My 2 Cents

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

11-26-2006, 03:55 AM
Busyman™

My 2 Cents

The Wii is an excellent party game system and I'd recommend if you have company over often.

It is great from young and old. The included Wii Sports is absolutely great.

It has built in Wifi so as long as there is an open access point, it is on the internet.

The 360 is great for the hardcore gamer. It has great games RIGHT NOW and has the best online of all the systems.

On Xbox Live you can see whatever anyone on your friend's list is doing, you can then chat, they can join in a game (like GOW), you get game demos automatically, and extra content for games you already own.

Right now the PS3's online plan looks shit and I don't see anyone being better than Xbox Live. With what you get for Live, it is well worth the $50 a year.

That's less than $5 a month.
11-26-2006, 04:41 AM
maebach

Re: My 2 Cents

thanks for the summary, I was gonn make a thread on that soon anyways.
11-26-2006, 02:54 PM
Busyman™

Re: My 2 Cents

Also in terms of best value on paper, the PS3 wins hands down.

Sony PS3 - $600

Blu-Ray Disc player
60 GB HD
wireless controller
Bluetooth
HDMI connector
CompactFlash, SD, and Memory Stick Duo slots

Xbox 360 Premium - $400

headset
20 GB HD
wireless controller
3 USB ports

The PS3 has

40 GB more HD pace
Has a multitude of card slots
Bluetooth
A HDMI connector
1 more USB port

Now if you spend $200 for a 360 HD-DVD player, you are now at the cost of a PS3 and without the things above.

The 360 does come with a headset
The HD-DVD player can work with a computer instead of a 360
Has the best online
Has the most next-gen games (many are quite good too)

Both systems have their backwards compatibility flubs.
The PS3 won't work with about 200 older games.
The 360 works with games that are made compatible (which really can be all of them).

Btw, Resistance: Fall Of Man is quite good. I wouldn't put it up there with GOW but it is good. It's not as pretty as GOW either.
11-26-2006, 03:10 PM
GepperRankins

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busyman™

Also in terms of best value on paper, the PS3 wins hands down.

Sony PS3 - $600

Blu-Ray Disc player
60 GB HD
wireless controller
Bluetooth
HDMI connector
CompactFlash, SD, and Memory Stick Duo slots

Xbox 360 Premium - $400

headset
20 GB HD
wireless controller
3 USB ports

The PS3 has

40 GB more HD pace
Has a multitude of card slots
Bluetooth
A HDMI connector
1 more USB port

Now if you spend $200 for a 360 HD-DVD player, you are now at the cost of a PS3 and without the things above.

The 360 does come with a headset
The HD-DVD player can work with a computer instead of a 360
Has the best online
Has the most next-gen games (many are quite good too)

Both systems have their backwards compatibility flubs.
The PS3 won't work with about 200 older games.
The 360 works with games that are made compatible (which really can be all of them).

Btw, Resistance: Fall Of Man is quite good. I wouldn't put it up there with GOW but it is good. It's not as pretty as GOW either.

i'd say you get less for your money on a ps3. you can put bluetooth and half a dozen memory card slots on your PC $40.

HDMI and blu-ray are potentially unnecessary.

so if we're not talking about games. 40 gig more HDD is the only solid advantage the ps3 has
11-26-2006, 04:54 PM
Hairbautt

Re: My 2 Cents

This actually clears a few things up for me, thanks. But arn't PS3 games still in development for the most part.

It's hard keeping up with these console wars.
11-26-2006, 05:20 PM
Busyman™

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hairbautt

This actually clears a few things up for me, thanks. But arn't PS3 games still in development for the most part.

It's hard keeping up with these console wars.

Any game that it isn't ready to come out is basically in development.:huh:

Funny enough I like the 360 better than them (consoles) all so far.

GOW is great and Xbox Live is killer.

Now I wish some genious would come out with a wireless mouse and keyboard for the 360 (not unless any USB peripheral would do).
12-02-2006, 12:38 AM
Jon L. Obscene

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by GepperRankins

so if we're not talking about games. 40 gig more HDD is the only solid advantage the ps3 has

But the ps3 is a "Games" system, so we are talking games and the graphics alone in a ps3 would cost you more than twice a ps3 price and a blue ray drive is currently $600 US.

I seriously do want the PS3 , having read the specs that really count it beats the 360 hands down, for example it doesn't share the ram between cpu and gpu like the 360 does.

I do like the 360, it's a good system but I'm a little dissapointed at the false advertising Mr. Gates used, we got the 20gb bundle, it actually has a 14gb drive in it, thats quite a chunk to lose, plus to bring it anywhere near the quality of the ps3 with reguards to drives etc it will add 50% of the purchase price to the 360 at present.

Over all it's a good system, I like the use profile idea, no more accidently writing over save games and stuff.

I will make a proper comparison when I do get the ps3, might be a while though lol

Jonno :cool:

Edit: btw BM.... you have waaaaaaaayyyy too much money lol
12-02-2006, 12:56 AM
Busyman™

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

Quote:

Originally Posted by GepperRankins

so if we're not talking about games. 40 gig more HDD is the only solid advantage the ps3 has

But the ps3 is a "Games" system, so we are talking games and the graphics alone in a ps3 would cost you more than twice a ps3 price and a blue ray drive is currently $600 US.

Wha?:blink:

I seriously do want the PS3 , having read the specs that really count it beats the 360 hands down, for example it doesn't share the ram between cpu and gpu like the 360 does.

Specs are shit without a developer taking advantage of it.

I do like the 360, it's a good system but I'm a little dissapointed at the false advertising Mr. Gates used, we got the 20gb bundle, it actually has a 14gb drive in it, thats quite a chunk to lose, plus to bring it anywhere near the quality of the ps3 with reguards to drives etc it will add 50% of the purchase price to the 360 at present.

It's a 20 GB drive with 13 GB that are user accessible.

Over all it's a good system, I like the use profile idea, no more accidently writing over save games and stuff.

I will make a proper comparison when I do get the ps3, might be a while though lol

Jonno :cool:

Edit: btw BM.... you have waaaaaaaayyyy too much money lol

Why do you say that?:huh: I actually am a miser and buy only if proper research is done.:snooty:
12-02-2006, 01:12 AM
Jon L. Obscene

Re: My 2 Cents

lol I was kidding in a jealous way cos you got all 3 <_<

Jonno :cool:

Edit:

Specs are shit without a developer taking advantage of it

This is true, but it's taken xbox game developers a year to come up with GOW has it not?
And how would you compare one of xbox's launch titles say.... Call Of Duty 2 (one of my favourites on PC) vs PS3's Resistance?
From what I've seen Resistance looks far better and has upgraded controls and gameplay yet this is a launch title with PS3 so imagine what they can do in a years time. And seriously, no one can dispute that previous PS games have set so many benchmarks in the gaming world for graphics, controls, gameplay, longevity, AI etc etc.
Also the 360 at present and for the forseeable future only has dual layer dvd to work with, give EA, Rockstar, Eidos etc a while to get to grips with it and I can see games on the PS3 being of such magnitude to the likes we and Xbox have never imagined.
For instance, the size of game of GTA or Final Fantasy on an 8.5gb disc. Then think about them on a 50gb disc.
Personally I think the PS3 is the first true Next-Gen gaming system and the 360 and wii are simply upgrades of old technology and thinking.

