Consoles Good and bad

[Zerg_eater]

Okay...first things first. FAN BOYS ARE GETTING ANNOYING!!!! >.<

now I always try to explain to *cough*retarded* fanboys that every console has a good and bad, i mean YEAH wii has bad graphics and such...but still.

WII:
Goods: Nice interactive fun, Brawl, First person shooting taken to another level if done right, at least the console has more than 64 bits right?
bad: graphics....er...well, i guess a little better than the ps 2 but still...>_>, if not done right, motion sensors are Fkin annoying. Yeah that's right, Im talking to you...damn CoD 3, Wii batteries run out pretty fast, no HD, only like 4 games worth playing forever i think.


well, since my mom's home, i shall continue this...tomorrow, feel free to add more by posting in this thread

[ChimTheGrim21]

PS3 good: -FREE ONLINE
-PS2 controller now wireless, they call it a PS3 controller.
-Sleek design. Lexus of consoles.
-Blu-ray player is awesome.
-Great graphics
-built-in wireless (something 360 owners pay for)
-Easy to convince your parents with an HDTV to buy one as a Blu-ray player.
-Some good quality stuff on Playstation Network store (PSN)
-Folklore now $30, very very sweet.
Bad: -Not enough exclusive games thus far.
-Installing and long load times = lame as hell.
-Expensive games usually $60 (same for 360)
-Doesn't substitute for a girlfriend.

[WarInSerbia]

PS3 good: -FREE ONLINE
-PS2 controller now wireless, they call it a PS3 controller.
-Sleek design. Lexus of consoles.
-Blu-ray player is awesome.
-Great graphics
-built-in wireless (something 360 owners pay for)
-Easy to convince your parents with an HDTV to buy one as a Blu-ray player.
-Some good quality stuff on Playstation Network store (PSN)
-Folklore now $30, very very sweet.
Bad: -Not enough exclusive games thus far.
-Installing and long load times = lame as hell.
-Expensive games usually $60 (same for 360)
-Doesn't substitute for a girlfriend.
Agreed...

PC good:
-Customisable graphics.
-Easy to work with.
-Can open www.Warboards.org
-Can open ANY game.
Bad:
-Spamming in forums
-Time to open a game...

[GroG]

Console - Pros

Couch is comfortable, TV is big.
Controller easier on the hands and fingers these days.
Easier to snack while playing.
Ability to pause on non-multiplayer gaming so you can take a piss and/or grab food.
Much smaller load time than PC games, generally.
More social, friends can play with you in person.
Don't have to mess around with technical specs of your PC to see if you can or get PC to play your game.
Much less time wasted typing or chatting, more time focused on actually playing the game itself.Console - Cons

Wife wants to watch TV, so then I can't play.
Can't be used for much else, except watching DVD's/(PS3 - Blueray) or listening to CD's.
Console > PC, IMO.

[IrishDutchman]

More social, friends can play with you in person.

Definitely, that's the best one IMO. Nothing beats DOA with a couple of mates.

[ChimTheGrim21]

yea, being able to play with friends is the main selling point for me as well. It's sometimes a pain trying to set up a wireless network with a laptop just to play multiplayer PC games. Consoles usually don't have that problem when playing in-house split-screen.

[Nephi]

consols have rockband PC does not biggest factor right there :)

Although when i'm on my own i'd rather play my computer than my consols (ps3, wii, 360)

[Skullflower]

PS3 good: -FREE ONLINE
-PS2 controller now wireless, they call it a PS3 controller.
-Sleek design. Lexus of consoles.
-Blu-ray player is awesome.
-Great graphics
-built-in wireless (something 360 owners pay for)
-Easy to convince your parents with an HDTV to buy one as a Blu-ray player.
-Some good quality stuff on Playstation Network store (PSN)
-Folklore now $30, very very sweet.
Bad: -Not enough exclusive games thus far.
-Installing and long load times = lame as hell.
-Expensive games usually $60 (same for 360)
-Doesn't substitute for a girlfriend.

It's also a relatively cheap blu-ray player. Better to buy a PS3 than a standalone blu-ray player becuase they're $600 to $1000 except for the Sony blu-ray players which cost the same as a PS3. And the PS3 is supposed to play blu-ray better than most standalone blu-ray players.

[WarriorRapter]

yea, being able to play with friends is the main selling point for me as well. It's sometimes a pain trying to set up a wireless network with a laptop just to play multiplayer PC games. Consoles usually don't have that problem when playing in-house split-screen.

But, you also have to consider, not all your friends will live neaby you, and there will be some you'll have to link up with via wifi or direct cable connection. While I understand what you mean here, sometimes having a wifi system hooked up for when you want to play with long distance friends can be worth it. Not to mention almost all the consoles out today have a way of using the wifi, and the few games (ex. Chrome Hounds for Xbox360) require online connection for multiplayer.

[ZeroDarkStar]

PC good:
-Can open www.Warboards.org (http://www.Warboards.org)
-Can open ANY game.


YOU'RE TELLING ME I CAN PUT HALO 3 IN MY COMPUTER AND IT WILL WORK???

WHAT AM I WAITING FOR

[Neo]

Smartass.

Personally I feel the Wii and to a smaller degree the other two are moving to where consoles should be moving -- in a different direction from PC Gaming.

PC gaming is huge, and always will be. But the line between console vs pc has been and will continue to thin out (imagine in ten years when there aren't any consoles, just a computer that can do it all). However I couldn't imagine using, say, a wiimote to control a computer or vice-versa.

Also I'd vote the Wii as the best party console. Similar to the GCN.

-Neo

[ChimTheGrim21]

I would argue that besides Blizzard games, the Sims2, and maybe a few others out there, PC gaming isn't nearly as big as you think. The sales figures suggest that PC games aren't really doing that great anymore (market wise).

Sources to support my thinking
Epic--
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/03/02/epics-mark-rein-and-cliffyb-explain-pc-gaming-disarray/
EA--
http://www.allgamenews.com/feeds/rate.php?id=272507&val=1
Overall PC sales in 2007 only 14%--
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/01/28/pc-game-sales-only-14-of-industry-in-2007/

I am not suggesting that PC gaming isn't awesome, because it clearly is. I love my Blizz games, Heroes of Might and Magic, and Relic games, but to say "PC gaming will always be huge" might be an overstatement. I think saying "PC gaming will always be huge for Blizzard and a few others" is a smarter way to say it.

[deadkat]

The only reason there are even consoles out there is because not everyone has the $2000-$6000 for a high quality gaming PC that will run every game almost perfectly.

They don't want to deal with system specs, OS compatibility, drivers, all that crap that comes with making sure the game you paid $50 for works on your PC.

On a console, you stick your game disc in, and the game will work. Period. If it doesn't work, there's something faulty. No worries about whether you have powerful enough hardware, whether Windows Vista will screw it all up. Just pop it in and play. And all for less than $600.

The day when everyone can afford a high-end gaming PC that is fully compatible with all games is the day consoles die. And that day will probably never come.

[Frattimonde]

How's GameCube?

[SilverCrusader]

YOU'RE TELLING ME I CAN PUT HALO 3 IN MY COMPUTER AND IT WILL WORK???

WHAT AM I WAITING FOR
Yes, download a Xbox360 emulator, download the ROM for Halo 3, and enjoy. (It is illegal if you don't own the game).

Gamecube-
Pros:
Good Games
Cons:
Bad Graphics
Lack of online multiplayer
Lack of good FPS games (excluding metroid prime).
Outdated?

