• We are currently experiencing a flood of requests from bots scraping the forums. Unfortunately it has gotten to the point where it is negatively impacting the site. As a result the forums may be slow and you may periodically experiance an error message. We are aware of the problem and apologize for the inconvenience.
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

My take on all three console directions.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Microsoft:

Highlights:

+ Online Play
+ Content - Demos, Trailers, etc.
+ Xbox Live Arcade: Great feature and needs to be exploited more.
+ Traditional pricing structure (system can be had for 300 dollars)
+ Software - They are paying out the *** for software. Spending hundreds of millions of dollars on software development groups like Mistwalker, Silicon Knights, Rare, Epic, et. al.
+ Focus on simplicity of hardware design. Focused mainly on making a console, and not an off the shelf PC.
+ Ease of development, lots of developer tools and support.

Negatives:

- HD isn't standard. This hasn't been a huge issue, but I that I think devs would exploit the HD more if it had been standard.

- There's nothing 'revolutionary' about the design choices of the Xbox 360. Standard fare here, although this isn't much of a negative. Unlike Nintendo, it doesn't provide any huge controller differences, and unlike Sony it doesn't have a new media format.




Nintendo:


Highlights:

+ Unique Controller. I have to atleast give Nintendo props for doing something different. I wish they would have integrated it with a conventional controller a bit better, so developers had a bit more choice as to how to design their games.
+ Unique Content - I'm not a huge fan of the quirky games that Nintendo has made recently for the DS and GC, but I suppose it satisfies some audiences.

Negatives:

- Outrageous Price for the quality of hardware. 250 dollars is pretty steep for a system that seemingly has very little different in graphics than one released 5 years ago. Big negative for this. I wouldn't mind a system with inferior graphics so long as the price goes down accordingly. Nintendo can get away with it -- their fans are some of the most devout of the bunch.

- Vastly inferior hardware. There's a generational difference between the Wii and the PS3/360. That's pretty much a fact. I can't say I like this direction Nintendo is taking. Graphics are very important, and anyone who says otherwise is lying. They can greatly enhance the atmosphere and mood of a game. Imagine a zelda game with advanced shader techniques, and huge Oblivion-esque environments?

- Software so far is terrible. The only game I'm looking forward to is a GC port with Zelda. That's a huge plus, but let's be honest: what is on the horizon outside of Mario, Metroid, and Smash Bros? Not much.

- First party games appear to have progressively gotten worse since the N64 days. This is my opinion, of course, but none of the mario titles have felt genuine. The next mario title seems to follow the same direction that Mario Sunshine went, and perhaps even worse if the levels are relegated to planet hopping. They just don't have the charm that they once did.

Sony:
Highlights:

+ I like the standard HD across all systems.

+ I like the fact that you can apparently upgrade the HD with off the shelf PC components.

+ I like the fact that the firmware will, no doubt, have plenty of security holes allowing for this machine to get hacked beyond belief, and probably allow for a true media center PC eventually. This system may be a hackers dream, like the original Xbox was previously.

+ I like that they took a chance with Blu Ray, but I do not like the fact that it has elevated the price to 200 dollars more than an xbox 360, and has effectively doubled the conventional price of a launching system.

Negatives:

- Hardware design is sloppy. Overly complex. Very inefficient design. The system could have been much more powerful than it is with a 200 dollar premium over the X360.

- Graphics are good, but just as good as the 360. For a year later than the 360, it has no advantage. A 360 game being released this year is going to have the best graphics. This wasn't seen in earlier generations, as the PS2 easily had better looking games than the DC at launch, and similarly the Xbox had a game that looked leagues better than the best PS2 game at launch (Halo).

- Lack of consumer choice with Blu-Ray.

So when it's all said and done, most have their faluts, and most have their highs. In the end the consumer wins. Although I agree with the Playstation 3 vision of the future.
 

[AceAussie]

Awaiting October.
okay i'm sorry but i must say...

Graphics mean nothing it helps but without good games a console can't survive..
Nintendo Graphics are smooth PS3's are just PS2 with about 20% improvment and don't tell me i'm worng the 360 has far better graphics and i'm not saying nintendo has better graphics but they do look nicer...

Sony is a bunch of liars they are pathetic in the way they have done the PS3 i'll have to wait till march if i wanted one..and the Wii is out very soon why wouldn't i go for that console??

PS3=PS2 it's just so simple..
 
ut oh nintendo fanboy on the loose, I was giving my hardest at an unbiased look but I'm getting the lolz shut up Sony nintendo r00xx already crap.
 