Like I said, I do like the 360 but in a years time I think the PS3 will bury it.
12-02-2006, 01:23 AM
NikkiD

Re: My 2 Cents

From the furious typing going on in the other room, I'm guessing he's working on a longer reply.
12-02-2006, 02:28 AM
j2k4

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by NikkiD

From the furious typing going on in the other room, I'm guessing he's working on a longer reply.

Jonno types "furiously"? :huh:
12-02-2006, 05:49 AM
Busyman™

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

lol I was kidding in a jealous way cos you got all 3 <_<

I don't have a PS3.

Jonno :cool:

Edit:

Specs are shit without a developer taking advantage of it

This is true, but it's taken xbox game developers a year to come up with GOW has it not?
And how would you compare one of xbox's launch titles say.... Call Of Duty 2 (one of my favourites on PC) vs PS3's Resistance?
From what I've seen Resistance looks far better and has upgraded controls and gameplay yet this is a launch title with PS3 so imagine what they can do in a years time. And seriously, no one can dispute that previous PS games have set so many benchmarks in the gaming world for graphics, controls, gameplay, longevity, AI etc etc.
Also the 360 at present and for the forseeable future only has dual layer dvd to work with, give EA, Rockstar, Eidos etc a while to get to grips with it and I can see games on the PS3 being of such magnitude to the likes we and Xbox have never imagined.
For instance, the size of game of GTA or Final Fantasy on an 8.5gb disc. Then think about them on a 50gb disc.
Personally I think the PS3 is the first true Next-Gen gaming system and the 360 and wii are simply upgrades of old technology and thinking.

Like I said, I do like the 360 but in a years time I think the PS3 will bury it.

1. The 360 is clearly next-gen.
2. The Wii clearly is not.
3. The PS3 will possibly bury the 360 for reasons unrelated to be being a next-gen gaming console.
It's backwards compatible.
It has a next-gen movie player built-in.

The games don't even have to be better the 360 games and it'd win out. Also Sony has great exclusives.

Tbh, I don't see PS3 games outshining 360 games by any stretch.

A good benchmark is to see how multi-platform games turn out on both systems.

Last go round the Xbox clearly won that.

Also I heard Resistance is 17 GB. I doubt we'll see many games on the dual layer discs.

The biggest mistake M$ made was not incorporate HD-DVD into the console. This wasn't entirely M$'s fault though.
12-02-2006, 06:50 AM
Mr. Peabody

Re: My 2 Cents

Actually the main reason Sony went with the Blue-ray drive was
it's a major backer of Blue-ray dvd movies.
What better way to insure sales by incorperating it in thier next product.
If storage is in question what's to stop Xbox360 from bringing games on a multiple disc format if not already,it's been done with the Final Fantasy series on Ps1.

I'm not a big console player now adays,not since Ps1.
Had a Ps2 for little more then a year before it crapped out,since then I've been a strictly Pc gamer and never looked back.
12-02-2006, 11:47 PM
Jon L. Obscene

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

1. The 360 is clearly next-gen.

Not really, they have simply upgraded graphics and sound and cpu, everything else is pretty much the same. The only thing "Next-Gen" about it is the personalisation of profiles etc.

Quote:

2. The Wii clearly is not.

Not gonna argue there.

Quote:

3. The PS3 will possibly bury the 360 for reasons unrelated to be being a next-gen gaming console.
It's backwards compatible.

The 360 is backwards compatible too.

Quote:

It has a next-gen movie player built-in.

True. Although I personally think the PS3 will win through with it's games and not simply the movie player.

Quote:

The games don't even have to be better the 360 games and it'd win out. Also Sony has great exclusives.

I did say that.

Quote:

Tbh, I don't see PS3 games outshining 360 games by any stretch.

Using media capable of utilizing over 5 times the size? you don't see that? really?

Quote:

A good benchmark is to see how multi-platform games turn out on both systems.

Benchmark is first, setting a standard. And the 360s best to date is GOW correct? 10 hours of gameplay in a relativly easy game, yes like I said elsewhere it's a good game but far from great IMHO, look 1 year hence with the PS3 and THEN we'll see who sets real benchmarks.

Quote:

Last go round the Xbox clearly won that.

Wasn't the Xbox released around a year after the PS2? so it should have done although it didn't, yet the PS3 has already caused more of a stir than the 360 did and the PS2 outsold the Xbox 2-1 in canada (although I cannot find a link I do remember reading that as does Nik). and in may PS2 was still outselling the Xbox 360 in the U.S.

Quote:

Also I heard Resistance is 17 GB. I doubt we'll see many games on the dual layer discs.

Why?
And resistance is a "Launch" title.

Quote:

The biggest mistake M$ made was not incorporate HD-DVD into the console. This wasn't entirely M$'s fault though.

True. That and simply being Microsoft lol

@Mr. Peabody....

Quote:

If storage is in question what's to stop Xbox360 from bringing games on a multiple disc format if not already,it's been done with the Final Fantasy series on Ps1.

But by the same token whats to stop game companies bring out multiple disc games for PS3, the Xbox cannot possibly keep up using dvds. To make resistance they would need 3 discs yes?

Jonno :cool:
12-03-2006, 12:20 AM
NikkiD

Re: My 2 Cents

Just to clarify, Nik found the link I was talking about. I was wrong :( PS2 didn't outsell xbox 2-1............it outsold it 4-1 :P lol

http://forum.pcvsconsole.com/viewthr...id=8498&page=2

The following argument a guy has said about at least 25% of sony's figures are boosted, that still (if true) makes it 3-1.

So who won the last console war?

Jonno :cool:

Edit: Aww crap, I posted that under Nikki's account......D'oH!

NikkiD :cool:

Pps: getting wrong for posting under her name wiv bad gramar.....and speling and stuff like vat huh cor.
12-03-2006, 05:43 PM
Busyman™

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

Not really, they have simply upgraded graphics and sound and cpu, everything else is pretty much the same. The only thing "Next-Gen" about it is the personalisation of profiles etc.

What do you think next-gen is? :lol: As long as the graphics, sound, and CPU is enough, then it's considered next-gen.

Quote:

2. The Wii clearly is not.

Not gonna argue there.

Quote:

3. The PS3 will possibly bury the 360 for reasons unrelated to be being a next-gen gaming console.
It's backwards compatible.

The 360 is backwards compatible too.

Agreed but what system has more games out of the box? The PS3.

Quote:

It has a next-gen movie player built-in.

True. Although I personally think the PS3 will win through with it's games and not simply the movie player.

The thing that puts the PS3 over the top is the Blu-Ray player though. Many people look at the price of the players now ($800 and up), see the PS3 for $600, and consider it a bargain on that alone.

Quote:

The games don't even have to be better the 360 games and it'd win out. Also Sony has great exclusives.

I did say that.

Where?

Quote:

Tbh, I don't see PS3 games outshining 360 games by any stretch.

Using media capable of utilizing over 5 times the size? you don't see that? really?

I don't think it'll be utilized to the fullest. With PS2, games that utilized it's full potential didn't come out 'till in the end systems cycle. From what I read, the PS3 is even harder to program games for.

Quote:

A good benchmark is to see how multi-platform games turn out on both systems.

Benchmark is first, setting a standard. And the 360s best to date is GOW correct? 10 hours of gameplay in a relativly easy game, yes like I said elsewhere it's a good game but far from great IMHO, look 1 year hence with the PS3 and THEN we'll see who sets real benchmarks.

Agreed. The only drawback to GOW is it's shortness. I beat it in 2 sittings and it was less than 10 hours.