[Frattimonde]

Gamecube-
Pros:
Good Games
Cons:
Bad Graphics
Lack of online multiplayer
Lack of good FPS games (excluding metroid prime).
Outdated? Just wondering, but of course Wii can play GCC. Was thinking of getting a Wii mbe.

[Twitch6000]

PS3 good: -FREE ONLINE
-PS2 controller now wireless, they call it a PS3 controller.
-Sleek design. Lexus of consoles.
-Blu-ray player is awesome.
-Great graphics
-built-in wireless (something 360 owners pay for)
-Easy to convince your parents with an HDTV to buy one as a Blu-ray player.
-Some good quality stuff on Playstation Network store (PSN)
-Folklore now $30, very very sweet.
Bad: -Not enough exclusive games thus far.
-Installing and long load times = lame as hell.
-Expensive games usually $60 (same for 360)
-Doesn't substitute for a girlfriend.
Very good pros and cons except you missed the web browser and updates stuff.
Updates are usally monthly and make the ps3 even better.
There is a web browser on it that lets you surf the web :).
O yeah you can install and os on it aswell but,that's nothing major.

[Skullflower]

Yes, download a Xbox360 emulator, download the ROM for Halo 3, and enjoy. (It is illegal if you don't own the game).


You can also buy a wireless 360 controller for your PC.

[deadkat]

Yes, download a Xbox360 emulator, download the ROM for Halo 3, and enjoy. (It is illegal if you don't own the game).

There is no emulator for Xbox 360 right now, and by the time there is, no one will care.

There is, however, a Wii emulator, given to developers. And Nintendo makes sure that it will not be leaked.

Right now, the only fully working emulators are for the handheld systems, NDS, PSP, GBA. And they aren't nearly the same experience. I would rather be playing Starcraft.

So really, you can't circumvent buying the actual console.

For PC:

Good

-FPS/RTS: In my opinion, mouse control > analog stick control (not including NDS, stylus control is pretty manageable).
-Many people have at least a PC, not everyone has a console system.
-Large assortment of games (whether they're good or not, there's still a lot).
-Getting linked to the Internet (and other people) is easy.
-Having a full featured operating system and full keyboard allows for things besides gaming.
-A good laptop becomes a good mobile gaming platform.

Bad

-You have to worry about hardware specs, on consoles, pop in and go.
-Expensive. Very expensive.
-As said before, sitting on a couch with a few buddies creates fun beyond just the game.
-PC's contract viruses (Mac or not).
-Games on PC = less work done + more procrastination.
-PC needs more maintenance. <-my keyboard needs serious cleaning

[ChimTheGrim21]

Yes, download a Xbox360 emulator, download the ROM for Halo 3, and enjoy. (It is illegal if you don't own the game).

Gamecube-
Pros:
Good Games
Cons:
Bad Graphics
Lack of online multiplayer
Lack of good FPS games (excluding metroid prime).
Outdated?

I only owned a Gamecube in the last generation of consoles. I never got a PS2, even still (bummer for me).

I'll give my opinion on the little cube:

Pros-
-Great first party exclusives (Metroid Prime, Mario Sunshine, Mario Tennis, Pikmin 2, Super Smash Melee, Eternal Darkness, etc..)
-A few great 3rd party (Timed) exclusives (Resident Evil REmake, Zero, and 4 [also Tales of Symphonia, and a few other gems])
-Great controller design in my opinion.
-Gameboy player was cool to me
Cons-
-Not a sleek looking system
-Not enough 3rd party support
-With most 3rd party multi-platform titles, the Gamecube gets the worst version (a few exceptions are around like Prince of Persia: Sands of Time)
-Other than Resident Evil and Eternal Darkness, there isn't much M rated content.
-No online, but its not that big of a deal on the last generation of consoles (to me).


But yea, the Wii is like a much better Gamecube. The Wii at least looks sleek and has other games that it can play. The fact that the Wii plays Gamecube games makes it a definite buy for me sometime in a couple years since I have a crapload of Gamecube games.

[Vezer]

The day when everyone can afford a high-end gaming PC that is fully compatible with all games is the day consoles die. And that day will probably never come.

Unless you own an Xbox 360. Then you can count on it dying.

[Dayoh]

Xbox360 price 500~ bucks, halo3 100~bucks, Getting your RROD priceless

Thats how i feel about the Box Of Death, Before the WII was revealed to me it really looked like the consoles were transforming into PC's themselves, I dont know if this will happen Next Gen since the WII had the impact it had.

I just pray to god its not a motion sencing gen.

I never thought the NGC had shit graphics

[WarInSerbia]

THERE IS one for PS3...

[Skullflower]

Unless you own an Xbox 360. Then you can count on it dying.

Yeah, the RROD is awesome. Who wouldnt want a console that has a 20%-30% failure rate?

[ChimTheGrim21]

I use an R4 on my DS, and the thing is damn cool. I have A crapload of SNES games: ChronoTrigger, FF2, FF3, FFV, Breath of Fire, Homeworld, Super Metroid, etc...
On top of that, I have regular DS games (some of them Japanese only): Final Fantasy 3, Advance Wars DS, Mario & Luigi 2, Big Brain Academy, and Japanese Language teaching games.
This is all on one DS card mind you. It's fucking sweet. I don't feel bad about having this emulator seeing as I've spent thousands of dollars on video games in the past 4 years--hundreds on DS products.

Yeah, the RROD is awesome. Who wouldnt want a console that has a 20%-30% failure rate?
The failure rate is actually about 1 in 6, so a little under 20%, but yea that is a main reason I bought a PS3 over a 360.

[Skullflower]

So thats like a 16% failure rate. Industry average is 3%.

[ChimTheGrim21]

So thats like a 16% failure rate. Industry average is 3%.

Yes, I agree that 16% is simply ridiculous for an item that costs that much. That's why I didn't get a 360.

[kongurous]

You're acting like 16% is a lot or something.

[Neo]

I would argue that besides Blizzard games, the Sims2, and maybe a few others out there, PC gaming isn't nearly as big as you think. The sales figures suggest that PC games aren't really doing that great anymore (market wise).

Sources to support my thinking
Epic--
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/03/02/epics-mark-rein-and-cliffyb-explain-pc-gaming-disarray/
EA--
http://www.allgamenews.com/feeds/rate.php?id=272507&val=1
Overall PC sales in 2007 only 14%--
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/01/28/pc-game-sales-only-14-of-industry-in-2007/

I am not suggesting that PC gaming isn't awesome, because it clearly is. I love my Blizz games, Heroes of Might and Magic, and Relic games, but to say "PC gaming will always be huge" might be an overstatement. I think saying "PC gaming will always be huge for Blizzard and a few others" is a smarter way to say it.

Counterstrike?

Just because you don't play other games doesn't mean they don't exist. The most popular game on the planet is counterstrike (or variations thereof).

So saying something like "pc gaming isn't that huge" is a misnomer.

Also console fans usually end up paying more then computer gamers do in the long run. Ok sure, let's say you take 3000 now and build a decent gaming rig (doable no doubt -- even with 2k it's doable) even pickup a nice wide giant screen. Now on the face of that it looks like a massive amount of money compared to say a 360 or Wii or even a PS3.

However when you include things like games for the consoles (don't most average 50-60 still?) plus the fact that even the most popular console games consists of those wierd sports games, which if they were pc games, would've simply gotten a patch/update every year instead of having you purchase a brand new version that barely changes anything besides the team rosters.

Then you've got to tack on other charges -- Xbox Live, peripherals, etc...

Now you're still wondering "why the hell does Neo think console gamers pay more?" -- well a computer can be used for more then just gaming, and while a couple of the consoles are similar (360 streaming for instance) -- they simply aren't as versatile. A computer can allow you to game, browse, work, etc... all in one unit. I even, now, use my computer as a replacement for my TV because of Hulu and other services.

