Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I know it's a bit early to make any real decision as to what will be the best next-generation console, but if nothing else which are you most looking forward too?

hmm Im gonna wait til I see some nintendo rev stuff before I vote.. plus I'd like to see rev's controller

360 has my vote so far.

I dunno Nintendo's revolution looks like it could revolutionise the gaming industry. The screen shots of Tekken on the PS3 look unbeleivable, so life like, its amazing. And the the design of the console and controller gives it that "next gen" look lol, if u know wat i mean. Tbh I dont really care about microsofts 360 as I was never a fan of the x-box.

I say Sony wil probably take the top spot again as best console out of the three. Hopefully Nintendo can beat Microsoft this time around with the Revolution, im expecting great things from it.

Oooh, gonna make this sticky to make sure we don't get too many like this

360 Gets my vote too.

Unless Elder Scrolls 4 comes out on PS3....

PS3

360 vs PS3

I know people are going to deny all the claims made by this guy, but he knows more about what he's talking about than I do.

Edit> I will not, however, be ignorant to the fact that it has been written by someone at Microsoft and may be a little biased, but its not going to change the fact I'm gonna get a 360.

Either way, you won't really see the difference in either machine until the developers have utitilized the technology.

I, for one, am of the opinion that it is not the specs, but the games that sell systems. Seriously, those of you who bought an Xbox, did you buy it because it was technologically the best of the three, or because you'd be able to play the Halo games? Technologically, the PS2 should have had the lowest sales, but its extensive library of excellent games skyrocketed it to the top. And the reason you buy a Nintendo console is to play Nintendo's amazing first-party games and exclusive third-party deals.

That said, I believe the PS3 will keep Sony on the top, just because of the great games Sony gets. I think the Revolution will be a close second, mainly because of the ultimate backwards compatibility, which should draw in both the older gamers who want that nostalgia of playing Super Mario Bros. or Duck Hunt again, and the newer gamers who have never actually seen an original NES but have wanted to play old-school games. The 360, from what I managed to decode from Microsoft's pre-E3 press conference, will be a distant third, because they either have no target group, or are targeting the "girlfriends & mothers" area with the non-gaming customization of characters, levels, and the box itself. It also seemed that, since they managed to turn a computer into a gaming console to make the Xbox, they are now turning the Xbox back into a computer, with the gamerIDs and the messaging and internet surfing and all that non-gaming rot. I would not be surprised if the gaming side of Microsoft died in this cycle.

I bought Xbox for music/dvd/ and gaming tech.

Well, I can see that the PS3 could ultimatly fail if the price is very high. If its over 450-500 bucks, will the casual gamer want to pick it up?
Remember, Sony's consoles are always about casual gamers. I cant see a person buying it for that type of money.

But we have to wait and see.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Well, I can see that the PS3 could ultimatly fail if the price is very high. If its over 450-500 bucks, will the casual gamer want to pick it up?
Remember, Sony's consoles are always about casual gamers. I cant see a person buying it for that type of money.

But we have to wait and see.

You speak a good point, Smasandian. I agree that the new consoles, despite anything else, could live or die by the price.

Betcha my Zelda game collection (two gold cartridges!) that the Revolution is the least expensive, though.

Yea, it might end up being like the PsP itll sell a crapload at first and then just stop selling.

More PS3 vs 360 rantings

Personally I think both companies are talking out of their arses at the minute.

Originally posted by Thael
More PS3 vs 360 rantings

Personally I think both companies are talking out of their arses at the minute.

I would agree... still too soon to tell. But if the specs shown in Play Magazine's latest issue for 360 are accurate, I will be having very high expectations for it.

Originally posted by Thael
More PS3 vs 360 rantings

Personally I think both companies are talking out of their arses at the minute.
Yep, bitter hatreds there.

There's talk that PS3 will be priced at launch similiar to what the PS2 was priced at.
I dont believe it because a) the hardware cost more than 1,000 right now b) PS3 has been labelled as the entertainment supercomputer and it thats true, thats soo not cheap.

