got this 500gb HD, I never thought I'd be actually able to fill it, and now I'm having to uninstall things to make room! :smallbiggrin:

[Daze]

Eh... I don't know anything about Lost Odyssey, but I'm not sure I buy into the whole "bigger is better" philosophy of game design. I'm old school enough to remember what games were like back in the nineties, back when games were either on carts or floppy disks. When CD-ROMs hit the scene, finally game developers could use 700MB on a CD, rather than force their games onto 1.44 MB diskettes or 8 MB SNES carts. You'd think game quality would go up dramatically, right?

Instead, what we initially got was the... (shudder)... "interactive movie". This was a warning code to expect a badly pixellated experience that barely qualified as interactive and a movie you wouldn't pay five quid to go see, let alone the fifty they were expecting (or $100 in my country). Blech.

Eventually game companies got back to their senses and started making games much like they did in old days, except now with voice acting or higher res textures, but I'm still wary of any game that touts the number of discs as a selling point. A single DVD can hold a massive amount of data, so if you really need four I'm not sure what they're putting on there.

(Caveat: I don't know anything about Lost Odyssey; for all I know it could be the best game of the decade. But I'm willing to bet that won't be purely for the amount of space it takes.)

I definitely see what your saying.
In fact, I'll go even more old school.... I remember when they had to load games onto 5.25 floppy discs! They were really the most atrocious media format ever created. As far as storage, they held less than a MB in most cases... 900 KB or so. And were also notorious for demagnetizing for no apparant reason.

However, there wasn't really a noticeable difference in gaming when the switch was made to the 3.5 "hard" floppy discs. Other than convenience.

I do remember the initial swath of games that came out when CD-ROM was introduced as the standard. I'm sorry if you felt ripped off by them, but the games I bought and played were noticeably better than their predecessors...
Day of the Tentacle and other Sierra games (KQ, SQ, QFG, LSL, etc..) were very good and noticeably better than their floppy counterparts. I'm old and struggling to remember other titles at the moment, but I dont recall my general impression was one of disappointment. Then again, our games didnt cost $100, geez where ya from?

Basically, I see your point about game developers falling into a trap of throwing flashy, piles of junk out there to make a quick buck. But I completely disagree with your contention that the size of the media is no big deal.
As Drascin mentioned in the post before mine, it's all about graphics and the rendering thereof. Every gamer (whether they admit it or not) is excited for the day when photo-realism becomes a reality in game development. Bigger media is an absolute must for that ever to happen.

As far as the "quality" (read:fun factor) of future (& present) games, that has less to do with the size of the media and more to do with the fact that the industry has become more and more homogenized and being clever in your design is no longer a profitable motive. That's where our concerns should lie.


The jump from DVD to Blue Ray is huge, not even comparable to previous upgrades (cept maybe jump to CD). Blu ray will only enhance what developers can do with games, we should be glad it's there. Better graphics, better integrated sound/music, bigger worlds. When I see the entire world of Tamriel on one disc, I'll know we arrived ;)

As far as Lost Odyssey.... I thought my mentioning of the FF guy would explain the type of game it is. It's basically a FF clone... heavily rendered 3D "art" graphics... extensive cutscenes. The usual JRPG stuff. (read: huge and over the top...) Wish it was on PS3 for my part, but oh well... we got FFXIII coming.

[Trazoi]

I do remember the initial swath of games that came out when CD-ROM was introduced as the standard. I'm sorry if you felt ripped off by them, but the games I bought and played were noticeably better than their predecessors...
Day of the Tentacle and other Sierra games (KQ, SQ, QFG, LSL, etc..) were very good and noticeably better than their floppy counterparts. I'm old and struggling to remember other titles at the moment, but I dont recall my general impression was one of disappointment. Then again, our games didnt cost $100, geez where ya from?
I'm from Australia, mate! :smallsmile: From memory I think I exaggerated a bit on the price; games in the early CD-ROM era were still at about A$80.

Day of the Tentacle was one of the good CD games, but it was essentially the same as the floppy version just with voice acting. But I remember there were a swathe of entirely forgettable FMV focused games clogging up the shelves for about three years, like Phantasmagoria from Sierra (I think that came out on seven CDs).