Quote:

Last go round the Xbox clearly won that.

Wasn't the Xbox released around a year after the PS2? so it should have done although it didn't, yet the PS3 has already caused more of a stir than the 360 did and the PS2 outsold the Xbox 2-1 in canada (although I cannot find a link I do remember reading that as does Nik). and in may PS2 was still outselling the Xbox 360 in the U.S.

I'm talking how good the system was and not how much it sold.

The PS2 came out before the Xbox and was backward compatible so should have sold more.

The Xbox came after so it should have had better graphics. The stir for the PS3 is about the same around as the 360. I remember people camping out for the 360 as well.

Quote:

Also I heard Resistance is 17 GB. I doubt we'll see many games on the dual layer discs.

Why?
And resistance is a "Launch" title.

Again, I just don't think it'd be utilized. DVD-9 was around with PS2 and there were maybe 10 games that came out in that format. I just don't think it'll be games needing over 25 GB and if so, it'll be a handful.

Quote:

The biggest mistake M$ made was not incorporate HD-DVD into the console. This wasn't entirely M$'s fault though.

True. That and simply being Microsoft lol

What does that mean?

@Mr. Peabody....

Quote:

If storage is in question what's to stop Xbox360 from bringing games on a multiple disc format if not already,it's been done with the Final Fantasy series on Ps1.

But by the same token whats to stop game companies bring out multiple disc games for PS3, the Xbox cannot possibly keep up using dvds. To make resistance they would need 3 discs yes?

Jonno :cool:

Well because the games would cost a shitload. Unlike DVD, Blu-Ray is brand spanking new and costs a motherfucker. Cost in manufacturing won't go down for years.

Now let's take one of the Xbox's biggest games, Ninja Gaiden. If you made that game in HD, it wouldn't need over 25 GB let alone 75 GB (1 50 GB & 1 25 GB disc). Ninja Gaiden was 6 GB.
12-03-2006, 10:28 PM
true_neo

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busyman

Again, I just don't think it'd be utilized. DVD-9 was around with PS2 and there were maybe 10 games that came out in that format. I just don't think it'll be games needing over 25 GB and if so, it'll be a handful.

I believe (this is my total fanboi opinion in no way backed up by anything resembling facts :P) that they simply couldn't utilise that amount of space without just filling it with FMV's with the technology present at that point.
I heard a few months ago that game developers are now looking for a new kind of technology to compress textures, which will allow say your armour to fatigue in combat (ie show signs of wear and tear), cloth items to look "darker" when it's raining, et cetera. Until that technology is discovered, however, they would need to package 10+ full-size texture files to achieve the same effect. This could quite well fill up a 50 GB disk.

I've heard various complaints about the online feature in PS3, something about browser not being good and no background download available.
Couldn't this be fixed through firmware/software updates?
Also, are the rumours about FREE online service in the PS3 true?
Either ways, I don't see myself as a big user of that feature (even if it is free), so personally it doesn't wager against the PS3.
12-04-2006, 03:59 AM
Jon L. Obscene

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

What do you think next-gen is? :lol: As long as the graphics, sound, and CPU is enough, then it's considered next-gen.

No not really, it's not just graphics etc. I think you also have to take into account periferals, hardware the way it's built, plus the media it uses, for example the PS, Dreamcast both were Next gen with the jump to CD, the Xbox and PS2 moved to dvd.......now the Xbox 360 is STILL on dvd, it still has the removable HD etc, the PS3 uses Blue ray and multimedia card reader both have not been done before out of the box. Wireless controllers are nothing new. I've heard people say about the Red Steal controllers, realistically they are nothing more than Light guns which have been around for years.

Quote:

Agreed but what system has more games out of the box? The PS3.

lol now you're arguing with me that the PS3 is better?

Quote:

The thing that puts the PS3 over the top is the Blu-Ray player though. Many people look at the price of the players now ($800 and up), see the PS3 for $600, and consider it a bargain on that alone.

And look back to 2000 when the PS2 came out, how much was a DVD drive and media, especially dual layer.

Quote:

I did say that.

Where?

plus to bring it anywhere near the quality of the ps3 with reguards to drives etc it will add 50% of the purchase price to the 360 at present.

Actually thought I'd been more specific than that but it's basically what I meant.

Quote:

I don't think it'll be utilized to the fullest. With PS2, games that utilized it's full potential didn't come out 'till in the end systems cycle. From what I read, the PS3 is even harder to program games for.

Not true, Final Fantasy x was massive with supurb graphics and sound and came out very early on, GTA vice city was also pushing the PS2's media and hardware and came out what 2 years ago? and both on 1 disc.
And besides, game developers have new technology to work with giving them more freedom to do what they have wanted to in years before.

Quote:

Agreed. The only drawback to GOW is it's shortness. I beat it in 2 sittings and it was less than 10 hours.

Yes and I think possibly because they conentrated too much on looks, a mistake Sage learned only too well with the Mega-CD.

Onto insane mode then?

Quote:

I'm talking how good the system was and not how much it sold.

The PS2 came out before the Xbox and was backward compatible so should have sold more.

The Xbox came after so it should have had better graphics. The stir for the PS3 is about the same around as the 360. I remember people camping out for the 360 as well.

Not true in both points, the 360 is back compatable and I think PS3 sales will pass it quickly.
As for camping out etc, I don't remember anyone being killed, stabbed, beaten, robbed at gunpoint for a 360, many examples of that with the PS3, as stupid and rediculas as it maybe it shows the impact it has had.

Quote:

Again, I just don't think it'd be utilized. DVD-9 was around with PS2 and there were maybe 10 games that came out in that format. I just don't think it'll be games needing over 25 GB and if so, it'll be a handful.

Thats the point, thats what developers are always striving to do.
But I guess only time will tell.

Quote:

True. That and simply being Microsoft lol

What does that mean?

Sony has much much better PR and commands a hell of a lot more respect from the public, I know many people who did and wont by an Xbox simply because it's microsoft. It was meant as a kind of joke in the same way you type M$.

Quote:

Well because the games would cost a shitload. Unlike DVD, Blu-Ray is brand spanking new and costs a motherfucker. Cost in manufacturing won't go down for years.

You mean like DVD's when they first came out?

Quote:

Now let's take one of the Xbox's biggest games, Ninja Gaiden. If you made that game in HD, it wouldn't need over 25 GB let alone 75 GB (1 50 GB & 1 25 GB disc). Ninja Gaiden was 6 GB.

And make the same game with Next-gen graphics, sound and gameplay and it'll be a hell of a lot bigger no? Tripple the graphics, tripple the size of game , you end up with 18gb.....you said yourself resistance is 17gb...how big is that game in terms of longevity?

@Neo...

Quote:

that they simply couldn't utilise that amount of space without just filling it with FMV's with the technology present at that point.

Didn't they say the same thing about dual layer dvd?

Quote:

I heard a few months ago that game developers are now looking for a new kind of technology to compress textures, which will allow say your armour to fatigue in combat (ie show signs of wear and tear), cloth items to look "darker" when it's raining, et cetera. Until that technology is discovered, however, they would need to package 10+ full-size texture files to achieve the same effect. This could quite well fill up a 50 GB disk.

Yes I've read similar things.

As far as this "Can't fill media" and "Media is too expensive" arguments I think you should try looking back in time, when they could squeeze 16mb onto a cart, then how will they fill 700megs, then how will they fill 4.5 then 8.5gig, notice how it goes up 10-20 times the size each time? And they've never had any real problems doing it, it just usually takes a year or so to get to grips with the system capabilities.