Am I the only who feels Sony think themselves as gods because of the PS3?

ok I'm Sony all the way even though nintendo in my mind is better then microsoft PLEASE dont' go all oh xbox xbox on me oh yeah sony is the best come on SUPERCOMPUTER TECH i think it's going to be around 500, the ps3 yeah wireless online ? blu ray ? 128 bit color? 50 GB discs ? COME ON who thinks that xbox 360 is going to top the CELL come on i think that backwards compatibility for the ps3 was a no brainer but the revolution ALL THE nintendo games ? COME ON that's bad friggen ass i would be happy with just the flippin nintend 64 games but the snes and the gamecube, duh, DAMN that's awesome

yeah about the price US hardcore gamers are getting it for sure but the casual gamers ahhh man I hope that the can be awakened to the god that is gaming ... sorry for the blasphemy but come on sony pwns all I know that sony shouldn't feel like gods but SONY WE LOVE YOU

Originally posted by General Kaliero
I, for one, am of the opinion that it is not the specs, but the games that sell systems. Seriously, those of you who bought an Xbox, did you buy it because it was technologically the best of the three, or because you'd be able to play the Halo games? Technologically, the PS2 should have had the lowest sales, but its extensive library of excellent games skyrocketed it to the top. And the reason you buy a Nintendo console is to play Nintendo's amazing first-party games and exclusive third-party deals.

That said, I believe the PS3 will keep Sony on the top, just because of the great games Sony gets. I think the Revolution will be a close second, mainly because of the ultimate backwards compatibility, which should draw in both the older gamers who want that nostalgia of playing Super Mario Bros. or Duck Hunt again, and the newer gamers who have never actually seen an original NES but have wanted to play old-school games. The 360, from what I managed to decode from Microsoft's pre-E3 press conference, will be a distant third, because they either have no target group, or are targeting the "girlfriends & mothers" area with the non-gaming customization of characters, levels, and the box itself. It also seemed that, since they managed to turn a computer into a gaming console to make the Xbox, they are now turning the Xbox back into a computer, with the gamerIDs and the messaging and internet surfing and all that non-gaming rot. I would not be surprised if the gaming side of Microsoft died in this cycle. [/QUOTE
This is so true serious chet xbox doesn't have crap halo wow one title will carry a whole system ? come now at the time launch of the ps2 it was technologically the best thing ever and it still is gambecube and xbox maybe now will beat ps2 in tech but the ps2 was the one that had the games had the tech AT THE TIME to make all those great games but now that it is losing in tech it is already to late to beat it it had a good 2 or 3 years headstart on gamecube and I am pretty sure 3 and a half years ahead on xbox I know this is kinda dumb to say but some people are still trying get a ps2 serious ps3 is going to blow everything away

The PS2 went through a similar hype vacuum (Tekken Tag anyone? ), the console didn't live up to half of its hype IMO.

The only reason the PS2 has more of a foothold over the X-Box is because it was out sometime before, so its already got its "foot in the door" I mean, everyone bashes the 'Box because "Halo is the only good thing on it" well the PS2 wasn't so hot on release either.

To be honest, I'd only really get a PS3 for GTA and Metal Gear, other than that I don't see the big selection of games to play on Sony's systems that everyone else laps up, since most games nowadays are multi-format.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Am I the only who feels Sony think themselves as gods because of the PS3?

Nope, but it seems that Sony have a lot of people believing that too. I try to ignore the hype, but its difficult when you got people trying to ram it down your throat.



What the bloody hell are you rambling about? "The god of gaming" so you're saying unless you own a PS3 you're not a hardcore gamer? "Gamer" by definition means someone that enjoys games, not a particular system, you can't call yourself a hardcore gamer and be pig-ignorant of other systems. Fanboy maybe, but no gamer.