Chris

Old Coot
- There's nothing 'revolutionary' about the design choices of the Xbox 360. Standard fare here, although this isn't much of a negative. Unlike Nintendo, it doesn't provide any huge controller differences, and unlike Sony it doesn't have a new media format.
Uh, who cares? It's design is GREATLY different from the original Xbox. It's no longer HUEG and it can be stored in just about any location without taking up much space.

Unlike Sony? Dude, Blu-Ray isn't standard either, and it never will be. o_O


- Outrageous Price for the quality of hardware. 250 dollars is pretty steep for a system that seemingly has very little different in graphics than one released 5 years ago. Big negative for this. I wouldn't mind a system with inferior graphics so long as the price goes down accordingly. Nintendo can get away with it -- their fans are some of the most devout of the bunch.
You're paying $250 for a console that can play Wii games, GameCube games, NES games, SNES games, N64 games, Sega Genesis games, Turbo Grafix games, has online connectivity, can use an online browser, has DS connectivity and you're COMPLAINING that that's a con? Considering the fact that it's the CHEAPEST of the three consoles? Seriously. Wtf?

- Vastly inferior hardware. There's a generational difference between the Wii and the PS3/360. That's pretty much a fact. I can't say I like this direction Nintendo is taking. Graphics are very important, and anyone who says otherwise is lying. They can greatly enhance the atmosphere and mood of a game. Imagine a zelda game with advanced shader techniques, and huge Oblivion-esque environments?
Graphics aren't very important. If you looked at the N64 days, you could see that some games did just fine without needing to be completely up to date (refer to Banjo-Kazooie, Perfect Dark and Conker's Bad Fur Day as examples from Rare for the N64). You also seem to forget that the PS3 is delivering PS2 visuals. ;\

- Software so far is terrible. The only game I'm looking forward to is a GC port with Zelda. That's a huge plus, but let's be honest: what is on the horizon outside of Mario, Metroid, and Smash Bros? Not much.
Yes, the Wii LAUNCH is plagued with crap third party titles. So is Sony and so was Microsoft. What's your point? Every launch SUCKS as there's little in quality titles. You're also basing your opinions on a console that hasn't even been released yet, let alone have any idea as to what other games will soon be in development and what not.

- First party games appear to have progressively gotten worse since the N64 days. This is my opinion, of course, but none of the mario titles have felt genuine. The next mario title seems to follow the same direction that Mario Sunshine went, and perhaps even worse if the levels are relegated to planet hopping. They just don't have the charm that they once did.
Next Mario title following Sunshine? Not even close. We're not getting Mario with a squirt gun. And you're only basing this con on one game? What games does Sony or Microsoft have going for them in first party? Oh wait, NONE.

+ I like the fact that the firmware will, no doubt, have plenty of security holes allowing for this machine to get hacked beyond belief, and probably allow for a true media center PC eventually. This system may be a hackers dream, like the original Xbox was previously.
Why in the world would you want to make your game system into a PC? :| Seriously, just buy a PC. This pro is irrelevant.

+ I like that they took a chance with Blu Ray, but I do not like the fact that it has elevated the price to 200 dollars more than an xbox 360, and has effectively doubled the conventional price of a launching system.
Not a pro as you mention that it DOES elevate the price and it is not a standard media format. Sony appears to also be the only company backing the format. Sounds familiar. Oh wait, UMDs. ;\

- Graphics are good, but just as good as the 360. For a year later than the 360, it has no advantage. A 360 game being released this year is going to have the best graphics. This wasn't seen in earlier generations, as the PS2 easily had better looking games than the DC at launch, and similarly the Xbox had a game that looked leagues better than the best PS2 game at launch (Halo).
Wow. Sony fanboy much? Dreamcast had the better graphics. They just had the lack of quality games. Example? Soul Calibur on Dreamcast ran faster and looked better than Soul Calibur 2 did on the PS2.

- Lack of consumer choice with Blu-Ray.
Not only is it not consumer choice, but developers aren't liking Blu-Ray. Irrelevant con, anyways, since Blu-Ray DVD movies aren't be welcomed with open arms.

So when it's all said and done, most have their faluts, and most have their highs. In the end the consumer wins. Although I agree with the Playstation 3 vision of the future.
So how's about them Toy Story graphics on that PS2? Hm?

Your logic is completely flawed. :| You failed to mention the huge amount of interest from developers for the Wii. You failed to mention that the PS3 comes in TWO expensive prices and that games may cost from $50 to $70. You also failed to mention that Sony has no stable online plans, while Nintendo and Microsoft have Wi-Fi and Xbox Live. You also forgot to mention that Sony doesn't have much in the ways of exclusives.

Nice try.
 