Pfft, who knows.

Also in your links there it even mentions that the results didn't factor in digital sales -- and how many people use Steam or other similar services?

Besides this, they've been saying for ages that "pc gaming is declining" or that "it's going to fall this year" -- as long as we have quality developers like Blizzard, and addictive games like WoW, and popular FPS games like CSS and others pc gaming won't be going anywhere.

Anyway... I use my PC as a console sometimes to ;)

-Neo

[Dayoh]

Well my 360 RROD'd like 3 months after purchase, they wouldnt repair it for free cause that specific RROD wasnt in the warrenty (sure it wasnt).

So i traded all my games and got a PS3, i had a voucher for a PS3 anyway.

THERE IS one for PS3...

Are you saying there is motion sencing for the PS3 or something else, make bigger posts this is practicly spam.
Everyone knows the PS3 "motion sencing" was only a last min addon after they saw the WII, we all know how Sony loves to copy ninty.

plus the fact that even the most popular console games consists of those wierd sports games, which if they were pc games, would've simply gotten a patch/update every year instead of having you purchase a brand new version that barely changes anything besides the team rosters.

There already is DLC for all the consoles, patches etc.

Then you've got to tack on other charges -- Xbox Live, peripherals, etc...

Live Silver is free, Gold is 70$ a month whereas WoW is 200 odd a month.

Ew WoW lol, I have to say tho the only reason why WoW is so big is because there is no real competition to that game.

[Skullflower]

However when you include things like games for the consoles (don't most average 50-60 still?) plus the fact that even the most popular console games consists of those wierd sports games, which if they were pc games, would've simply gotten a patch/update every year instead of having you purchase a brand new version that barely changes anything besides the team rosters.


They have patches for PS3/360 games. I mean, whenever players get traded they put out patches that update the rosters.

[ChimTheGrim21]

To Kongurous: 16% means that 1 out of every 6 people that buy a 360 is buying a system that will break in a relatively short time. 16% is 5 times more than the industry average of 3%. How can you say that a company wasting 5 times more supply on a product compared to their competitors is not a lot? Microsoft has already spent over $1 billion just fixing Xbox 360s for people (and thats not including the non-ring-of-death people whose console they refuse to fix).

Source for $1 billion figure:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/06/business/06soft.php

Counterstrike?

Just because you don't play other games doesn't mean they don't exist. The most popular game on the planet is counterstrike (or variations thereof).

So saying something like "pc gaming isn't that huge" is a misnomer.

Also console fans usually end up paying more then computer gamers do in the long run. Ok sure, let's say you take 3000 now and build a decent gaming rig (doable no doubt -- even with 2k it's doable) even pickup a nice wide giant screen. Now on the face of that it looks like a massive amount of money compared to say a 360 or Wii or even a PS3.

However when you include things like games for the consoles (don't most average 50-60 still?) plus the fact that even the most popular console games consists of those wierd sports games, which if they were pc games, would've simply gotten a patch/update every year instead of having you purchase a brand new version that barely changes anything besides the team rosters.

Then you've got to tack on other charges -- Xbox Live, peripherals, etc...

Now you're still wondering "why the hell does Neo think console gamers pay more?" -- well a computer can be used for more then just gaming, and while a couple of the consoles are similar (360 streaming for instance) -- they simply aren't as versatile. A computer can allow you to game, browse, work, etc... all in one unit. I even, now, use my computer as a replacement for my TV because of Hulu and other services.

Pfft, who knows.

Also in your links there it even mentions that the results didn't factor in digital sales -- and how many people use Steam or other similar services?

Besides this, they've been saying for ages that "pc gaming is declining" or that "it's going to fall this year" -- as long as we have quality developers like Blizzard, and addictive games like WoW, and popular FPS games like CSS and others pc gaming won't be going anywhere.

Anyway... I use my PC as a console sometimes to ;)

-Neo


If you look at what I said, I included Blizz games, Sims2, and "a few others" into my statement. The "few others" part is where CS fits into the scenario. So don't have a fit over it. I also said that I love PC games. I play them 20 times more than console games. I am just stating the obvious when you look at the articles and facts that are published on credible sites and magazines. Also, I must ask did you even look at the sources that I provided?

Also, the 17% figure that I talked about may not include steam and MMO subscriptions, but if you consider that many developers wont even make games on PC--Epic, EA, etc..--it shows that something isn't right with the platform when it comes to gaming. Yes, companies like Valve, Blizzard, and A FEW OTHERS will always do well on PC. But for the rest of the bunch, their games wont even get a chance on PC. Let me tell you some examples: Look at a game like Crysis. It is a big budget title, that didn't really meet the kind of sales that it would probably get on consoles. Just take a look at a game like "Sins of a Solar Empire." It is a well received game with great reviews, but the sales aren't going to match the reception by a long shot.

Notice that the only big new games being developed for PC are within strict genres like MMORPG, RTS, FPS, and Sims type games. I notice that you said something about consoles just having a lot of sports games. I think you really should look at the amount of games the PS2 had. It was a list of thousands. Surely, most of those were not sports games.

[Vhaeraun]

Everyone knows the PS3 "motion sencing" was only a last min addon after they saw the WII, we all know how Sony loves to copy ninty.
Sounds like a fanboy comment to me. Where's your proof that Sony wasn't working on something like that for months prior to announcement? Don't start spouting off about things you can't prove kthx.

Live Silver is free, Gold is 70$ a month whereas WoW is 200 odd a month.
200 odd a month? Where do you get that number?

Ew WoW lol, I have to say tho the only reason why WoW is so big is because there is no real competition to that game.
Guild Wars, Everquest, Final Fantasy XI. Others that I don't care to remember a name for.

Just because WoW is huge isn't because there's no real competition. Blizz gave the masses what they wanted, and it paid off.

[Neo]

There already is DLC for all the consoles, patches etc.

To bad that almost all of the more interesting downloaded content is something you've got to pay for.

Blizzard released Diablo II v 1.10 (or was it 1.11?) after like 6 or 7 years from the original release that included a totally revamped Hell mode, and the inclusion of the Pandemonium Tristram area where you can fight souped up versions of the three. Amoung other stuff.

That was free.

Tell me, how much are extra tracks, or other features for games with downloaded content?

And are you seriously telling me that EA would release a Patch for Football '08 in '09 when the rosters and stuff have changed -- FOR FREE? -- That is what I was getting at. Not technical patches.

Live Silver is free, Gold is 70$ a month whereas WoW is 200 odd a month.

I'm sorry, but where the hell did you pull that wow number from? Subscription to wow is $15 a month. And there are a multitude of ways to get free months (I've paid for maybe 2 months, but have been on wow since december)

and $70 a month? Holy fuck, you mean the same price that I pay for one game is what I'd have to pay every month to play online? And silver doesn't really count, since it doesn't actually let you play online.

EDIT: Actually XBox live costs $50 a year... not sure where he's pulling $70 a month.

Ew WoW lol, I have to say tho the only reason why WoW is so big is because there is no real competition to that game.

Again you show your ignorance with this statement. MMOs are huge, and there are many more out there then just WoW, as mentioned you've got the behemoth Everquest, FF11, even smaller ones like Ragnarok Online or Maple Story, then theres Guild Wars, etc...

Seriously. There's a lot more to pc gaming then just boxed sales.

They have patches for PS3/360 games. I mean, whenever players get traded they put out patches that update the rosters.