Jonno :cool:
12-04-2006, 04:45 PM
Busyman

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

No not really, it's not just graphics etc. I think you also have to take into account periferals, hardware the way it's built, plus the media it uses, for example the PS, Dreamcast both were Next gen with the jump to CD, the Xbox and PS2 moved to dvd.......now the Xbox 360 is STILL on dvd, it still has the removable HD etc, the PS3 uses Blue ray and multimedia card reader both have not been done before out of the box. Wireless controllers are nothing new. I've heard people say about the Red Steal controllers, realistically they are nothing more than Light guns which have been around for years.

Quote:

Agreed but what system has more games out of the box? The PS3.

lol now you're arguing with me that the PS3 is better?

Quote:

The thing that puts the PS3 over the top is the Blu-Ray player though. Many people look at the price of the players now ($800 and up), see the PS3 for $600, and consider it a bargain on that alone.

And look back to 2000 when the PS2 came out, how much was a DVD drive and media, especially dual layer.

Quote:

I did say that.

Where?

plus to bring it anywhere near the quality of the ps3 with reguards to drives etc it will add 50% of the purchase price to the 360 at present.

Actually thought I'd been more specific than that but it's basically what I meant.

Quote:

I don't think it'll be utilized to the fullest. With PS2, games that utilized it's full potential didn't come out 'till in the end systems cycle. From what I read, the PS3 is even harder to program games for.

Not true, Final Fantasy x was massive with supurb graphics and sound and came out very early on, GTA vice city was also pushing the PS2's media and hardware and came out what 2 years ago? and both on 1 disc.
And besides, game developers have new technology to work with giving them more freedom to do what they have wanted to in years before.

Quote:

Agreed. The only drawback to GOW is it's shortness. I beat it in 2 sittings and it was less than 10 hours.

Yes and I think possibly because they conentrated too much on looks, a mistake Sage learned only too well with the Mega-CD.

Onto insane mode then?

Quote:

I'm talking how good the system was and not how much it sold.

The PS2 came out before the Xbox and was backward compatible so should have sold more.

The Xbox came after so it should have had better graphics. The stir for the PS3 is about the same around as the 360. I remember people camping out for the 360 as well.

Not true in both points, the 360 is back compatable and I think PS3 sales will pass it quickly.
As for camping out etc, I don't remember anyone being killed, stabbed, beaten, robbed at gunpoint for a 360, many examples of that with the PS3, as stupid and rediculas as it maybe it shows the impact it has had.

Quote:

Again, I just don't think it'd be utilized. DVD-9 was around with PS2 and there were maybe 10 games that came out in that format. I just don't think it'll be games needing over 25 GB and if so, it'll be a handful.

Thats the point, thats what developers are always striving to do.
But I guess only time will tell.

Quote:

True. That and simply being Microsoft lol

What does that mean?

Sony has much much better PR and commands a hell of a lot more respect from the public, I know many people who did and wont by an Xbox simply because it's microsoft. It was meant as a kind of joke in the same way you type M$.

Quote:

Well because the games would cost a shitload. Unlike DVD, Blu-Ray is brand spanking new and costs a motherfucker. Cost in manufacturing won't go down for years.

You mean like DVD's when they first came out?

Quote:

Now let's take one of the Xbox's biggest games, Ninja Gaiden. If you made that game in HD, it wouldn't need over 25 GB let alone 75 GB (1 50 GB & 1 25 GB disc). Ninja Gaiden was 6 GB.

And make the same game with Next-gen graphics, sound and gameplay and it'll be a hell of a lot bigger no? Tripple the graphics, tripple the size of game , you end up with 18gb.....you said yourself resistance is 17gb...how big is that game in terms of longevity?

@Neo...

Quote:

that they simply couldn't utilise that amount of space without just filling it with FMV's with the technology present at that point.

Didn't they say the same thing about dual layer dvd?

Quote:

I heard a few months ago that game developers are now looking for a new kind of technology to compress textures, which will allow say your armour to fatigue in combat (ie show signs of wear and tear), cloth items to look "darker" when it's raining, et cetera. Until that technology is discovered, however, they would need to package 10+ full-size texture files to achieve the same effect. This could quite well fill up a 50 GB disk.

Yes I've read similar things.

As far as this "Can't fill media" and "Media is too expensive" arguments I think you should try looking back in time, when they could squeeze 16mb onto a cart, then how will they fill 700megs, then how will they fill 4.5 then 8.5gig, notice how it goes up 10-20 times the size each time? And they've never had any real problems doing it, it just usually takes a year or so to get to grips with the system capabilities.

Jonno :cool:
12-04-2006, 06:52 PM
Cheese

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by People in this thread

"Next-Gen"

I thought this was the 7th generation of the consoles which inlcudes PS3, Wii and Xbox 360. The term "Next-Gen" is an oxymoron, especially if you're applying it to a console like Xbox 360 which has been out for a year. :dabs:
12-04-2006, 09:06 PM
mildthrill

Re: My 2 Cents

Maybe this is the wrong time to interject my thoughts since it's already been decided that the Wii in NOT next gen, but I'd like to argue that that's just not true!

I would say the generation gap is when there's a change or refinement in the way games are played that makes previous games feel out-dated.

Case in point: when the N64 came out, it wasn't the increased power alone that pushed the games forward, it was that combined with analog joystick. N64 and later PS1 games were being played in a way that couldn't be done before, and a new generation was born.

The NGC, PS2, and birth of the Xbox didn't have any new concepts driving it, but what it did do was do everything the previous generation did, and 10X better. Any veteran of Halo or other generational FPS who went back to play the previous generations great FPS GoldenEye of Perfect Dark (which were the shit in their day!) found them at the least clunky and very out-of-date. Again Graphics did play its part, but it was that combined with all other refinements that set this generation apart.

So my question with this new generation is what will, or have the big three done to set this generation apart gameplay-wise other then juice up the hardware? Am I going to get into these new systems and years later go back to play xbox or ps2 to find it unbearable to play for more then just novelty sake because the 360, ps3, and wii are just that much more refined?

The wii (imo) is the only one, that I see, capable of making me feel that way. I can imagine, once developers fully master the mechanics of the wiimote, that it would make playing a FPS where it takes moving a little joystick to aim the reticle then fire feel annoying instead of just pointing and cappin' bitches!

Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to claim that the 360 and PS3 AREN'T next gen; I'm simply making an argument that the wii is. Do I think that more powerful hardware would have made the wii better? Yeah, I am definitely bummed about the lack of HD, but even with only slightly better then last gen graphics, I still see it as fully capable of making me feel differently about how games should feel and play.

As far as how that plays out in the console wars, or if the wii can deliver on its potential, that's a wait and see situation. However I was in line Sunday morning at the local toy' r us with about 30 other adults/parents, and when the store manager came out to hand out tickets for consoles, when he asked who was there for a PS3, no-one responded. Everyone was there to get a wii only (not that there were any PS3's anyway). :dabs:
12-04-2006, 09:42 PM
Cheese

Re: My 2 Cents

Double post. :dabs:
12-04-2006, 09:43 PM
Cheese

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by mildthrill

Maybe this is the wrong time to interject my thoughts since it's already been decided that the Wii in NOT next gen, but I'd like to argue that that's just not true!

I would say the generation gap is when there's a change or refinement in the way games are played that makes previous games feel out-dated.

