Icetrash
King K.Rool
ABC said:
jerk off.... ITS POLISH CHRISTMAS YOU ****ER!
Played the PS3
- Thread starter Rand
- Start date
jerk off.... ITS POLISH CHRISTMAS YOU ****ER!
Squall7
A li'l bit different
ABC isn't bringing solely facts to this. He's bringing his opinions based on whatever facts he could find. Let's not forget that many people have touted (and argued based on it) that PSX and PS2 have 'won' previous console wars. I would therefore argue that it is one's own right to argue over which console will win this time around. Likewise, the assumption that PlayStation will win again because they've won the last two rounds is the equivolent as touting that "The N64 will win" (Note in a past tense). PlayStation have entered in later (Just like the N64) and have had much negative publicity and have a high pricing (arguably what the N64 had). There's actually quite a lot of parallels between the PS3 and the N64, so don't go counting on the PS3's success yet.
The PS3 reportidly had to be connected to the internet to download neccessary updates to play games at all. The Wii only had to download updates (Which the UK release won't have to worry about) to do things online properly. So in effect, Internet access is vital to the PS3, but not to the Wii. Not sure if this point will effect sales or not though.
Whilst I have played neither console as of yet (Give me a chance, this is the UK!), I reject the idea of my opinions on the matter being are worth nothing. I have read much about this console war on many different sites since way before E3.
And why is it important to me that Nintendo Wii succeeds?
1. For the continuation of the Nintendo line - Whilst Nintendo may not give up now, ex-president Yamauchi stated that the Gamecube would be the last Nintendo console if it failed at E3. Let's not forget that people kep refering to the ever-present reminder of "What happened to Sega". Considering also, that Nintendo are the only company that are trying to keep gaming and PC industries seperate - which they should be in my opinion.
2. It proves that most people aren't into "better" graphics (lets not forget that "better" when it comes to image is merely one's own desires for image fulfilled - that being that better isn't clearly defined as being more visible, more polygons nor more being more realistic - otherwise, half of the catalogue of games could never be on the "better" sides of graphics).
3. As a counter-attack for Sony fans that lauded Nintendo's "failures" with the N64 and Gamecube. Nintendo deserves to be the top in this instance, as they're all about games, and not about "realism", that's not to say that Nintendo cannot be realistic, but it has to be at least fun.
Also, many people have argued that the Wii is just a "souped up" Gamecube. Since when were the Gamecube graphics soo bad? Resident Evil, RE0 and RE4 all proved that not to be the case.
One last point - When going on about sales, I noticed the figures that ABC came out with were biased. Actual sold consoles of GC and Xbox vs consoles shipped for PS2 (There's still many PS2's in the shop ready to be sold)? Let's also not forget which console has the most breakdowns - PS2 (I myself have been through 2, and I know many of you have had similar experiences). In terms of breakdowns, Sony has produced many consoles. It doesn't mean they're good. On the contrary, it shows that it was not designed very well.
P.S. I'm sick of the comments about Nintendo's "mistake" with sticking with cartridges. It was not a mistake, it was a choice. Don't forget that Resident Evil 2 and Tony Hawks Pro Skater 2 made their way onto the N64 - Showing that there is enough room for most 1 disk PSX games. Cartridges are more reliable (scratch a Disk and you'll see) and has no loading times (something reportidly the PS3 suffers majorly from). It was a choice for developers - Quality or quantity. They wanted quantity. They got it. They got the extra disk space. They got more copies sold. They got tonnes of competition (the back-catalogue is quite the epitome of quantity over quality). Sony got tonnes of piracy (being on disks rather than cartridges meant that people could mod their PlayStations and boot up pirated games).
The reason why the N64 was so late, expensive and powerful was because of delays through partnerships being broken with both Philips and Sony. Kinda makes you wonder how valid Sony's excuse was (Blu-ray).
P.P.S. I'm not a fanboy, I'm a fanguy! I still don't get the idea of "fanboys" being so bad - the only people who argue with them, and have problems with them are fanboys from other sides: (Ninty Vs Sony Vs MS). Chances are, if you're arguing with a fanboy, you are a fanboy.
Interesting Read: Click Me
The PS3 reportidly had to be connected to the internet to download neccessary updates to play games at all. The Wii only had to download updates (Which the UK release won't have to worry about) to do things online properly. So in effect, Internet access is vital to the PS3, but not to the Wii. Not sure if this point will effect sales or not though.
Whilst I have played neither console as of yet (Give me a chance, this is the UK!), I reject the idea of my opinions on the matter being are worth nothing. I have read much about this console war on many different sites since way before E3.
And why is it important to me that Nintendo Wii succeeds?
1. For the continuation of the Nintendo line - Whilst Nintendo may not give up now, ex-president Yamauchi stated that the Gamecube would be the last Nintendo console if it failed at E3. Let's not forget that people kep refering to the ever-present reminder of "What happened to Sega". Considering also, that Nintendo are the only company that are trying to keep gaming and PC industries seperate - which they should be in my opinion.
2. It proves that most people aren't into "better" graphics (lets not forget that "better" when it comes to image is merely one's own desires for image fulfilled - that being that better isn't clearly defined as being more visible, more polygons nor more being more realistic - otherwise, half of the catalogue of games could never be on the "better" sides of graphics).
3. As a counter-attack for Sony fans that lauded Nintendo's "failures" with the N64 and Gamecube. Nintendo deserves to be the top in this instance, as they're all about games, and not about "realism", that's not to say that Nintendo cannot be realistic, but it has to be at least fun.
Also, many people have argued that the Wii is just a "souped up" Gamecube. Since when were the Gamecube graphics soo bad? Resident Evil, RE0 and RE4 all proved that not to be the case.
One last point - When going on about sales, I noticed the figures that ABC came out with were biased. Actual sold consoles of GC and Xbox vs consoles shipped for PS2 (There's still many PS2's in the shop ready to be sold)? Let's also not forget which console has the most breakdowns - PS2 (I myself have been through 2, and I know many of you have had similar experiences). In terms of breakdowns, Sony has produced many consoles. It doesn't mean they're good. On the contrary, it shows that it was not designed very well.
P.S. I'm sick of the comments about Nintendo's "mistake" with sticking with cartridges. It was not a mistake, it was a choice. Don't forget that Resident Evil 2 and Tony Hawks Pro Skater 2 made their way onto the N64 - Showing that there is enough room for most 1 disk PSX games. Cartridges are more reliable (scratch a Disk and you'll see) and has no loading times (something reportidly the PS3 suffers majorly from). It was a choice for developers - Quality or quantity. They wanted quantity. They got it. They got the extra disk space. They got more copies sold. They got tonnes of competition (the back-catalogue is quite the epitome of quantity over quality). Sony got tonnes of piracy (being on disks rather than cartridges meant that people could mod their PlayStations and boot up pirated games).
The reason why the N64 was so late, expensive and powerful was because of delays through partnerships being broken with both Philips and Sony. Kinda makes you wonder how valid Sony's excuse was (Blu-ray).
P.P.S. I'm not a fanboy, I'm a fanguy! I still don't get the idea of "fanboys" being so bad - the only people who argue with them, and have problems with them are fanboys from other sides: (Ninty Vs Sony Vs MS). Chances are, if you're arguing with a fanboy, you are a fanboy.
Interesting Read: Click Me
Last edited:
Icetrash
King K.Rool
Wow well typed out, alot of effort was put into that....