I felt I should reiterate that I'm not talking about small patches, moving a name here or there, or updating a graphic glitch. I'm talking about a really big patch that changes the game in a serious manner (ie: a free patch that updates Basketball '08 to an '09 version) -- and I'm also talking about free updates.

To Kongurous: 16% means that 1 out of every 6 people that buy a 360 is buying a system that will break in a relatively short time. 16% is 5 times more than the industry average of 3%. How can you say that a company wasting 5 times more supply on a product compared to their competitors is not a lot? Microsoft has already spent over $1 billion just fixing Xbox 360s for people (and thats not including the non-ring-of-death people whose console they refuse to fix).

Source for $1 billion figure:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/06/business/06soft.php
and? microsoft has a ton of money anyway, and while the 360s have a larger then average failure rate, that doesn't mean it's a bad system or anything.

If you look at what I said, I included Blizz games, Sims2, and "a few others" into my statement. The "few others" part is where CS fits into the scenario. So don't have a fit over it. I also said that I love PC games. I play them 20 times more than console games. I am just stating the obvious when you look at the articles and facts that are published on credible sites and magazines. Also, I must ask did you even look at the sources that I provided?

Yes, except for the video, since I didn't really get how that fit in. There are many more developers then just EA and Epic.

Also, the 17% figure that I talked about may not include steam and MMO subscriptions, but if you consider that many developers wont even make games on PC--Epic, EA, etc..--it shows that something isn't right with the platform when it comes to gaming.
No, it shows that the companies out for a quick buck (EA more then Epic I admit) aren't willing to develop for a platform that requires more then just a few months of work -- especially when they compare it to a group like Blizzard who not only release quality stuff, but do it for both Mac and Windows, and with a little tweaking works on linux.

I'd say that there are two typs of gaming companies, one focuses on consoles, and one on PCs. It doesn't really matter why, I suppose. But when you've got an incredible sea of console developers churning out lackluster titles just to get them out there (see: any game based on a movie from disney/pixar/etc....) then I don't that I'd say pc gaming pales in comparison.

Yes, companies like Valve, Blizzard, and A FEW OTHERS will always do well on PC.
A few others? You name two out of maye a couple dozen pc gaming companies and that's supposed to be it? Valve is behind the most popular game played and this is just an after thought?

But for the rest of the bunch, their games wont even get a chance on PC. Let me tell you some examples: Look at a game like Crysis. It is a big budget title, that didn't really meet the kind of sales that it would probably get on consoles.
That's because it wasn't fucking optimized. You can't release a game like Crysis that, at the day of release, ran well on maybe 10% of the target audiences computers (and maybe even less at full specs) and expect it to do well. Crysis was/is a cool game, but dammit, you can't expect to sell a game that to enjoy it you've got to seriously have a 4-5k computer system sitting in front of you.

Just take a look at a game like "Sins of a Solar Empire." It is a well received game with great reviews, but the sales aren't going to match the reception by a long shot.

In my experience, for both console and pc game "revies" is that they hardly reflect the sales. Of course they are going to hype up stuff an insane amount, but no amount of hype can make "Big Mouth Bass" type games a hit.

Notice that the only big new games being developed for PC are within strict genres like MMORPG, RTS, FPS, and Sims type games. I notice that you said something about consoles just having a lot of sports games. I think you really should look at the amount of games the PS2 had. It was a list of thousands. Surely, most of those were not sports games.
The most popular console games (in sales) are always the EA sport games. That's what I meant.

And the PS2 library was extensive, yes, but 90% of that was total crap.

And finally, gaming on the pc includes more then just mmo's, fps, rts, or sim games. Flight Simulator's come to mind, I suppose. Then we've got the popular Action/RPG games. But you act as if FPS/MMOs/RTS games are nothing, and that I should be more impressed that so many idgits play those stupid sport games.

For the record, I own an NES, SNES, Sega Genesis, GameboySP, PS2, as well as various emulators I use on my pc to replay old classics with a ps2 controller, not to mention occasionally having SSB fights with friends =P

I like consoles as much as the next person, but I just see them as exceedingly expensive. I remember the hype surrounding downloaded content, and then people having a meh reaction to the idea being you'd have to pay MORE to get this extra content.

It also raised concerns that console developers would spend more time on the extras, then they would the actual game. Sort of like a "take their $60 now and then every couple of days we suck $5 out of them!" mentality.

The PC will always be, in my eyes, the superior gaming platform. That isn't to say I don't enjoy the occasional wii brawl or whatever, it just means I'm a total geek and prefer my PC which can do more to a console.

-Neo

[SilverCrusader]

12 x $15 = $180
WoW even isn't 200 a year. Amazing. I'm astonished at that.
Does anything logical at all go on up in your head?
Besides, Xbox live only costs $50 a year [source (http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/memberships/subscriptioncards.htm)].
$50/12 = $4.17. <- Approximation, the real thing is $4.10 plus 2/3 of a cent.

[ZeroDarkStar]

Yes, download a Xbox360 emulator, download the ROM for Halo 3, and enjoy. (It is illegal if you don't own the game)

Oh really? I would LOVE to see you point me in the direction of a working one.


Good luck! Try not to waste TOO much time.

The fact is, the 360 is a pretty impressive piece of machinery, especially for the price. Regular PCs today just don't have the specs to be able to run Windows and a 360 emulator at the same time.

[WarriorRapter]

To bad that almost all of the more interesting downloaded content is something you've got to pay for.

Blizzard released Diablo II v 1.10 (or was it 1.11?) after like 6 or 7 years from the original release that included a totally revamped Hell mode, and the inclusion of the Pandemonium Tristram area where you can fight souped up versions of the three. Amoung other stuff.

That was free.

Tell me, how much are extra tracks, or other features for games with downloaded content?

And are you seriously telling me that EA would release a Patch for Football '08 in '09 when the rosters and stuff have changed -- FOR FREE? -- That is what I was getting at. Not technical patches.



I'm sorry, but where the hell did you pull that wow number from? Subscription to wow is $15 a month. And there are a multitude of ways to get free months (I've paid for maybe 2 months, but have been on wow since december)

and $70 a month? Holy fuck, you mean the same price that I pay for one game is what I'd have to pay every month to play online? And silver doesn't really count, since it doesn't actually let you play online.

EDIT: Actually XBox live costs $50 a year... not sure where he's pulling $70 a month.



Again you show your ignorance with this statement. MMOs are huge, and there are many more out there then just WoW, as mentioned you've got the behemoth Everquest, FF11, even smaller ones like Ragnarok Online or Maple Story, then theres Guild Wars, etc...

Seriously. There's a lot more to pc gaming then just boxed sales.



I felt I should reiterate that I'm not talking about small patches, moving a name here or there, or updating a graphic glitch. I'm talking about a really big patch that changes the game in a serious manner (ie: a free patch that updates Basketball '08 to an '09 version) -- and I'm also talking about free updates.


and? microsoft has a ton of money anyway, and while the 360s have a larger then average failure rate, that doesn't mean it's a bad system or anything.



Yes, except for the video, since I didn't really get how that fit in. There are many more developers then just EA and Epic.


No, it shows that the companies out for a quick buck (EA more then Epic I admit) aren't willing to develop for a platform that requires more then just a few months of work -- especially when they compare it to a group like Blizzard who not only release quality stuff, but do it for both Mac and Windows, and with a little tweaking works on linux.

I'd say that there are two typs of gaming companies, one focuses on consoles, and one on PCs. It doesn't really matter why, I suppose. But when you've got an incredible sea of console developers churning out lackluster titles just to get them out there (see: any game based on a movie from disney/pixar/etc....) then I don't that I'd say pc gaming pales in comparison.