Every gamer (whether they admit it or not) is excited for the day when photo-realism becomes a reality in game development. Bigger media is an absolute must for that ever to happen.
I'm not particularly excited about photo-realistic games. I'm into abstract minimalism in art; that's why I'm here on the Order of the Stick forums! Technically, those "interactive movie" games were photo-realistic; they were after all based on real camera footage.

Part of why I'm concerned about multi-DVD games is that I find it difficult to imagine how someone could fill that up without including elements I either don't care or dislike. A double-sized DVD is 8.5 GB; that's a massive amount of space. To fill that up to bursting you're probably using a lot of cutscenes (movies take the most amount of space), and I'm not a big fan of movie cutscenes. They tend to jar from the look of the in-engine graphics and they don't involve any interactive participation from the player.

I'm more excited about advances in artificial intelligence, which is more dependent on processor ability. The big selling point for the PS3 for me is the Cell processor; seven cores could lead to some multiprocessor fun.

[Daze]

I'm from Australia, mate! :smallsmile: From memory I think I exaggerated a bit on the price; games in the early CD-ROM era were still at about A$80.
Well onya mate... glad to hear your opinions from down under :smallwink:



Day of the Tentacle was one of the good CD games, but it was essentially the same as the floppy version just with voice acting. But I remember there were a swathe of entirely forgettable FMV focused games clogging up the shelves for about three years, like Phantasmagoria from Sierra (I think that came out on seven CDs).
Oh man.. I remember Phantasmagoria... very disappointing, you're right. But overall I thought Sierra was a very good company... a bit underrated even.



I'm not particularly excited about photo-realistic games. I'm into abstract minimalism in art; that's why I'm here on the Order of the Stick forums! Technically, those "interactive movie" games were photo-realistic; they were after all based on real camera footage.

Heh, well thats why I like GITP too... just for my little self made stick guy *points left*.
And I know what you mean about minimalism in games. I'll take subpar graphics and great gameplay over the reverse any day of the week.
But still... when I say "photo-realistic gaming", I mean those movie cutscenes will actually be interactive and playable, ala the whole game is like "playing" a movie. While I'm not obsessed with graphics, I still think that will be hella cool.



Part of why I'm concerned about multi-DVD games is that I find it difficult to imagine how someone could fill that up without including elements I either don't care or dislike. A double-sized DVD is 8.5 GB; that's a massive amount of space. To fill that up to bursting you're probably using a lot of cutscenes (movies take the most amount of space), and I'm not a big fan of movie cutscenes. They tend to jar from the look of the in-engine graphics and they don't involve any interactive participation from the player.

Your right again. A lot of the current space used on DVD games is cutscenes and/or un-interactive movie segments. Personally it doesnt bother me that much. I think good gameplay and good cutscenes arent neccessarily mutually exclusive. I enjoy a good story and look forward to when I get involved with a deep narrative enhanced by "movie" segments. Always been a final fantasy style fan, and always will be I guess.
But again, the extra space does afford deeper gameplay, especially if you consider games like Oblivion which was pretty much cutscene free and had a big beautiful world to play in.



I'm more excited about advances in artificial intelligence, which is more dependent on processor ability. The big selling point for the PS3 for me is the Cell processor; seven cores could lead to some multiprocessor fun.

Another reason why I bought the PS3. The upside on the Cell is very high... in fact multi-threading is really another technology that will change the face of gaming, both for console and the PC. I currently run an AMD Dual-core on my rig and it's pretty awesome. Not as high MGhz granted, but that's overrated anyways... considering I can play FEAR, Far Cry or Oblivion at full frames, no drops with a virus scan running in the background. Between the increased space and threading possibilities, I really believe that PS3 will be home to the biggest & best games.

[Drascin]

As Drascin mentioned in the post before mine, it's all about graphics and the rendering thereof. Every gamer (whether they admit it or not) is excited for the day when photo-realism becomes a reality in game development. Bigger media is an absolute must for that ever to happen.