Uh, who cares? It's design is GREATLY different from the original Xbox. It's no longer HUEG and it can be stored in just about any location without taking up much space.

Unlike Sony? Dude, Blu-Ray isn't standard either, and it never will be. o_O

Assumption.

You're paying $250 for a console that can play Wii games, GameCube games, NES games, SNES games, N64 games, Sega Genesis games, Turbo Grafix games, has online connectivity, can use an online browser, has DS connectivity and you're COMPLAINING that that's a con? Considering the fact that it's the CHEAPEST of the three consoles? Seriously. Wtf?

ooo roms, yeah that's pushing the hardware.

Graphics aren't very important. If you looked at the N64 days, you could see that some games did just fine without needing to be completely up to date (refer to Banjo-Kazooie, Perfect Dark and Conker's Bad Fur Day as examples from Rare for the N64). You also seem to forget that the PS3 is delivering PS2 visuals. ;\

Graphics are important.

Yes, the Wii LAUNCH is plagued with crap third party titles. So is Sony and so was Microsoft. What's your point? Every launch SUCKS as there's little in quality titles. You're also basing your opinions on a console that hasn't even been released yet, let alone have any idea as to what other games will soon be in development and what not.

Just a observation, calm down.

Next Mario title following Sunshine? Not even close. We're not getting Mario with a squirt gun. And you're only basing this con on one game? What games does Sony or Microsoft have going for them in first party? Oh wait, NONE.

looks gimmicky and unfun to me. HALO and GT for each respective console.

Why in the world would you want to make your game system into a PC? :| Seriously, just buy a PC. This pro is irrelevant.

To you

Not a pro as you mention that it DOES elevate the price and it is not a standard media format. Sony appears to also be the only company backing the format. Sounds familiar. Oh wait, UMDs. ;\

UMDs are a different market, the portable is different from the home console.

Wow. Sony fanboy much? Dreamcast had the better graphics. They just had the lack of quality games. Example? Soul Calibur on Dreamcast ran faster and looked better than Soul Calibur 2 did on the PS2.

wow a one game examle...that the developer not the game. Yes I'm sure the Dreamcast can run Kingdom Hearts 2 perfectly

Not only is it not consumer choice, but developers aren't liking Blu-Ray. Irrelevant con, anyways, since Blu-Ray DVD movies aren't be welcomed with open arms.

Neither are HD-DVDs its open as to what is going on as there hasn't been a real agreesive push yet, what are you proving?

So how's about them Toy Story graphics on that PS2? Hm?

wow empty promises like Nintendo has never done this before! omg!

Your logic is completely flawed. :| You failed to mention the huge amount of interest from developers for the Wii. You failed to mention that the PS3 comes in TWO expensive prices and that games may cost from $50 to $70. You also failed to mention that Sony has no stable online plans, while Nintendo and Microsoft have Wi-Fi and Xbox Live. You also forgot to mention that Sony doesn't have much in the ways of exclusives.

Where are Wii's exclusive besides the first party titles and a title here and there from a publisher? PS3 has plenty of exclusive titles

Nice try.

likewise.

Stop, turn, take a look around. ;026;
 

Chris

Old Coot
Assumption.
Assumption? The hell kind of answer is that? It's not standard. Not everyone is conforming to HD or Blu-Ray. Several companies are refusing to switch over.

ooo roms, yeah that's pushing the hardware.
Yet you list Xbox Live Arcade as a pro. :) Unbiased, huh? No one said anything about them pushing the console's limits. They ADD more to the console's library. You're getting a console that almost entirely backwards compatible with all of its previous home console predecesors, with an additional two others. ROMs or not, it still makes the library larger.

Graphics are important.
Because graphics are the only thing that make games worth playing. Ammirite? 8)

looks gimmicky and unfun to me. HALO and GT for each respective console
Onoz! Nintendo's going with gimmicks! Let's just go ahead and stick to the same type of games everyone else is doing! You fail to realize that games are no longer fun when everyone just does the same thing and doesn't try anything new. Halo is only one game, and even that didn't stop Xbox's launch from sucking. Gran Turismo? Please. That's a terrible example.

No, it IS irrelevant because the console is a GAME MACHINE. Not a PC. If you want a PC, buy one. Modding a game console into something else does not count as it is not within the developers' intentions and the "pro" merely falls into place of your opinion.

wow a one game examle...that the developer not the game. Yes I'm sure the Dreamcast can run Kingdom Hearts 2 perfectly
Soul Calibur, Crazy Taxi, Grandia II, Ecco the Dolphin: Defender of the Future, Marvel vs. Capcom 2, Resident Evil Code: Veronica, Rez, Space Channel 5, and Dead or Alive 2 (a few games to mention) all run better on the Dreamcast than they do on their PS2 counterparts (in SC's case, the sequel runs quite bad on the PS2 compared to the prequel on the DC). I do hope you realize that the PS2 hardly outdates the Dreamcast when both were in development around the same time and were only released 15 months apart from eachother.