A few others? You name two out of maye a couple dozen pc gaming companies and that's supposed to be it? Valve is behind the most popular game played and this is just an after thought?


That's because it wasn't fucking optimized. You can't release a game like Crysis that, at the day of release, ran well on maybe 10% of the target audiences computers (and maybe even less at full specs) and expect it to do well. Crysis was/is a cool game, but dammit, you can't expect to sell a game that to enjoy it you've got to seriously have a 4-5k computer system sitting in front of you.



In my experience, for both console and pc game "revies" is that they hardly reflect the sales. Of course they are going to hype up stuff an insane amount, but no amount of hype can make "Big Mouth Bass" type games a hit.


The most popular console games (in sales) are always the EA sport games. That's what I meant.

And the PS2 library was extensive, yes, but 90% of that was total crap.

And finally, gaming on the pc includes more then just mmo's, fps, rts, or sim games. Flight Simulator's come to mind, I suppose. Then we've got the popular Action/RPG games. But you act as if FPS/MMOs/RTS games are nothing, and that I should be more impressed that so many idgits play those stupid sport games.

For the record, I own an NES, SNES, Sega Genesis, GameboySP, PS2, as well as various emulators I use on my pc to replay old classics with a ps2 controller, not to mention occasionally having SSB fights with friends =P

I like consoles as much as the next person, but I just see them as exceedingly expensive. I remember the hype surrounding downloaded content, and then people having a meh reaction to the idea being you'd have to pay MORE to get this extra content.

It also raised concerns that console developers would spend more time on the extras, then they would the actual game. Sort of like a "take their $60 now and then every couple of days we suck $5 out of them!" mentality.

The PC will always be, in my eyes, the superior gaming platform. That isn't to say I don't enjoy the occasional wii brawl or whatever, it just means I'm a total geek and prefer my PC which can do more to a console.

-Neo

*claps* Remind me never to get on your bad side.

Anyway, the way you look at consoles might also depend on which ones you are used to. For example, I have known and played on Nintendo systems longer then I have anything else, so I may have a slight favoring for their systems when it comes to comparing. The PC I use mainly for online gaming, forums, etc. Besides, if you think about it, it wouldn't be the first time a few fans have disagreed with the game review sites. That's why I find, at the moment, comments about the games from other players of those games slightly more creditable.

And in all reality, there are good and bad about EVERY game system. Comparing the good and bad of one system to another is like trying to compare the games themselves; whether you want to or not, you'll eventually start a conflict between the fans of the two.

[Neo]

Just to be clear: I'm not anti-consoles, I love them as much as the next person =o

-Neo

[Dayoh]

To clear things up i made a typo on the Live prices, i was close on the WoW pricing.

Anyway, arent the upgrades for CoD4 on PS3 free :P

[Vezer]

The only reason I still buy nintendos is because I've played them all my life. Characters like Samus, Mario, Link, Fox, etc. (Pretty much the entire super smash lineup) I remember from when I was a kid.

I wasted countless days playing Link to the Past, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Starfox, Starfox 64, Super Mario, Super Mario 64, Super Smash Brothers, Super Smash Brothers Melee, Super Metroid, and Metroid Prime 1 + 2. Games like Metroid Prime 3, Super Mario Galaxy, and Super Smash Bros. Brawl are all the more fun because I have experience playing games with these characters for as long as I can remember.

I will continue to buy nintendos just to see more great sequals.

[pytum]

both consoles and pc are good, for me...

but i think consoles are better than pc gaming, because if you play on your pc, when the games become more advance you have to get more RAM, a better video card, maybe a fan (just in case)... and since games on pc are getting high specs from one day to another, i think its more expensive... and considering the damage to your eyes while playing in front of your monitor...

the good things about consoles are that there will be a period of time, of course while the console lives, that the gaming specs will be the same and every game developed for said console will run perfectly without buying something else (except for n64 and its expansion pack)

[DoctorZettabyte]

n64 and its expansion pack

Which just so happened to come with just about any game that needed it.

Consoles are snapshots of various levels of PC gaming at a particular point in time that get upgraded every five years. The Wii, for example, is older-PC casual games, while the PS3 can chew up Crysis right up there with the best PC's.
It depends on what you want, I guess. The Wii has a nouveau way of looking at gaming with low-end specs, the 360 is mid/upper range PC gaming (a la Orange Box), and the PS3 is the equivalent of quite a few high-end PC boxes out there today.
However, many PC's can still run games at a wide range of hardware setups, and depending on your OS, backwards compatibility is little to no hassle and is totally free and legal.
Take your pick. This is just another case of Windows vs. Mac vs. Linux vs. Solaris vs. Plan 9/Unix.

-DocTera

[ZeroDarkStar]

The Wii has a nouveau way of looking at gaming with low-end specs, the 360 is mid/upper range PC gaming (a la Orange Box), and the PS3 is the equivalent of quite a few high-end PC boxes out there today.

I'm sorry, the PS3 isn't even close. The GPU is a joke. And 90% of developers won't even go near the Cell...it just isn't developer friendly, which means developers have to work twice as hard to get half the results they would on Wii and 360. It's a completely new type of processor.

[kongurous]

while the PS3 can chew up Crysis right up there with the best PC's.

That's funny right there. Real funny.

[DoctorZettabyte]

while the PS3 can chew up Crysis right up there with the best PC's.

Hypothetically, of course. Assuming the architecture in Cell was worth a damn to game programmers and people actually bought the system.

-DocTera

[Neo]

To clear things up i made a typo on the Live prices, i was close on the WoW pricing.

Anyway, arent the upgrades for CoD4 on PS3 free :P

... how is $200 a month for wow "close" ??

and that's all you have to say?

I'm sorry, the PS3 isn't even close. The GPU is a joke. And 90% of developers won't even go near the Cell...it just isn't developer friendly, which means developers have to work twice as hard to get half the results they would on Wii and 360. It's a completely new type of processor.

Oh please. This is just nonsensical laziness on their part. "OH NOES ITS TO DIFFICULT TO DEVELOP FOR"

The way you make it sound is NO ONE is touching the PS3 at all, which might've been try in the recent past, but is rapidly changing.

I think the problem is that most were just wary about developing for a console that, until more recently with the HDDVD dieing, people weren't that into.

-Neo

[ChimTheGrim21]

Playstation is going to regain the momentum it lost in the last year or two. The system is starting to look more attractive since more is going for it. The new games (both exclusive and multi-plat), the blu-ray player, and free online play are all going to help the system look more attractive. So I don't think anyone should say the PS3's cell is useless. Try to consider developers used to complain about how hard it was to develop for the PS2 back in 2000 and 2001.

[DoctorZettabyte]

Playstation is going to regain the momentum it lost in the last year or two.

If you'll notice, it never had any to speak of.

The system is starting to look more attractive since more is going for it. The new games (both exclusive and multi-plat), the blu-ray player, and free online play are all going to help the system look more attractive. So I don't think anyone should say the PS3's cell is useless.

I'm not seeing how all that relates in any possible way to the cell processor.

-DocTera

[Dayoh]

and that's all you have to say?

what do you want me to do, bow before you just cause you can mesmerise how much it is to play WoW for a year...

[ZeroDarkStar]

... how is $200 a month for wow "close" ??

and that's all you have to say?



Oh please. This is just nonsensical laziness on their part. "OH NOES ITS TO DIFFICULT TO DEVELOP FOR"

The way you make it sound is NO ONE is touching the PS3 at all, which might've been try in the recent past, but is rapidly changing.

I think the problem is that most were just wary about developing for a console that, until more recently with the HDDVD dieing, people weren't that into.