Case in point: when the N64 came out, it wasn't the increased power alone that pushed the games forward, it was that combined with analog joystick. N64 and later PS1 games were being played in a way that couldn't be done before, and a new generation was born.

The NGC, PS2, and birth of the Xbox didn't have any new concepts driving it, but what it did do was do everything the previous generation did, and 10X better. Any veteran of Halo or other generational FPS who went back to play the previous generations great FPS GoldenEye of Perfect Dark (which were the shit in their day!) found them at the least clunky and very out-of-date. Again Graphics did play its part, but it was that combined with all other refinements that set this generation apart.

So my question with this new generation is what will, or have the big three done to set this generation apart gameplay-wise other then juice up the hardware? Am I going to get into these new systems and years later go back to play xbox or ps2 to find it unbearable to play for more then just novelty sake because the 360, ps3, and wii are just that much more refined?

The wii (imo) is the only one, that I see, capable of making me feel that way. I can imagine, once developers fully master the mechanics of the wiimote, that it would make playing a FPS where it takes moving a little joystick to aim the reticle then fire feel annoying instead of just pointing and cappin' bitches!

Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to claim that the 360 and PS3 AREN'T next gen; I'm simply making an argument that the wii is. Do I think that more powerful hardware would have made the wii better? Yeah, I am definitely bummed about the lack of HD, but even with only slightly better then last gen graphics, I still see it as fully capable of making me feel differently about how games should feel and play.

As far as how that plays out in the console wars, or if the wii can deliver on its potential, that's a wait and see situation. However I was in line Sunday morning at the local toy' r us with about 30 other adults/parents, and when the store manager came out to hand out tickets for consoles, when he asked who was there for a PS3, no-one responded. Everyone was there to get a wii only (not that there were any PS3's anyway). :dabs:

Good post. The Wii is the only next-gen console I'd consider lowering myself to purchase because it is offering me a different type of gaming experience that I can't have on the PC. The other two next-gen consoles are, to me, just improved versions of what has gone on before with extras I don't want or need.
12-04-2006, 11:35 PM
Busyman™

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by mildthrill

Maybe this is the wrong time to interject my thoughts since it's already been decided that the Wii in NOT next gen, but I'd like to argue that that's just not true!

I would say the generation gap is when there's a change or refinement in the way games are played that makes previous games feel out-dated.

Case in point: when the N64 came out, it wasn't the increased power alone that pushed the games forward, it was that combined with analog joystick. N64 and later PS1 games were being played in a way that couldn't be done before, and a new generation was born.

The NGC, PS2, and birth of the Xbox didn't have any new concepts driving it, but what it did do was do everything the previous generation did, and 10X better. Any veteran of Halo or other generational FPS who went back to play the previous generations great FPS GoldenEye of Perfect Dark (which were the shit in their day!) found them at the least clunky and very out-of-date. Again Graphics did play its part, but it was that combined with all other refinements that set this generation apart.

So my question with this new generation is what will, or have the big three done to set this generation apart gameplay-wise other then juice up the hardware? Am I going to get into these new systems and years later go back to play xbox or ps2 to find it unbearable to play for more then just novelty sake because the 360, ps3, and wii are just that much more refined?

The wii (imo) is the only one, that I see, capable of making me feel that way. I can imagine, once developers fully master the mechanics of the wiimote, that it would make playing a FPS where it takes moving a little joystick to aim the reticle then fire feel annoying instead of just pointing and cappin' bitches!

Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to claim that the 360 and PS3 AREN'T next gen; I'm simply making an argument that the wii is. Do I think that more powerful hardware would have made the wii better? Yeah, I am definitely bummed about the lack of HD, but even with only slightly better then last gen graphics, I still see it as fully capable of making me feel differently about how games should feel and play.

As far as how that plays out in the console wars, or if the wii can deliver on its potential, that's a wait and see situation. However I was in line Sunday morning at the local toy' r us with about 30 other adults/parents, and when the store manager came out to hand out tickets for consoles, when he asked who was there for a PS3, no-one responded. Everyone was there to get a wii only (not that there were any PS3's anyway). :dabs:

The Wii has a new controller that's actually not new. (Xavix)

That does not make it next-gen in the least to me.

It is, however, fun.

Light gun, dance mat, trackball, paddles.....oh my.
12-05-2006, 12:04 AM
Busyman™

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

No not really, it's not just graphics etc. I think you also have to take into account periferals, hardware the way it's built, plus the media it uses, for example the PS, Dreamcast both were Next gen with the jump to CD, the Xbox and PS2 moved to dvd.......now the Xbox 360 is STILL on dvd, it still has the removable HD etc, the PS3 uses Blue ray and multimedia card reader both have not been done before out of the box. Wireless controllers are nothing new. I've heard people say about the Red Steal controllers, realistically they are nothing more than Light guns which have been around for years.

So you are saying that the 360 isn't next-gen cuz it doesn't offer games on a larger storage medium? The games could be on cartridge and they came out the same, they are the same.

Quote:

Agreed but what system has more games out of the box? The PS3.

lol now you're arguing with me that the PS3 is better?

Huh? No, I'm not a fanboy of either. I simply said that the PS3, and the PS2 before it automatically have a fanbase.

Quote:

The thing that puts the PS3 over the top is the Blu-Ray player though. Many people look at the price of the players now ($800 and up), see the PS3 for $600, and consider it a bargain on that alone.

And look back to 2000 when the PS2 came out, how much was a DVD drive and media, especially dual layer.

DVD was already out for years.

Quote:

I did say that.

Where?

plus to bring it anywhere near the quality of the ps3 with reguards to drives etc it will add 50% of the purchase price to the 360 at present.

Actually thought I'd been more specific than that but it's basically what I meant.

Yeah cuz that wasn't the same at all. I was simply saying that Sony would win regardless if the 360's game quality was on par with it. Again, Sony has the huge base.

Quote:

I don't think it'll be utilized to the fullest. With PS2, games that utilized it's full potential didn't come out 'till in the end systems cycle. From what I read, the PS3 is even harder to program games for.

Not true, Final Fantasy x was massive with supurb graphics and sound and came out very early on, GTA vice city was also pushing the PS2's media and hardware and came out what 2 years ago? and both on 1 disc.
And besides, game developers have new technology to work with giving them more freedom to do what they have wanted to in years before.

GTA VC's graphics were not great at all. FFX had great cutscenes. They both were no powerhouses.

Quote:

Agreed. The only drawback to GOW is it's shortness. I beat it in 2 sittings and it was less than 10 hours.

Yes and I think possibly because they conentrated too much on looks, a mistake Sage learned only too well with the Mega-CD.

Onto insane mode then?

I don't know if concentrating on graphics shorted the game since it also plays well. However, they could have had the game perfect if:

1. They shoulda nixed Casual mode. The game is too easy that way and people will always start there for there first impression. They shoulda called it easy. I woulda skipped it then. Insane mode is excellent. In some cases, 3shots and you're dead. It is the perfect difficulty. Locusts are harder to take down. They are monsters they are supposed to be and not just soldiers with different skin.

I don't know how it took you even 10 hrs to complete.:P I finished the game in two long sittings....but that might just be my higher skill level.:snooty:

2. They shoulda had at least 2 more levels. The game ending on the train was a bummer. (it was a nice level though)

AND WHY THE FUCK YOU DIDN'T GET TO FIGHT THE BROMAK!

Quote:

I'm talking how good the system was and not how much it sold.

The PS2 came out before the Xbox and was backward compatible so should have sold more.