My god comment was more about Sony thinking whatever they do will still make them the leading gaming machine. They're going towards more all in one entertainment box and less of an gaming console.
Dont you think sooner or later Sony will have its priorities crossed.
For me, gaming is about bloddy games. Its my hobby. Having a blu-ray disc player (no ****ing point of having one) and all the shabam isnt my hobby. Nintendo is about gaming and they will always look out for the gamer. Sony does too but if PS3 is bought by people looking for the entertainment all in one device and not gaming, dont you think Sony will cater towards that market instead of gamers, considering casual and hardcore gamers made the Playstation popular?

I hope for goodness sakes thats not true.

I think PS3 is supposed to be the most powerful, I'd expect it to be between the PS3 and the Revolution for the best games. I'm an RPG/Zelda-ish games-man myself though... Don't really like many sports or racing games. The only problem is that I didnt really feel that the Cube was even as good as PS2 in terms of games. Nintendo's goin downhill. Can't wait for the next Zelda regardless.

And the backwards compatibility thing for Nintendo is gonna be huge, as I'm pretty sure SNES is unanimously decided as the BEST GAMING SYSTEM EVER! Gooooooo Mario RPG.

I think XBOX 360 may do better than PS3 though... Cuz the roles are reversed. Everyone's going to be buying XBOX when it comes out, and not want another system the following spring. Halo 3 is also gettin released at the same time as PS3.

To me, it seemed like X Box drew in a lot more people who were new to gaming with Halo, in the same way that it seemed like Playstation 1 did. N64 was better than PS1 (yea, i said it) but PS2 beat the crap out of the Gamecube. I think X Box 360 might do the same thing, especially if PS3 fails to live up to PS2 like Gamecube did to N64.

I dont think the GC failed live up to the N64.

Both are equally good systems.
There's some amazing games out for the GC and the system itself is not too shabby either.

Originally posted by Smasandian
I dont think the GC failed live up to the N64.

Both are equally good systems.
There's some amazing games out for the GC and the system itself is not too shabby either.

I would tend to agree... GC did a few things right, most notably the fact that they moved from cartidge format to disc format. I think the excessive focus, however, on GBA connectivity and the lack of online support is one of the biggest mistakes that they made during this go around. That, and letting Rare slip away. Oops.

i think GC was just under rated its an awsome system

tis true shadow12

PS3 is tight as hell

I saw how war game looked on it at E3..it looks so really you could almost feel the blood shed.

Having Rare slip away was a good thing.

There's no doubt they make some really good games, but for the price to keep the contract, it wasnt worth it.

Look at what Rare has produced in the past console race. Nothing, no games at all. Kameo and Perfect Dark Zero was suppose to be out on the GC, then the XBOX, now its on the XBOX 360. For what MS paid for (around 500 million I think), getting 2 games out of 6 years aint going to cut it.

Rare released Jet Force Gemini, PD, Goldeneye and Banjo Tooie and its other one, Killer Instinct Gold, Blast Corps, Diddy Kong Racing, Donkey Kong 64 and Conkers for the N64. Thats alot of good games.
For XBOX, they are releaseing a remake of Conkers.
The funny thing though, is that they also released Star Fox Adventures for the Cube.
I dont think it really made a difference when Rare left because alot of those games are with Nintendo franchises. The ones they produced themselves didnt sell as well.
Nintendo did good cause now they have Retro, who did amazing work with Metriod.

well in the stock market in japan the PS3 is about $500. That is to god damn much money. Xbox blows, so why would i invest in a company that produced a mediocre system,but promised everything but? i guess i'll just play ps2 and xbox untill i get bored with games and call it quits.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Having Rare slip away was a good thing.

There's no doubt they make some really good games, but for the price to keep the contract, it wasnt worth it.

Look at what Rare has produced in the past console race. Nothing, no games at all. Kameo and Perfect Dark Zero was suppose to be out on the GC, then the XBOX, now its on the XBOX 360. For what MS paid for (around 500 million I think), getting 2 games out of 6 years aint going to cut it.