-Neo

No, Sony is well known for having lackluster software development tools and the complexities of the Cell do not help at all.

Basically what you've got in the Cell is 7 underpowered-starving-for-memory cores and one main one that has to share it's memory with the rest of them. It is not suited for tasks like rendering textures or anything like that. It's good for number crunching, or for decoding video.

Add to that the pathetic GPU and the Cell has to work that much harder to keep up.

Now don't get me wrong. I have nothing against the PS3. I like the games it DOES offer. I am not an Xbox or Wii fanboy, I am just amazed at how badly it was designed (IMO).

[ChimTheGrim21]

If you'll notice, it never had any to speak of.




The brand "Playstation" never had any momentum? I'm sorry did a train derail and crash into something? Oh yea, that was the PS2 transition to the PS3.

I'm not seeing how all that relates in any possible way to the cell processor.

-DocTera

Post # 43 by ZeroDarkStar: "I'm sorry, the PS3 isn't even close. The GPU is a joke. And 90% of developers won't even go near the Cell...it just isn't developer friendly, which means developers have to work twice as hard to get half the results they would on Wii and 360. It's a completely new type of processor."

My comment was a follow-up to imply that the PS3 will start selling more, thus creating a demand for developers to actually utilize the cell processor. Sorry if I thought some people actually read most the comments.

[WarriorRapter]

The brand "Playstation" never had any momentum? I'm sorry did a train derail and crash into something? Oh yea, that was the PS2 transition to the PS3.

I'm not quite sure on this, but I think he meant that Playstation didn't lose any momentum.

[Neo]

No, Sony is well known for having lackluster software development tools and the complexities of the Cell do not help at all.

Basically what you've got in the Cell is 7 underpowered-starving-for-memory cores and one main one that has to share it's memory with the rest of them. It is not suited for tasks like rendering textures or anything like that. It's good for number crunching, or for decoding video.

Add to that the pathetic GPU and the Cell has to work that much harder to keep up.

Now don't get me wrong. I have nothing against the PS3. I like the games it DOES offer. I am not an Xbox or Wii fanboy, I am just amazed at how badly it was designed (IMO).

As opposed to how awesome the 360 was designed? Or even the Wii? =P

what do you want me to do, bow before you just cause you can mesmerise how much it is to play WoW for a year...

Pfft. It's $180 a year, which is pittance compared to other forms of entertainment (ie: a cable tv subscription, or whatever).

-Neo

[Dayoh]

As opposed to how awesome the 360 was designed? Or even the Wii? =P

The 360 has really bad designs (console killing flaws), I think the WII was designed pretty good, unless theres something im missing, reminding everyone nintendo chose to use old tech in it.

[SilverCrusader]

Hehe, Just saying that there is a way. Or will be a way.

[DoctorZettabyte]

Playstation is going to regain the momentum it lost in the last year or two.
If you'll notice, it never had any to speak of.

Quote:
The system is starting to look more attractive since more is going for it. The new games (both exclusive and multi-plat), the blu-ray player, and free online play are all going to help the system look more attractive. So I don't think anyone should say the PS3's cell is useless.
I'm not seeing how all that relates in any possible way to the cell processor.
Sorry if I thought some people actually read most the comments.
I know, right? God forbid if we should actually quote someone -- nobody reads those.

My point is that the PS3 had very little, if any momentum against the other consoles. I'm also not seeing how free multiplayer, and a blu-ray player have anything to do with the cell processor. What's the use of it if it's too tough to develop for? Most games PS3 owners have been waiting for have been pusehd back time and time again, like MGS4, GTAIV, and even released ones, like UT3 was delayed for weeks after it launched for the PC.

-DocTera

[Neo]

actually, I really like the wii's physical design myself, especially the extra features that just make it that much nicer (built in wireless, gcn ports right there, as well as other nooks and flaps that reveal stuff you may not ever even use), but the flaw, imo, with the wii is the online play.

I won't get to much into it, but not having any sort of communication between players online is beyond stupid (regardless of nintendo's wish to keep the console "family friendly" chances are if you have an internet connection then you know how people are online and/or you might actually be interested in communicating with one another).

Secondly the actual setup of the online play (from my understanding it's more of a peer to peer system, with there being a central server) seems folly. If you are going to do a p2p setup, then either decentralize the system entirely, or beef up those central servers so that when one of the most popular game is released it doesn't fuck up.

Plus friend codes.

Really?

Couldn't just let people setup an account name?

random rant, sorry.

i've not had the chance to delve to much into any of the consoles to be fair (i AM a pc guy after all) but I'd say each has potential.

-Neo

[Dayoh]

Yes, i agree the WII online is lacking. Personnaly i dont have a problem with the Friend Codes all you have to do is input a number but they could have done a "Online Account" maybe use your MII, say if you want to add someone it emails that persons WII and they have to agree on it, i think thats a pretty "safe" way off adding people.

Also Picto Chat really could have been used on the WII :-/, anyway we will see what happens when "Pay To Play" is revealed.

[ChimTheGrim21]

My point is that the PS3 had very little, if any momentum against the other consoles.
If you look at the sentence that you quote, I said "playstation." I didn't say Playstation 3. Maybe I should have included the word "brand," or something. There are still a lot of PS2 owners who haven't bought a 360 or PS3 due to prices. So the market is still up for grabs in a lot of ways.

I know, right? God forbid if we should actually quote someone -- nobody reads those.

My point is that the PS3 had very little, if any momentum against the other consoles. I'm also not seeing how free multiplayer, and a blu-ray player have anything to do with the cell processor. What's the use of it if it's too tough to develop for? Most games PS3 owners have been waiting for have been pusehd back time and time again, like MGS4, GTAIV, and even released ones, like UT3 was delayed for weeks after it launched for the PC.

-DocTera

I am wondering; How can you not see that as the PS3 becomes more popular --due to features like blu-ray and free online-- that developers will start utilizing the processor in the system more efficiently?

Do you think that if the PS3 was more popular than the 360 by 2010, that people would be singing a different tune about the cell? Of course they would. Everyone would be saying, "Oh man, the Cell is awesome. GJ S0Nii!!" The cell will be effected by features that were included with the system, because those features differentiate the PS3 from the 360--which can drive sales.

[DoctorZettabyte]

I am wondering; How can you not see that as the PS3 becomes more popular --due to features like blu-ray and free online-- that developers will start utilizing the processor in the system more efficiently?

Do you think that if the PS3 was more popular than the 360 by 2010, that people would be singing a different tune about the cell? Of course they would. Everyone would be saying, "Oh man, the Cell is awesome. GJ S0Nii!!" The cell will be effected by features that were included with the system, because those features differentiate the PS3 from the 360--which can drive sales.

Developer will not use the cell processing system more efficiently because of built in features -- that's just nonsense. People will think of the PS3 as more popular "once there are games for it" -- the ubiquitous cover-up for poor development for the cell processor. With nothing to start generating popularity but delayed products and the dying glimmer of Resistance, the PS3 has a bleak future indeed.

Of course people will sing the praises about the PS3 processor once it's more popular than the 360, but no Sony-staple franchise has launched a worthy title on the PS3 yet. No Final Fantasy 13, no GTAIV, no MGS. Get back to me once Sony has a bullet to fire in the console wars -- not blank rounds that misfire every other time.

Also, we've been talking about the PS3 the whole time, outside of the big PC vs. Wii/360 schtick, believe it or not. If I may direct you back to post #2 (http://www.warboards.org/showpost.php?p=591482&postcount=2) and #47. (http://www.warboards.org/showpost.php?p=593750&postcount=47)

-DocTera

[Dayoh]

Do you think that if the PS3 was more popular than the 360 by 2010, that people would be singing a different tune about the cell? Of course they would.