The Xbox came after so it should have had better graphics. The stir for the PS3 is about the same around as the 360. I remember people camping out for the 360 as well.

Not true in both points, the 360 is back compatable and I think PS3 sales will pass it quickly.
As for camping out etc, I don't remember anyone being killed, stabbed, beaten, robbed at gunpoint for a 360, many examples of that with the PS3, as stupid and rediculas as it maybe it shows the impact it has had.

But the Xbox had no precursor and so no immediate fanbase. The PS3 has had a fanbase since the PS1. The move up to the next system didn't short the consumer their games.

There were robberies and camping out for the 360. Sony learned from M$ about having shortages to stir up hoopla on a system. The people also learned.

For instance, I learned to get myself some PS3s since I didn't think of getting in on the 360 craze. 360 profit selling was going strong for 2 months after it launched. People remember that and jumped in (and also robbed) to get on the next bandwagon.

Quote:

Again, I just don't think it'd be utilized. DVD-9 was around with PS2 and there were maybe 10 games that came out in that format. I just don't think it'll be games needing over 25 GB and if so, it'll be a handful.

Thats the point, thats what developers are always striving to do.
But I guess only time will tell.

Quote:

True. That and simply being Microsoft lol

What does that mean?

Sony has much much better PR and commands a hell of a lot more respect from the public, I know many people who did and wont by an Xbox simply because it's microsoft. It was meant as a kind of joke in the same way you type M$.

Quote:

Well because the games would cost a shitload. Unlike DVD, Blu-Ray is brand spanking new and costs a motherfucker. Cost in manufacturing won't go down for years.

You mean like DVD's when they first came out?

Okayyyyy....The PS2 didn't come out when DVDs came out. I think it was 3 years after. In the current case, they are bringing out a format with the system.

That's a big difference.

Quote:

Now let's take one of the Xbox's biggest games, Ninja Gaiden. If you made that game in HD, it wouldn't need over 25 GB let alone 75 GB (1 50 GB & 1 25 GB disc). Ninja Gaiden was 6 GB.

And make the same game with Next-gen graphics, sound and gameplay and it'll be a hell of a lot bigger no? Tripple the graphics, tripple the size of game , you end up with 18gb.....you said yourself resistance is 17gb...how big is that game in terms of longevity?

I haven't beat Resistance yet. Now if that game is the same length than GOW then what? The graphics are on par with GOW if not slightly worse.
12-05-2006, 12:27 AM
GepperRankins

Re: My 2 Cents

i spent my wii money on the 360 instead. not worth getting for few months IMO. i'll probably get it the minute it is.

i gotta say even as a nintendo fanboy, xbox360 is way ahead of the wii and it's got nothing at all to do with the hardware.

the first game i played that i considered next gen was animal crossing on the DS and that's because it's (almost) seamlessly multiplayer. it's 2006 and nintendo still won't use online properly. the only online game that we can guarantee will make it to wii is farcry.

i've only played four games and about twenty demos and as far as the multiplayer goes i could never say "it could do with....". the way the games work online so seamlessly, even with split screen; it seems bizarre that nintendo can only just get limited features online multiplayer on the odd game.

forget what PR people say, for now and the foreseeable future, microsoft pwn nintendo and it's because of the intuitive gameplay and interface
12-05-2006, 12:30 AM
GepperRankins

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Now let's take one of the Xbox's biggest games, Ninja Gaiden. If you made that game in HD, it wouldn't need over 25 GB let alone 75 GB (1 50 GB & 1 25 GB disc). Ninja Gaiden was 6 GB.

which mong said this? high definition has nothing to do with texture sizes or compression or anything like that :pinch:
12-05-2006, 01:09 AM
Jon L. Obscene

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

So you are saying that the 360 isn't next-gen cuz it doesn't offer games on a larger storage medium? The games could be on cartridge and they came out the same, they are the same.

Pretty much, IMO a next-gen system is one which upgrades everything which Sony have done, graphics, cpu, sound, memory, drives, periferals, media, design, extra's, online etc etc etc the list goes on, the only thing 360 did was graphics, cpu and sound and made stick on skins for the front.

Quote:

DVD was already out for years.

Yes but look at the price of it when the PS2 came out, up until maybe 2 years ago dvd media and hardware was expensive.

[QUOTE]I did say that.

Quote:

Yeah cuz that wasn't the same at all. I was simply saying that Sony would win regardless if the 360's game quality was on par with it. Again, Sony has the huge base.

This is true but there's is a reason for that..because the PS systems are better!

Quote:

GTA VC's graphics were not great at all. FFX had great cutscenes. They both were no powerhouses.

I never said GTA had wonderful graphics.
And I'm sorry but they were both huge powerhouses, FFX was the biggest game to date with the best visual arts and GTA VC was GTA 3 but twice as big in every way.

Quote:

I don't know if concentrating on graphics shorted the game since it also plays well. However, they could have had the game perfect if:

1. They shoulda nixed Casual mode. The game is too easy that way and people will always start there for there first impression. They shoulda called it easy. I woulda skipped it then. Insane mode is excellent. In some cases, 3shots and you're dead. It is the perfect difficulty. Locusts are harder to take down. They are monsters they are supposed to be and not just soldiers with different skin.

Agreed 100%

Quote:

I don't know how it took you even 10 hrs to complete.:P I finished the game in two long sittings....but that might just be my higher skill level.:snooty:

What do you call a long sitting?
I don't actually know how long it took, I included while it was on so that includes piss breaks, drink breaks, homework help breaks etc.

Quote:

2. They shoulda had at least 2 more levels. The game ending on the train was a bummer. (it was a nice level though)

Yeah agreed, interesting and fun level but not a "Final" level by any means.
We see that all too often in games of late.

Quote:

AND WHY THE FUCK YOU DIDN'T GET TO FIGHT THE BROMAK!

Yeah would have made a good pre-final boss.

Quote:

There were robberies and camping out for the 360. Sony learned from M$ about having shortages to stir up hoopla on a system. The people also learned.

For instance, I learned to get myself some PS3s since I didn't think of getting in on the 360 craze. 360 profit selling was going strong for 2 months after it launched. People remember that and jumped in (and also robbed) to get on the next bandwagon.

Thats actually a good point well made.

Quote:

Okayyyyy....The PS2 didn't come out when DVDs came out. I think it was 3 years after. In the current case, they are bringing out a format with the system.

That's a big difference.

This is true but I still don't think it will take as long to come down in price because the interest will be higher. And like I said above, dvds were still at a very high price when the PS2 came out, I guess it's another thing only time will tell.

Quote:

I haven't beat Resistance yet. Now if that game is the same length than GOW then what? The graphics are on par with GOW if not slightly worse.

Well like I've said lots of times, Resistance is a Launch title, GOW is the flagship 1 year on. And from what I've heard resistance is a fair bit longer.

@The..... Of course the 360 pwns the Nintendo Urine.
I reckon Nintendo will be the next giant to be knocked off the gaming platform and the only thing that might save it is it's apeal to children because there are more kids games on the system.

@Mildthrill.... No, the wii is not a next gen system and no the hand thingies are nothing new as BM said, hell I had a light gun 20 years ago for my spectrum, it's the same thing.

