What Type Of Gamers Are Out There?

of quite a few of these well known gamers. They say x-box is good, and yet they are honorable gamers. Playstation has been around alot longer, and has many more games than x-box could ever hope to have...yet they say it's a bad gaming system, and they are honorable gamers. X-box has two games with it's system the honorable gamers tell me...I care why? The gaming world has been reduced to people who do not act appropriate, and say things like x-box owns you, or some other idiotic statement... Which system is backed by the more mature group, answer that for me... (If anyone has read Julius Caesar, they may get a kick out of this one :))

The PC. :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MagicNakor@2 April 2003 - 01:41
The PC. :lol:

---

Yep the PC for me too.

X-box for me, but I dont say that playstation 2 sux. If I had the money, I would have a playstation 2, a cube and an X-box B)

I own a PC. That should make it clear :lol:

me too, but I own a x-box too :P

Quote:

---

Originally posted by marine_aart@2 April 2003 - 15:42
X-box for me, but I dont say that playstation 2 sux. If I had the money, I would have a playstation 2, a cube and an X-box B)

---

i do own all of them, PS2 is good for the amount of games, but its been out for over a year more than the xbox and gamecube, so you would expect it to have more, PS2 is great but the controller for FPS games is crap. But the other types of games it has just about makes up for this.

The Gamecube, is a good system also, those that say its just for Pre teens are way out, im 30 and timesplitters 2 is great, not as good as goldeneye on the N64 but still a good game.

The Xbox does have the best graphics of all the systems and the idea of the hdd is great, The controler is great for FPS games but not as good as the PS2 controler for driving games.

All the above systems has uppers and downers in their own right, I like the PS2 for the amount of games, but sometimes the quality can leave a lot to be desired, but it does have final fantasy, GTA and Gran Turismo series, but The xbox has the 2 halo games at the moment and im sure a lot more games to come.

so for quality i would go for XBOX, PS2 and then the gamecube.

As for the PC argument, If I had a decent enough pc to play all the new games then i might have an oppinion, but as i dont and have just a 650mhz 8meg g/card il just leave that argument to someone else.

And as i was always told at school for essays, its quality not quantity that counts :D

PC B)
I also own:
PSX
Nintendo. (yes the ORIGINAL nes)
And I emulate:
SNES.
NEO GEO.
SEGA GENESIS.
N64.
I don't have the resources to buy an X-box or ps2.
I'll just wait untill they're down at the local salvation army!
(yes its true you can score good shit there!)

PC and...










































A GAMEBOY :P

I see you have a decent argument about system qualities. However, I believe that sony will always prevail when facing x-box. Sony has been in the business longer, and knows more about the gaming world. X-box was a risk (just like all business ventures.) It could have been a complete failure, though it wasn't, it was a possibiliy. The playstation two has the home field advantage in a sense, they know the cdrom console gaming industry alot better than Nintendo, or Microsoft could ever hope to know it. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure they explored every bit of information they had available, to see what the gamers wanted, but honestly, who would know better than the ones who have been successful in the business?

Sega Saturn = Failure
Sega Dreamcast = Failure (Some will say that it was great, but how great can it be when sega has to feed off of other systems to survive; The other system being sony playstation.)
Playstation = Complete Sucess
Playstation 2 = Complete Sucess (Only a complete success because of it's predecessor.)
Gamecube = Complete Sucess
X-Box = Complete Success (Though it was a risk for microsoft, they took it, and they did well...mostly because gamers nowadays are crazy over graphics, and system power, rather than decent games...Cant have everything can you?)

That's how I see the entire deal, I will always stand behind sony, simply because they probably are making more money in the console struggle as it stands. The majority of the money they are making is due to them being well-known, and word of mouth tends to spread quicker than news in this country. (An exaggeration for those of you who have no sense of humor.^)
X-box will continue to make money because people like the system, though I see nothing special about it. I have owned it, and really disliked the controller, so basically that's the reason I sold it...not to mention the shortage of games, another reason why playstation is more popular than x-box. For the people who are going to post, and say that I'm wrong...do your homework, check statistics, and only then can you tell me I'm wrong. I would like to state that these are my assumptions, and mine alone. I stated the obvious facts...so if you have a problem with it, go whine, because I'm not in the mood.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jowy@2 April 2003 - 16:07
I see you have a decent argument about system qualities. However, I believe that sony will always prevail when facing x-box. Sony has been in the business longer, and knows more about the gaming world. X-box was a risk (just like all business ventures.) It could have been a complete failure, though it wasn't, it was a possibiliy. The playstation two has the home field advantage in a sense, they know the cdrom console gaming industry alot better than Nintendo, or Microsoft could ever hope to know it. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure they explored every bit of information they had available, to see what the gamers wanted, but honestly, who would know better than the ones who have been successful in the business?