Neither are HD-DVDs its open as to what is going on as there hasn't been a real agreesive push yet, what are you proving?
That your con is irrelevant because the media simply isn't supported, period. In terms of games and DVDs.

wow empty promises like Nintendo has never done this before! omg!
Nintendo does have empty promises, but they don't outright lie to the public. The Toy Story graphics thing wasn't an empty promise. It was a flat out lie that Latios can explain better. It's as big of a lie as the claim that Microsoft is not a technology company and that Grand Theft Auto's sequel would be Sony exclusive and that the PS3's price isn't expensive. Right.

Where are Wii's exclusive besides the first party titles and a title here and there from a publisher? PS3 has plenty of exclusive titles
Nice try.

Blazing Angels: Squadrons of WWII - Available on Xbox 360
Call of Duty 3 - Available on Xbox 360
F.E.A.R. - Available on Windows and Xbox 360
Fight Night Round 3 - Available on PlayStation 2, PlayStation Portable, Xbox and Xbox 360
FlOw - Available on Windows, Mac OS, and Mac OS X
Madden NFL 07 - Available on GameCube, PS2, Xbox, Xbox 360, Windows, Nintendo DS, Game Boy Advance, PSP and Wii
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance - Available for PC, PS2, PSP, Xbox, Xbox 360, Wii, Game Boy Advance
NBA Live 07 - Available for Xbox 360, PS2, Xbox, PC, and PSP
Need for Speed: Carbon - Available for PC, PlayStation 2, PSP, Wii, GCN, NDS, GBA, Xbox 360 and Xbox
Sonic the Hedgehog - Available for Xbox 360
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion - Available for PC and Xbox 360
Tiger Woods PGA Tour 07 - Available for PC, Wii, Xbox, Xbox 360, PS2 and PSP
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas - Available for Xbox 360, PC and PSP
Tony Hawk's Project 8 - Available for PS2, Xbox, Xbox 360 and PSP

So let's see. 21 launch titles. 14 of them are available on other formats. That's only SEVEN exclusive titles for launch. The Wii has 17 exclusive launch titles. You fail.
 

UberSorcerer

Well-Known Member
I quite frankly agree with Chris on all acounts, with the exception of the Dreamcast as I never owned one, it is common knowledge/assumption BluRay will crash and burn like UMD, people in alot of the world just converted from VHS to DVD in the last few years, I am sorry, but people are not that dumb to convert again.
 

Wes

Iblis Wings
Where are Wii's exclusive besides the first party titles and a title here and there from a publisher?

Well there's Red Steel, Metal Slug Anthology, Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: The Crystal Bearer, Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles, Super Monkey Ball: Banana Blitz and of course.... Sonic and the Secret Rings! That's not all but I gotta get to school right now.

Graphics are important.

Well if the GCN can pull of amazing graphics I'm sure the Wii could too. I mean.... ever play Resident Evil 4 for GCN? That game just set the quality of graphics to a whole new level since Capcom put so much effort into it. If Resident Evil 4 a current gen game can look that good for GCNI'm sure that the Wii could do better.

But Justin can have his opinion too I guess.
 
Last edited:

azurill

Well-Known Member
Not giving in eh?

Well,the whole reason you made this is to go against Nintendo,don't try to pretend otherwise.


+ I like that they took a chance with Blu Ray
Um...don't you think that liking a system because they took a chance is kinda ridiculous?

- Outrageous Price for the quality of hardware. 250 dollars is pretty steep for a system that seemingly has very little different in graphics than one released 5 years ago. Big negative for this. I wouldn't mind a system with inferior graphics so long as the price goes down accordingly. Nintendo can get away with it -- their fans are some of the most devout of the bunch.
You do not reliase that the Wii is not based off on graphics,it's based on motion sensing.And I find the price cheap for that.I expected something like 300$.And another note,even if a screen can hold gazzilions of polygons and a disc 50 GB that still doesn't mean that you should pay 600$ plus the cost of the games plus HD set.

- First party games appear to have progressively gotten worse since the N64 days. This is my opinion, of course, but none of the mario titles have felt genuine. The next mario title seems to follow the same direction that Mario Sunshine went, and perhaps even worse if the levels are relegated to planet hopping. They just don't have the charm that they once did.
We know nothing about Galaxy yet,so you don't have the right to judge it.