Jonno :cool:
12-05-2006, 01:55 AM
GepperRankins

Re: My 2 Cents

you can't put a definition on "next-gen". consoles have a 5-6 year life cycle then the next increment is released. nintendo wii is as "next gen" as the PS3.

fact.
12-05-2006, 02:47 AM
Jon L. Obscene

Re: My 2 Cents

That is true yes, but I think when it comes to gaming systems the definition is there and not just a normal next in line generation thing.
For instance, no one would class the Sega saturn as next gen, but by your logic it is.
Difficult argument really, one which I couldn't find an answer to on google :o

Although I did come accross this, kind of ironic given the arguments.

Urban dictionary, 7th example of the definition of "Next Generation"

The Nintendo Wii

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...ext+generation

:lol:

Jonno :cool:
12-05-2006, 03:46 AM
GepperRankins

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

That is true yes, but I think when it comes to gaming systems the definition is there and not just a normal next in line generation thing.
For instance, no one would class the Sega saturn as next gen, but by your logic it is.
Difficult argument really, one which I couldn't find an answer to on google :o

Although I did come accross this, kind of ironic given the arguments.

Urban dictionary, 7th example of the definition of "Next Generation"

The Nintendo Wii

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...ext+generation

:lol:

Jonno :cool:

yeah, because the sega saturn is being released this month :lol:

we're moving from the 6th generation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_generation_consoles

to the 7th generation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7th_generation_consoles

so for anyone playing anything from the 6th generation, the 7th generation is the next generation, or "next gen" if you will.

i hope that cleared up the confusion :)
12-05-2006, 09:21 AM
Cheese

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by GepperRankins

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

That is true yes, but I think when it comes to gaming systems the definition is there and not just a normal next in line generation thing.
For instance, no one would class the Sega saturn as next gen, but by your logic it is.
Difficult argument really, one which I couldn't find an answer to on google :o

Although I did come accross this, kind of ironic given the arguments.

Urban dictionary, 7th example of the definition of "Next Generation"

The Nintendo Wii

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...ext+generation

:lol:

Jonno :cool:

yeah, because the sega saturn is being released this month :lol:

we're moving from the 6th generation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_generation_consoles

to the 7th generation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7th_generation_consoles

so for anyone playing anything from the 6th generation, the 7th generation is the next generation, or "next gen" if you will.

i hope that cleared up the confusion :)

Yeah, that's pretty much the industry definition of the "generations". You can argue that the Wii is a poor example of a 7th gen console but you can't argue it isn't a 7th gen console, that'd be mental.

So really, given that all the 7th gen consoles are out now, a "next-gen" console would be an 8th gen console. Something we won't see until like 2012...
12-05-2006, 09:35 AM
Busyman™

Re: My 2 Cents

[QUOTE=Jon L. Obscene;1586126]Pretty much, IMO a next-gen system is one which upgrades everything which Sony have done, graphics, cpu, sound, memory, drives, periferals, media, design, extra's, online etc etc etc the list goes on, the only thing 360 did was graphics, cpu and sound and made stick on skins for the front.

I say it's sound, graphics, cpu. This affects how it looks, it sounds, and how fast it computes. If you bump those 3 up a decent notch, that's next-gen. Everything else is secondary.

If there are 2 systems but one has a bigger drive, big hootie if their games look, play, and sounds the same. The same goes for whether it uses SD slots versus it's own proprietary slots.

And actually one should include the online component in the next-gen discussion. The Xbox has had a robust online component for years and now it's better.

Quote:

DVD was already out for years.

Yes but look at the price of it when the PS2 came out, up until maybe 2 years ago dvd media and hardware was expensive.

Not as expensive as Blu-Ray media......not by a longshot.

Quote:

I did say that.

Quote:

Yeah cuz that wasn't the same at all. I was simply saying that Sony would win regardless if the 360's game quality was on par with it. Again, Sony has the huge base.

This is true but there's is a reason for that..because the PS systems are better!

No PS systems were first and have always maintained a lead.

Quote:

GTA VC's graphics were not great at all. FFX had great cutscenes. They both were no powerhouses.

I never said GTA had wonderful graphics.
And I'm sorry but they were both huge powerhouses, FFX was the biggest game to date with the best visual arts and GTA VC was GTA 3 but twice as big in every way.

They weren't graphical powerhouses. They were large games.

Quote:

I don't know if concentrating on graphics shorted the game since it also plays well. However, they could have had the game perfect if:

1. They shoulda nixed Casual mode. The game is too easy that way and people will always start there for there first impression. They shoulda called it easy. I woulda skipped it then. Insane mode is excellent. In some cases, 3shots and you're dead. It is the perfect difficulty. Locusts are harder to take down. They are monsters they are supposed to be and not just soldiers with different skin.

Agreed 100%

Quote:

I don't know how it took you even 10 hrs to complete.:P I finished the game in two long sittings....but that might just be my higher skill level.:snooty:

What do you call a long sitting? 2-3 hrs
I don't actually know how long it took, I included while it was on so that includes piss breaks, drink breaks, homework help breaks etc.

Quote:

2. They shoulda had at least 2 more levels. The game ending on the train was a bummer. (it was a nice level though)

Yeah agreed, interesting and fun level but not a "Final" level by any means.
We see that all too often in games of late.

Quote:

AND WHY THE FUCK YOU DIDN'T GET TO FIGHT THE BROMAK!

Yeah would have made a good pre-final boss.

Quote:

There were robberies and camping out for the 360. Sony learned from M$ about having shortages to stir up hoopla on a system. The people also learned.

For instance, I learned to get myself some PS3s since I didn't think of getting in on the 360 craze. 360 profit selling was going strong for 2 months after it launched. People remember that and jumped in (and also robbed) to get on the next bandwagon.

Thats actually a good point well made.

Quote:

Okayyyyy....The PS2 didn't come out when DVDs came out. I think it was 3 years after. In the current case, they are bringing out a format with the system.

That's a big difference.

This is true but I still don't think it will take as long to come down in price because the interest will be higher. And like I said above, dvds were still at a very high price when the PS2 came out, I guess it's another thing only time will tell.

1st law of greed and business - you sell for what you think you can get. If tooooo many jump on the current price tag....it'll remain high. Ever notice that Halo was one of few games that didn't go down in price for a long time?

Keep in mind that Sony loses money on every sale of the PS3 so they will try to sustain the current price point as long as possible and drop when sales wane a bit.

Quote:

I haven't beat Resistance yet. Now if that game is the same length than GOW then what? The graphics are on par with GOW if not slightly worse.

Well like I've said lots of times, Resistance is a Launch title, GOW is the flagship 1 year on. And from what I've heard resistance is a fair bit longer.

@The..... Of course the 360 pwns the Nintendo Urine.
I reckon Nintendo will be the next giant to be knocked off the gaming platform and the only thing that might save it is it's apeal to children because there are more kids games on the system.

@Mildthrill.... No, the wii is not a next gen system and no the hand thingies are nothing new as BM said, hell I had a light gun 20 years ago for my spectrum, it's the same thing.

Jonno :cool:

It is a bit different though. It's like a light gun with a broader spectrum.

The Xavix was doing the same thing though.
12-05-2006, 09:40 AM
Busyman™

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

That is true yes, but I think when it comes to gaming systems the definition is there and not just a normal next in line generation thing.
For instance, no one would class the Sega saturn as next gen, but by your logic it is.
Difficult argument really, one which I couldn't find an answer to on google :o

Although I did come accross this, kind of ironic given the arguments.

Urban dictionary, 7th example of the definition of "Next Generation"

The Nintendo Wii

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...ext+generation

:lol:

Jonno :cool:

Plus many called the Wii, Gamecube 1.5.