Ok, while I wasn't that convinced about some of your points, I could see them. But I had to contest this. Sorry man, but no way in hell. If we're talking graphic styles, give me cartoony over photorrealistic any day of the week :smalltongue:. In fact, every time we advance yet more towards photorrealism and cartoony, stylish graphics get more thrown in the dust, I feel heavy. Which is why I generally say "I don't like the focus on graphic advancing". By this, I mean, I really, really don't like the direction that advancing is taking - I feel that, if we're talking fantastic worlds, attempts at realism only hurt the game. But well, since I'm in the minority, I'll stay here with my Okamis and Wind Wakers and Mario Galaxies and not bother you peeps. Much :smallamused:

[Setra]

Ok, while I wasn't that convinced about some of your points, I could see them. But I had to contest this. Sorry man, but no way in hell. If we're talking graphic styles, give me cartoony over photorrealistic any day of the week :smalltongue:. In fact, every time we advance yet more towards photorrealism and cartoony, stylish graphics get more thrown in the dust, I feel heavy. Which is why I generally say "I don't like the focus on graphic advancing". By this, I mean, I really, really don't like the direction that advancing is taking - I feel that, if we're talking fantastic worlds, attempts at realism only hurt the game. But well, since I'm in the minority, I'll stay here with my Okamis and Wind Wakers and Mario Galaxies and not bother you peeps. Much :smallamused:
But even you must admit that Mario Galaxy looks much better than, say, Mario 64.

Graphics advances are nice.. the problem of course, is when they spend too much time on graphics. Like in Crysis.

[Drascin]

But even you must admit that Mario Galaxy looks much better than, say, Mario 64.

Graphics advances are nice.. the problem of course, is when they spend too much time on graphics. Like in Crysis.

Oh, of course. Graphics advancing is always nice if they go for definition and prettyness. What I was saying was mostly that I ws against trying to make games photorrealistic, as I personally dislike that style for pretty much anything except simulators and maybe shooters. And I play neither, so... :smallamused:

And of course, there's the concern of "if they spend so very much of their budget and time in the graphic part, just how much is left for development and testing?". Which is pretty much what happened in Crysis, yeah. No optimization, bugs out of the wazoo, and an overall not that impressive game, despite it having some good ideas (at least, that's what my friends say, and since they're the shooter fans, I trust their judgement in these things)

[Malic]

I think it's interesting how we focus on graphics but not engines. Did you know that in video game's your not swimming in simulated water. No your basicly swimming around in a wall that has certain things that happen when you do certain things to it. We don't have the proccessing power or the algorithms to simulate water yet. Can't wait till we do though :smallamused:

Also graphics make games easier on the eye's. Some might argue and say Doom rules but I'm sure with the ability of hindsight we mst likely all agree that it wasn't easy on the eye's.

Also I support Blu-ray for the extra space. Polygons need homes aswell :smalleek:

[ShneekeyTheLost]

The primary reason why I feel the 260 will eventually fall short of the predicted 'landslide'?

I don't want to have to pay for:

a) the privelage of getting online with it, when I have a perfectly servicable ISP already
b) additions to games I already own (DDR and Guitar Hero, I'm lookin' at YOU)
c) whatever else Bill Gates want to try and soak me for, charging me extra for things that should come included

[Felizginato12]

I think one of the main reasons people have problems with the PC is because of the costs to be able to play games without lag.

You take the average person with an average computer and it will take some money to buy new parts and have them installed. Most people just don't want to deal with messing with their computers so they tend to either spend less and buy a console or just buy a console for familiarity and for the fact that the consoles get alot of games the PCs don't get.

And on the control side I think people enjoy PCs because the aiming is done with a mouse so you can just place it on your enemy for accurate shots. With consoles PC people may find it annoying that its not as easy to line up shots.

[Daze]

I think one of the main reasons people have problems with the PC is because of the costs to be able to play games without lag.

You take the average person with an average computer and it will take some money to buy new parts and have them installed. Most people just don't want to deal with messing with their computers so they tend to either spend less and buy a console or just buy a console for familiarity and for the fact that the consoles get alot of games the PCs don't get.


Yeah, but the "average" person buying the average, junky dell is not worried about playing games for the most part... their child may be, but certainly not the buyer. Any PC gamer worth his/her salt is gonna make sure their rig can at least play most games.

And PC games may not be as plentiful, but they're consistently better. Particulary in the strategy, FPS & RPG genres.

[Setra]

I can build a Crysis (and therefore everything else) playing PC for about $400, presuming you already have a Hard Drive... who doesn't though?

Innit that like only slightly more than a normal 360 and even less than an Elite?