One question!Why are you buying PS3?Your PS3 highlights don't give a single clue of why you want a PS3 when you actually say that graphics aren't that good(not that I care about graphics D)
 
Um...don't you think that liking a system because they took a chance is kinda ridiculous?
A lot of people like the Wii because nintendo took a chance with redesigning the way people play games.

:O!

That said, see; Chris' post.

-Josh
 

Valoc Darkmyre

Steel Type Hunter
I am going to side with Edward and Latios on most of these matters, but I don't completely agree on the point that graphics don't matter. Seriously, graphics can make a difference on gameplay if used right. I'm not talking about "graphics" in "how pretty the lighting effects are" or "how many polygons Solid Snake is pushing", but "graphics" in "how large the environments you have to explore are" and "how many enemies you're up against at once". Metroid Prime for the Gamecube is a good example of how large environments and numerous enemies onscreen that are capable because of the graphics engine can make a difference in the gameplay. Of course, those would be nothing without the great gameplay and controls, so in the end everything matters when making a game. ;)

Still, some games are quite good even if they're not particularly stunning visually, like Pokémon Red/Blue for example.
 
Last edited:

Valoc Darkmyre

Steel Type Hunter
Pokemon Red/Blue had decent graphics for a Game Boy Game irc.
You have to admit that the Pokémon sprites in those games, or rather background pieces (since that's what they are according to the Game Boy Color's color schemes) looked pretty ugly, and the backshots of the trainer and Pokés were even worse because of their pixellation. Still, it's forgivable because of the gameplay. =P
 

Valoc Darkmyre

Steel Type Hunter
Moral of the story: graphics don't matter.
I agree with that in the case of many games (ex. the 2D Pokémon games, Bomberman Tournament, Vib-Ribbon), but then again, we all bought Pokémon Stadium on the Nintendo 64 just to see our Pokémon fight with pretty 3D visuals (for the N64, at least). In the end, we're all a bunch of hypocrites. =P
 
Last edited:
graphics do matter. When did I ever say that they were more important than gamplay? ever? Oh that's right I didn't. There's nothing wrong with having superior graphics, and great gameplay to go with it...you should have to sacrifice one to go with the other.

and no you obviously picked a bad screenshot of the PS3 Sonic, because they are not graphically equal at all.
 

Korobooshi Kojiro

Funnnngaaaaa
By the time they were released in the US and worldwide, it was three years old. And to note, GSC used the same engine as RGBY. And RS's only graphical upgrades besides pretty colors is the reflection thing. DP... honestly there's nothing improved on that. It went to 3D, big whoop. FFIII looks better.

Moral of the story: graphics don't matter.

By the way, to bash on your idea Wii has the worst graphics of the three:

http://img56.imageshack.us/img56/9623/sonic360vi0.jpg -> Sonic for the 360
http://img56.imageshack.us/img56/8240/sonicwiixp7.jpg -> Sonic for the Wii

Unless my eyes suck and are untrained, I'd say both have the same level graphical detail.

I think those are labeled wrong....
 

Chris

Old Coot
Taking chances with new kinds of CD/DVD formats lead to problems.

Dreamcast used GD-ROMS, which was the ONLY thing that ever used such discs. Sega did this because not only were DVDs expensive at the time, but they also wanted to give more space for a CD and prevent people from pirating games. The opposite occured. People found ways to pirate the games, and it caused people to go towards the PS2 as it was the cheapest DVD player at the time.

The GameCube's miniDVDs was made in mind to prevent piracy and to avoid having to pay license fees to the DVD Forum, as well as lower the time of loading. In turn, this caused lower capacity for games to be stored in. Sometimes, bigger games had to be stored in two discs.

Sony's UMD for the PSP, while they have quite the amount of space, suffers greatly with movies. Most movies available on DVD have their extras removed from the UMD due to being unable to fit. UMDs were also, at one point, more expensive than DVDs of already existing movies and such. Sales went a turn for the worst to the point where retailers had to offer deals to sell the product (such as a buy one, get one free deal). Some retailers even dropped support for them entirely. Even studios such as Paramount, WB and even Sony Pictures cut back on releases due to the fact that DVDs are supported more.

There's nothing wrong with having superior graphics, and great gameplay to go with it...you should have to sacrifice one to go with the other.
Uh, no. Any gamer can tell you that games should NOT have to sacrifice anything.
 
right but you keep throwing up this notion that "graphics aren't everything" I keep seeing you repeat that over and over. um duh I know that they aren't however they are a huge part, I like to have both good graphics and good gameplay, which is also found on all three consoles, I don't think I've ever stated otherwise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top