Sega Saturn = Failure
Sega Dreamcast = Failure (Some will say that it was great, but how great can it be when sega has to feed off of other systems to survive; The other system being sony playstation.)
Playstation = Complete Sucess
Playstation 2 = Complete Sucess (Only a complete success because of it's predecessor.)
Gamecube = Complete Sucess
X-Box = Complete Success (Though it was a risk for microsoft, they took it, and they did well...mostly because gamers nowadays are crazy over graphics, and system power, rather than decent games...Cant have everything can you?)

That's how I see the entire deal, I will always stand behind sony, simply because they probably are making more money in the console struggle as it stands. The majority of the money they are making is due to them being well-known, and word of mouth tends to spread quicker than news in this country. (An exaggeration for those of you who have no sense of humor.^)
X-box will continue to make money because people like the system, though I see nothing special about it. I have owned it, and really disliked the controller, so basically that's the reason I sold it...not to mention the shortage of games, another reason why playstation is more popular than x-box. For the people who are going to post, and say that I'm wrong...do your homework, check statistics, and only then can you tell me I'm wrong. I would like to state that these are my assumptions, and mine alone. I stated the obvious facts...so if you have a problem with it, go whine, because I'm not in the mood.

---

u forgot gameboy and n64


n64-Complete success
Gameboy-complete success

Dreamcast was a success because everyone bought one. now it isn't because ps2 etc. is out and everyone stuffed them in the attic.

sony makes the best games.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kAb@3 April 2003 - 01:24
n64-Complete success
Gameboy-complete success

Dreamcast was a success because everyone bought one. now it isn't because ps2 etc. is out and everyone stuffed them in the attic.

---

now i was just gonna say that...

gameboy is the onli handheld thatz still alive!

Quote:

---

gameboy
gameboy pocket <-- again a rip off but then it was smaller then the big gameboy
gameboy color
gameboy advance
gameboy advance sp <-- now thatz just a rip off to make more money

---

other handheld consoles...

neogeo -- died....

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Soul814@2 April 2003 - 17:27
gameboy advance sp <-- now thatz just a rip off to make more money

---

But look at how small it is&#33; But it&#39;s still another marketing strategy.

Now to answer the question:
PC
N64
PS2
Turbografx-16 (Porbably none of you people ever heard of)
PC-Engine Core Grafx 2 (None of you ever heard of either)

ppl dont read the specs do u&#33;?&#33;?&#33; u just think "oh look its new, even though i have gameboy advance might as well get sp"

Quote:

---

Size (Closed):
Height 3.33 inches, width 3.23 inches, depth 0.96 inches
CPU:
32-bit RISC CPU with embedded memory
Screen:
2.9-inch reflective TFT color LCD
Light Source:
Front lights have been integrated with the existing reflective LCD
Display Size:
1.61 inches by 2.41 inches (identical to the Game Boy Advance)
Resolution: 240x160 pixels (identical to the Game Boy Advance)
Color: Simultaneously displays more than 32,000 colors (identical to the Game Boy Advance)
Weight: Approximately 5 ounces
Power Supply: Rechargeable lithium-ion battery
Battery Life:
10 hours continuous play with three hour recharging period; 18 hours continuous play with light function disabled
Hardware Color:
Platinum and cobalt (metallic)

Suggested Retail Price: &#036;99.95

---

Quote:

---

Gameboy Advance Specs

It is so powerfull it can emulate other consoles... though you will have to catch your eye balls back, the low-consuming monitor will make you get weirdest positions ever.

Specs

32-Bit ARM CPU with embedded memory
2.9 inch TFT Color LCD Screen (non-backlit, sadly)
240x160 resolution
40.8mm x 61.2mm screen size
32,768 possible colors
511 simultaneous colors in character mode
32,768 simultaneous colors in bitmap mode
Size 144w x 82h x 25d (mm)
Weight 140g
Power 2 AA batteries
Battery Life 15 hours&nbsp;
Price = &#036;65.00

---

overall advance WINS&#33;

good point well made, and im going to try my best not to whine, ok :D

1st point is Amiga Vs Pc and in some respects Sega as well.

Amiga was a lot better machine, it had 3 cpu`s, Agnus Denise and another one which i cant remember the name, so it was a lot better at multitasking than even some of todays top home pcs, not sure about the hyperthreading technology so i wont argue against that. It also had better games/graphics than pcs at the time and shell was a lot more powerful than dos.

The only advantage the Pc had over the Amiga as far as i can tell was the Built in HDD and maybe office software etc. I think this is what killed the Amiga in the long run, the lack of a HDD.

Now im not going to say the same thing will happen in the console world, But ive read that you can put a 200gig hdd in the xbox, then get an emulator, out in a couple of months i believe for the ps2, then all you do is copy the entire game onto the 200gig hdd, and you have a machine that can run PSX, PS2 and Xbox games.