I think the next gen will prolly be out then :P.


Quote:
My point is that the PS3 had very little, if any momentum against the other consoles.
If you look at the sentence that you quote, I said "playstation." I didn't say Playstation 3. Maybe I should have included the word "brand," or something. There are still a lot of PS2 owners who haven't bought a 360 or PS3 due to prices. So the market is still up for grabs in a lot of ways.


Playstation had took the world by stom with the PS1/2, the PS2 is still being developed for today.

The thing that sony did wrong with the PS3 is noone was really ready for the tech, not everyone has HDTV's, its the same with the dreamcast it was just so damn advanced noone was ready for it.
I bet if motion sensing was done by nintendo last gen with the gamecube it would not have worked.

A big thing that attracted me to the PS3 is the blu ray player, it is my media center but it is lacking "Grion grabbingly good" games.

Isnt the PS3 outselling the 360 now anyway? in some parts

[WarriorRapter]

The thing that sony did wrong with the PS3 is noone was really ready for the tech, not everyone has HDTV's, its the same with the dreamcast it was just so damn advanced noone was ready for it.
I bet if motion sensing was done by nintendo last gen with the gamecube it would not have worked.

That's one thing some people overlook sometimes. It's good to advance consoles with new tech, but keep the tech steps small. Let the players get use to a few of the new things, then add to it in the next gen of the consoles. Otherwise, the players could end up with more things they don't know how to work then things they do. I tend to compare it to trying to teach somebody to play a game they don't even know the buttons for, go to fast and they get lost and feel they know less about what they were doing then they did at the start.

[Neo]

just as a side note, square did say they would utilize the ps3 as much as they could and give us a really kickass new final fantasy, which thank god, brings back the free roaming airships <3

once we (consumers and competitors alike) see what a company such as square could do with a quality ps3 game and/or utilizing the higher end cell crap, hopefully we'll see developers jumping on board.

That or sony will just make it easier to develop stuff for the ps3 or something.

-Neo

[ChimTheGrim21]

Playstation had took the world by stom with the PS1/2, the PS2 is still being developed for today.

The thing that sony did wrong with the PS3 is noone was really ready for the tech, not everyone has HDTV's, its the same with the dreamcast it was just so damn advanced noone was ready for it.
I bet if motion sensing was done by nintendo last gen with the gamecube it would not have worked.

A big thing that attracted me to the PS3 is the blu ray player, it is my media center but it is lacking "Grion grabbingly good" games.

Isnt the PS3 outselling the 360 now anyway? in some parts

I actually thought about the same thing--wondering if Nintendo just came in at the right time with a cheap and innovative system. I'm sure their software power has something to do with it as well (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Smash Bros, etc...). The Wii does make some games more fun to play (others not so much).

I also wonder.. now that the Wii is more popular than the Gamecube ever was, does it mean that certain Gamecube games will become more valuable down the line? Maybe the Wii's backwards compatibility with cube games will cause Eternal Darkness and Resident Evil (REmake) and games of the like to become more rare (and more valuable).

[Twitch6000]

just as a side note, square did say they would utilize the ps3 as much as they could and give us a really kickass new final fantasy, which thank god, brings back the free roaming airships <3

once we (consumers and competitors alike) see what a company such as square could do with a quality ps3 game and/or utilizing the higher end cell crap, hopefully we'll see developers jumping on board.

That or sony will just make it easier to develop stuff for the ps3 or something.

-Neo
Don't for get about electronic arts :p.

[Dayoh]

I actually thought about the same thing--wondering if Nintendo just came in at the right time with a cheap and innovative system. I'm sure their software power has something to do with it as well (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Smash Bros, etc...). The Wii does make some games more fun to play (others not so much).

Yes i believe one of the big factors the WII is such a hit is runaway succes of the DS, i remember nintendo saying that the DS itself was a "trial" run for their next console (WII), they themselves were unsure of how much of a hit the DS and the WII turned out to be.

Nintendos biggest points are their franchise, noone can say anyone has any better ones, hell even there fuckin spin-offs sell shitloads and get good reviews (Mario Kart, Mario Party, Mario sport games, luigis mansion etc).

[ChimTheGrim21]

Yes i believe one of the big factors the WII is such a hit is runaway succes of the DS, i remember nintendo saying that the DS itself was a "trial" run for their next console (WII), they themselves were unsure of how much of a hit the DS and the WII turned out to be.

Nintendos biggest points are their franchise, noone can say anyone has any better ones, hell even there fuckin spin-offs sell shitloads and get good reviews (Mario Kart, Mario Party, Mario sport games, luigis mansion etc).

I really thought the Wii fit well for the Luigi's Mansion gameplay. I wish they would make a new one (I actually liked the game for its uniqueness).

[Twitch6000]

I really thought the Wii fit well for the Luigi's Mansion gameplay. I wish they would make a new one (I actually liked the game for its uniqueness).
Pshhh I like the super smash bros :).That is what hit the home run for the WII.Trust me it earned it.

[Neo]

Actually I'm looking forward to Mario Kart.

I like SSBB as much as the next guy, but I've always loved SMK, especially the GCN's double dash.

-Neo

[WarriorRapter]

As would be expected, I favored Pokemon Battle Revolution. :)

[Dayoh]

Actually I'm looking forward to Mario Kart.

I like SSBB as much as the next guy, but I've always loved SMK, especially the GCN's double dash.


I think MKWII will hold a better online experience (note i still havent got Brawl but from what i heard its pretty shallow online).


I really thought the Wii fit well for the Luigi's Mansion gameplay. I wish they would make a new one (I actually liked the game for its uniqueness).


Luigis mansion was the first GCN game i got, i loved it; i wouldnt mind seeing a sequel and another Starfox title :P

[ChimTheGrim21]

I never did play StarFox Assault, but StarFox 64 was awesome back in 1996--just awesome.

[Dayoh]

Assualt and the DS one are the only owns i havent owned at one stage, Starfox on Snes was my fav but lylatwars (starfox 64) was such an awesome jump

[xodkrm]

I really don't get the social thing people talk about
gaming is supposed to be done alone
if you want social turn off the tv and talk
go out for dinner with your friends and some bitches
thats social

but consoles are pretty good so are PC's
theres no point debating everything has a good and badside

[Rifleman223]

Wii -

Good:
1. Good for Families
2. Resident Evil 4 + 5
3. Extremely Fun with Super Smash Bros. Brawl.
Bad:
1. Not good with closed spaces.
2. No HD CABLES? WHAT THE HELL! (just had to add the what the hell)
3. takes forever to get used to the Wii Remotes.

Meh i perfer Xbox 360 and PS3 but, the WII is still worth it

Maybe we can rename it to MII?

[Dayoh]

No HD CABLES? WHAT THE HELL! (just had to add the what the hell)


We get componant cables i think that gives 720p (or maybe 500 something), but the WII is not a HD gaming machine. I really hoped it supported bigger resolutions since i have a tank tv :S

[ChimTheGrim21]

The Wii doesn't look too bad on a HDTV with component at 480p. That said, yea, 720p at least would've been nice since they profit off each system sold since launch.

[Neo]

honestly the talk about HD is such bs. those with hd tvs are still somewhat of a minority, how many of you currently who've played, own, or tested a 360, or ps3 at a friends or at home actually do so on an HDTV?