I have said that really all it adds is a new controller and a (so far) weak online component.

The graphics bump is akin to a same generation graphics cards by the same manufacturer but one is $50 more.:ermm:

As I said before, they could have added the Wiimote to the GC.

Take a look at what development went into the Wii......it went into the controller.:crazy:
12-05-2006, 10:24 AM
Cheese

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

Difficult argument really, one which I couldn't find an answer to on google :o

I had to laugh at that, given that if you put "Next-gen console" or the like in Google you'll get articles about the three 7th gen consoles with Nintendo's "next-gen" console always getting a mention. So basically what you're saying is that you couldn't find an article to back up your position on Google.

Though I'd avoid using Google to back up a weak argument. Personally I'm going by the experience I accrued by being frontline during the Great 5th Generation Console War. That was a proper console war not like the limp wars we get these days, with over half a dozen consoles you stubborn fools could have argued didn't belong in that generation.
12-05-2006, 10:04 PM
maebach

Re: My 2 Cents

I was thinking of buying a Wii, but now that I knowq the graphics are not amazing Im questioning it. Does anybody here have a Wii, and have some good things to say about it? I will mostly play shooters, and soccer/basketball games.
12-05-2006, 10:37 PM
Busyman™

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by maebach

I was thinking of buying a Wii, but now that I knowq the graphics are not amazing Im questioning it. Does anybody here have a Wii, and have some good things to say about it? I will mostly play shooters, and soccer/basketball games.

The Wii is fun. The new Zelda is great but it's a great game with Gamecube graphics.

For me, the Wii is a party console + Zelda.

Red Steel sucks ass. Imo it's not worth $250 at all.....unless you never had a Gamecube.

In that case....

Get Resident Evil 4, Zelda OOT, WW, and TP and call it a day. It comes with Wii Sports.
12-05-2006, 10:57 PM
Jon L. Obscene

Re: My 2 Cents

Ok, @the..... The links you post say the 360, wii and PS3 are 7th generation correct?
So what was the Saturn? I didn't mean was IS it, I mean what WAS it.

The 360, and PS3 cannot possibly be 7th generation by your reckoning, the 360 is 2nd and the PS3 is 3rdand the Wii is 5th.
They can't be 7th and if you say they are then what was first?
Sega cd? Mega drive? Master system? 3do? Jaguar? Atari Sixer? Atari four?the Odyssey ? Channel F? there's 9 examples of different "Generations" of gaming consoles.

So the link you posted makes no sense, when did these generations start? and like I said about the saturn, if you look at Nintendo vs Sega it goes....

Master system vs NES
Mega Drive (Genesis) vs SNES
Mega CD vs N64?
Saturn vs N64?
Dreamcast vs Game cube

But the Mega cd was a next gen system.

So I'll go back to the quote Chese made of my post and ask, find a definition of "Next Gen game consoles" on google, I couldn't, please show me cos I really am interested in what is truely classed as "Next-Gen"

@Cheese.... After reading my above post please explain to me what was the 5th gen wars and what consoles were involved and why it was 5th gen.

@BM.... You and I could argue this forever, I think the only way this will be settled is to wait and see.

Jonno :cool:
12-05-2006, 11:47 PM
Cheese

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

Ok, @the..... The links you post say the 360, wii and PS3 are 7th generation correct?
So what was the Saturn? I didn't mean was IS it, I mean what WAS it.

The 360, and PS3 cannot possibly be 7th generation by your reckoning, the 360 is 2nd and the PS3 is 3rdand the Wii is 5th.
They can't be 7th and if you say they are then what was first?
Sega cd? Mega drive? Master system? 3do? Jaguar? Atari Sixer? Atari four?the Odyssey ? Channel F? there's 9 examples of different "Generations" of gaming consoles.

So the link you posted makes no sense, when did these generations start? and like I said about the saturn, if you look at Nintendo vs Sega it goes....

Master system vs NES
Mega Drive (Genesis) vs SNES
Mega CD vs N64?
Saturn vs N64?
Dreamcast vs Game cube

But the Mega cd was a next gen system.

Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...281972-1977.29

That's pretty much how the gaming press, the gaming industry and your informed gamer sees it. It has more to do with the release dates of competing consoles than anything else though that is not the sole factor. The 360 is not a 2nd generation console because it was the second console Microsoft released as you incorrectly attempt to define it, rather it is a 7th gen console (which you could call "next-gen" but really that term should be used for the PS4, X720,etc) because it came out in the loose window defined by the releases of competing machines.

Quote:

So I'll go back to the quote Chese made of my post and ask, find a definition of "Next Gen game consoles" on google, I couldn't, please show me cos I really am interested in what is truely classed as "Next-Gen"

As I've said, using Google to back up your arguments is really flawed. Though if you insist, try Googling what's in your quote, it takes you to many articles about the three new consoles. Further, "Next-gen" is an oxymoron. It means nothing, it's something advertisers use to sell more machines and I'm dismayed that supposedly logically thinking people are taken in by this crap. If you take it, as I and many others do, to mean 7th gen then the Wii is "next-gen".

Quote:

@Cheese.... After reading my above post please explain to me what was the 5th gen wars and what consoles were involved and why it was 5th gen.

Easy. It was between the consoles released around 1994-1999, the main combatants were PS, N64 and Saturn.

However, these aren't hard and fast rules. Some leeway seems to be given because it's not the black and white issue you want to paint it as, though I believe that the definitions I have given are pretty much the way most informed people see the issue of "generations of consoles". Personally, I'm amazed that anybody would question this. :dabs:
12-05-2006, 11:50 PM
GepperRankins

Re: My 2 Cents

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene

Ok, @the..... The links you post say the 360, wii and PS3 are 7th generation correct?
So what was the Saturn? I didn't mean was IS it, I mean what WAS it.

The 360, and PS3 cannot possibly be 7th generation by your reckoning, the 360 is 2nd and the PS3 is 3rdand the Wii is 5th.
They can't be 7th and if you say they are then what was first?
Sega cd? Mega drive? Master system? 3do? Jaguar? Atari Sixer? Atari four?the Odyssey ? Channel F? there's 9 examples of different "Generations" of gaming consoles.

So the link you posted makes no sense, when did these generations start? and like I said about the saturn, if you look at Nintendo vs Sega it goes....

Master system vs NES
Mega Drive (Genesis) vs SNES
Mega CD vs N64?
Saturn vs N64?
Dreamcast vs Game cube

But the Mega cd was a next gen system.

So I'll go back to the quote Chese made of my post and ask, find a definition of "Next Gen game consoles" on google, I couldn't, please show me cos I really am interested in what is truely classed as "Next-Gen"

@Cheese.... After reading my above post please explain to me what was the 5th gen wars and what consoles were involved and why it was 5th gen.

@BM.... You and I could argue this forever, I think the only way this will be settled is to wait and see.

Jonno :cool:

did you put that post in a food blender or sth?

this is the 7th generation because it's been decided that it's easiest to describe this as the 7th generation.

regardless of any particular consoles family tree. the 7th generation is the 360, the PS3 and the wii.

trying to refer to a cycle of consoles designed to rival each other as "sonys third, microsofts second, nintendos fifth and the first that sega wont play a part in as a hardware company" is harder than saying "7th generation"

it's the 7th cycle of home consoles since they decided the point to start counting.

this system of referring to generations is a standard the hardware industry, the software industry and gaming media have decided works.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

The time now is 10:10 AM