I think the Xbox will slowly catch up to sony and take over sony as well, but buy that time i believe the PS3 will be out so i suppose only time will tell, Also you have to remember sony have been in the console business for what must be close to 10 years now, but the XBOX is the new kid on the block, and a little bit of competition is good for us the consumers, as the technology is getting better and the prices getting cheaper.

And as for the graphics being more major than the gameplay, not your thoughts but you think the thoughts of many, i still say some of the old games on the Amiga had a lot more playability and lastability than some of these new games that are coming out for all the consoles. Sensible Soccer for instance, played both the Amiga and the PC version at the time and i must admit the Amiga version was just a lot smoother, in the graphics and the playabilty.

I still think the PC needs some more competition, and not just the cpus but the whole architecture, Apple will never do it, But if someone gets hold of the Amiga architcture and brings it smack bang up to date, and gets a decent operating system, then i think M&#036; and IBM etc, might think twice about bringing out shitty upgrades for 100`s of dollers and you will see a price crash for decent improvements coming onto the market very fast.

Sorry, went on a bit of a tangent there, but it all leads to the same conclusion. Its the company with the most money behind it and M&#036; and Sony are virtualy neck and neck in that respect, so it will just be fascinating and hopefully cheaper fur us to see the putcome of this battle.

stoi.

lol good u didnt say anything about gameboy thats my topic :P lolol

pc

now to complain bout xbox

xbox = microsoft >>

microsoft = pc

pc = pc graphics and that means that the graphisc will never be as good as playstation or nintendo ones&#33;

Hey Stoi, very nice, I only have a one issue with it :) (And two comments, lol)

I think the Xbox will slowly catch up to sony and take over sony as well, but buy that time i believe the PS3 will be out so i suppose only time will tell, Also you have to remember sony have been in the console business for what must be close to 10 years now, but the XBOX is the new kid on the block, and a little bit of competition is good for us the consumers, as the technology is getting better and the prices getting cheaper.

(My thoughts on this are pretty clear, I don&#39;t believe it will take over sony as you say, sony would go out of business before it would work under another company. It would never happen anyway, sony makes many other things, and would always have enough money to support playstation, even if it wasn&#39;t an automatic hot-seller. I am happy about prices getting cheaper as well :P)

And as for the graphics being more major than the gameplay, not your thoughts but you think the thoughts of many, i still say some of the old games on the Amiga had a lot more playability and lastability than some of these new games that are coming out for all the consoles. Sensible Soccer for instance, played both the Amiga and the PC version at the time and i must admit the Amiga version was just a lot smoother, in the graphics and the playabilty.

(I was referring to console disc types...I really haven&#39;t done any coverage on the Amiga, so you lost me there. I see what your getting at though. )


Sorry, went on a bit of a tangent there, but it all leads to the same conclusion. Its the company with the most money behind it and M&#036; and Sony are virtualy neck and neck in that respect, so it will just be fascinating and hopefully cheaper fur us to see the putcome of this battle.

(I as well hope it makes everything cheaper, because subtracting bit by bit from my paycheck per month, can sometimes get annoying. )

Personally, I think that a top of the line PC today will beat any console, in grafix, gamplay, controls, durability, amount of games.... A P4 3.06Ghz, with 1GB RAM, 128MB GeForce FX and two 180GB 7200rpm HDD&#39;s will seriously kick any conslole&#39;s ass (I think the XBox uses a Geforce 4 Ti4600card...) There are more games for the PC then there are or ever will be for the PS2 or PS1...not to mention the XBox and Gamecube, grafix will look as stunning as on a XBox, and when that sistem get&#39;s old, U don&#39;t have to put it away in the attic, U can use it for stuff like word processing and shit like that (I use a P1 100mhz Toshiba laptop to write some school reports ;) )

As for the controls, u can&#39;t beat the keyboard/mouse combination for FPS games, and if U want to play games like Rayman 2/3, U can plug in a gamepad, or joistick, or wheel....3D glassed, force feedback chair with surround sound&#33;&#33;&#33;(got a bit carried away there :unsure: ) The PC is has a lot of versatility (sp?), can U open a PS2 and change the grafix card, sound card, put some more RAM??

The only drawback to the PC it that it&#39;s a little more complicated to use than the consoles, and it tends to be a lot more expensive &#036;&#036; :blink: &#036;&#036;..but in the long run , I think the PC beats any conslole in every department by 10 to 1......but then again, that&#39;s only my opinion :P

I got them all, I&#39;d put it:

Xbox
PS2
Cube

DOUBLE POST
*Apology*
>

PC games are the best for gameplay/fun value
PS2 for quality value
X-BOX for visual and audio value

Quote:

---

pc = pc graphics and that means that the graphisc will never be as good as playstation or nintendo ones&#33;

---

X-Box has better grapfics then playstation 2, and is able to produce better grapfics then gamecube