-Neo

[Dayoh]

honestly the talk about HD is such bs. those with hd tvs are still somewhat of a minority, how many of you currently who've played, own, or tested a 360, or ps3 at a friends or at home actually do so on an HDTV?


i own a HDTV (also a PS3, had a 360), 42" Plasma max output is 1080i (boo interlaced mode). Before you go "yer thats your parents" uuhh nah its not and its sitting in my room :)

A few of my friends parents have HDTVs, not everybody owns them but seriously mine was 1600 AUS, How can you not afford one?

[Neo]

i own a HDTV (also a PS3, had a 360), 42" Plasma max output is 1080i (boo interlaced mode). Before you go "yer thats your parents" uuhh nah its not and its sitting in my room :)

A few of my friends parents have HDTVs, not everybody owns them but seriously mine was 1600 AUS, How can you not afford one?

Do you pay rent? Utilities? Etc...?

Not all of us can afford to plop a couple thousand on an HDTV.

-Neo

[ChimTheGrim21]

Do you pay rent? Utilities? Etc...?

Not all of us can afford to plop a couple thousand on an HDTV.

-Neo
Agreed. By the time I graduate college and have a real job, I wont play games as much because I'll be too tired from work. Haaha. HDTVs have gone down reasonably in price, so by the time I have a real job in 2010 or 2011, then I can definitely buy my own.

Also, more proof Nintendo is pocketing most the Wii profits (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/04/24/nintendo-continues-cash-infusion-record-sales-and-profits-in-fy/).

[Dayoh]

Sure do champ.

[QUOTEAgreed. By the time I graduate college and have a real job, I wont play games as much because I'll be too tired from work.

I didnt buy it for games lol that would be silly, its mainly for movies etc. Also when i move out, Ill already have a great TV.

[Neo]

So where you live currently, you pay the full amount of rent, all the utilities, car insurance, cell phone bills, etc...?

You are missing the point here, not everyone even has the ability to save up that much money if they aren't making that much to begin with, especially when most of the money you DO make goes to gas money, and other base essentials.

-Neo

[Dayoh]

So where you live currently, you pay the full amount of rent, all the utilities, car insurance, cell phone bills, etc...?

You are missing the point here, not everyone even has the ability to save up that much money if they aren't making that much to begin with, especially when most of the money you DO make goes to gas money, and other base essentials.


Whats with the big bitching here, all i said was i own a HDTV (that took me awhile to save up for).

Also i live with my parents, i also pay for the following
-Rent close to full rent ($150)
-Money to keep a car going (gas/repairs etc)
-I also cook some of the meals a week/house work whatnot.
-I rarely use the house phone, as i have a mobile on a plan.
(there might be more but w/e)


So why is this thread questioning my personal life just cause you cant afford a HDTV? Maybe you should stop wasting money on games perhaps.

[Neo]

Whats with the big bitching here, all i said was i own a HDTV (that took me awhile to save up for).

Also i live with my parents, i also pay for the following
-Rent close to full rent ($150)
-Money to keep a car going (gas/repairs etc)
-I also cook some of the meals a week/house work whatnot.
-I rarely use the house phone, as i have a mobile on a plan.
(there might be more but w/e)


So why is this thread questioning my personal life just cause you cant afford a HDTV? Maybe you should stop wasting money on games perhaps.

Because you made the smartass comment that you had an HDTV after I claimed that not many people are going to have one at the moment.

FYI: $150 isn't the "full rent" just because you do pay some rent, doesn't mean it's the same as others who have to pay their way entirely.

You made it sound like it was totally easy to buy an HDTV, well yes, I'm sure it is easy when your parents are paying most of your expenses.

-Neo

[Dayoh]

FYI: $150 isn't the "full rent" just because you do pay some rent, doesn't mean it's the same as others who have to pay their way entirely.


I said close to full rent which is 200$, I dont see how i was being a smartass it is easy to get one; I also said it took me awhile to save.

EDIT: Im editing this too stop this stupid arguement, look seriously its going nowhere. I may have sounded like a smartass cause im actually proud of it, i worked hard for it. Also lets get back on topic :)

[Neo]

Dude, rent is like 800-1000 a month, and thats on the cheaper end of things.

You don't pay that every month.

That's all I was getting at.

-Neo

[Dayoh]

AHHH i see where i went wrong, i pay per week i should have specified it.
So i pay 600 per month, pretty close.

[Neo]

><!

That's just not fair!

curls into a small ball and starts whimpering

-Neo

[Twitch6000]

Also Neo,not to make you cry more but, rents down here vary a lot as well,yes some can be in the 1000's but, alot are only 500-800.

I myself have a hdtv from saving up.

Although I do not pay rent and such so I do not have a big argument.

Unless you want to count a lot of teens around here like to blow money and I'm smart enough not too.

[Neo]

Also Neo,not to make you cry more but, rents down here vary a lot as well,yes some can be in the 1000's but, alot are only 500-800.

I myself have a hdtv from saving up.

Although I do not pay rent and such so I do not have a big argument.

Unless you want to count a lot of teens around here like to blow money and I'm smart enough not too.

Well I'm just saying. It's not often that as a young person (in college or not) you'll have to ability to save up and purchase an HDTV, rent isn't the only thing you have to pay obviously.

Of course saving is possible, but very few people do. I know my mother doesn't, which aggravates me to no end, heh.

-Neo

[Rifleman223]

i got a 60" Plasma , it aint that hard, all i did was get money from my family and rent to buy from Rent a Center.

[ChimTheGrim21]

i got a 60" Plasma , it aint that hard, all i did was get money from my family and rent to buy from Rent a Center.

Rent-a-center!>?? *err* MUST NOT TROLLL!

Seriously man, rent-a-center or any kind of business like that really hurts you. You pay way more that way. Why not just keep good credit and use a credit card rather than pay weekly for an item and get way overcharged?

I'm trying my best not to be rude. I just want to say that I know people who use those types of services and they really aren't the brightest people out there in terms of finances.

[Dayoh]

Well I'm just saying. It's not often that as a young person (in college or not) you'll have to ability to save up and purchase an HDTV, rent isn't the only thing you have to pay obviously.

Of course saving is possible, but very few people do. I know my mother doesn't, which aggravates me to no end, heh.

I have a habit of saving pretty much all of my money. I go into town with friends about once or twice every two weeks, so its not like im just
"pissing" my money away (Which alot of young people like to do :))

If i wasnt at my parents house now, I dont think i would have a HDTV as soon as i do now.

[Neo]

My brother is no different I suppose. This is like the 5th time my mother's had to rescue his bank account from being overdrawn.

What pisses me off is that my brother has the nerve to then bitch at those of us around him as if it was our fault that he can't keep track of his money.

Personally I don't think he's mature enough to handle a bank account yet. I'd like to see him close it.

It doesn't help though that during one of his stupid airheaded moments that he got his wallet stolen and thus his old checking account can't be closed at all (which we all pretty much agree is fucking lame) and the bank can't do anything about it (you'd think they could note or tag the account as "stolen" or "comprimised" or something so that when a payment tries to come through, they just block it).

Oh well.

I try to save my money up, but at the moment I don't really have a steady income.

-Neo

[ChimTheGrim21]

I've never heard of a bank account that works like that neo. I would be yelling at someone at the bank, haha. I lost my wallet just 3 weeks ago and I know someone stole it and my cash. The bank got me all my stuff back from them, and I know I can close the account anytime. It seriously can't be legal to prevent you from closing a bank account so long as you can prove you're the person entitled to it.

[Neo]

yup. it's not that it's "illegal" it's just that if any charges come through on that account, it automatically gets reopened.

The problem is that if my brother was more with it, he could've gotten the account striken from his credit history, and therefore could literally ignore it. But until, or if, he does that, he has to take the time to goto the bank whenever anything fishy happens with it.

-Neo