Rare released Jet Force Gemini, PD, Goldeneye and Banjo Tooie and its other one, Killer Instinct Gold, Blast Corps, Diddy Kong Racing, Donkey Kong 64 and Conkers for the N64. Thats alot of good games.
For XBOX, they are releaseing a remake of Conkers.
The funny thing though, is that they also released Star Fox Adventures for the Cube.
I dont think it really made a difference when Rare left because alot of those games are with Nintendo franchises. The ones they produced themselves didnt sell as well.
Nintendo did good cause now they have Retro, who did amazing work with Metriod.

I guess we'll have to see how Kameo and PDZ turn out, and when they turn out to see if you're right. In terms of current consoles, you're right. Long term, I'm not sure.

Long term maybe.

But Retro, the company who did Metriod Prime looks very promising when it comes to developing now.

Originally posted by Shin_akuma
ok I'm Sony all the way even though nintendo in my mind is better then microsoft PLEASE dont' go all oh xbox xbox on me oh yeah sony is the best come on SUPERCOMPUTER TECH i think it's going to be around 500, the ps3 yeah wireless online ? blu ray ? 128 bit color? 50 GB discs ? COME ON who thinks that xbox 360 is going to top the CELL come on i think that backwards compatibility for the ps3 was a no brainer but the revolution ALL THE nintendo games ? COME ON that's bad friggen ass i would be happy with just the flippin nintend 64 games but the snes and the gamecube, duh, DAMN that's awesome

yeah about the price US hardcore gamers are getting it for sure but the casual gamers ahhh man I hope that the can be awakened to the god that is gaming ... sorry for the blasphemy but come on sony pwns all I know that sony shouldn't feel like gods but SONY WE LOVE YOU

This is so true serious chet xbox doesn't have crap halo wow one title will carry a whole system ? come now at the time launch of the ps2 it was technologically the best thing ever and it still is gambecube and xbox maybe now will beat ps2 in tech but the ps2 was the one that had the games had the tech AT THE TIME to make all those great games but now that it is losing in tech it is already to late to beat it it had a good 2 or 3 years headstart on gamecube and I am pretty sure 3 and a half years ahead on xbox I know this is kinda dumb to say but some people are still trying get a ps2 serious ps3 is going to blow everything away


Okay, I understood about half the things you said there.

I'l stick to old NES and Sega, they have the good fun games, I really dont care for new consoling since I only want to play new gmaes on pc, since it packs much more power and alot better to play with, who wants to sit with a Stradegy game on a consol, a 3DShooter on consol? nah the consols are only good for the fighinting games

Well its all got to do with opinion. Consoles are more accessible



There is the downfall, depending on your situation you might have to buy a new PC every year to keep up to date and that can be very expensive.

true my friend spends a fortune tring to keep up with the times

You know, I read an interesting thing yesterday. I'll try to find the article in a bit, but for now...

Not one of the movies at Sony's E3 presentation was done using the PS3 graphics technology. Why? Because the GPU to be used for the PS3 (codenamed RSX)is still in development - meaning the supposedly real-time demos cannot be real. nVidia's chief financial officer Mary Burkett confirmed that last week. Burkett did concede, however, that nVidia had been working with chips similar in power to the RSX, so the PS3 may indeed be able to deliver such graphics as seen at E3. Right.

Yet more interesting is the info about Microsoft. Their playable demos on the show floor - which at first appeared to be running on the displayed 360's - were in fact being powered by APPLE G5'S behind the scenes!

So the tables have turned, haven't they? Sony had nothing to actually show, and so made a mock up of what they think it will look like? And Microsoft was using MACINTOSH computers to fake their own console, which they said would be out by this holiday season?

Looks like Nintendo is the only one who did the smart thing, by actually telling people they didn't have a console yet.

The source would be nice.

I love how people call Nintendo creative when almost all of their recent big video games have just been rehashes of old titles. Nintendo relies too much on their classics to keep their boat from sinking.

PS3 is going to win.

they hate to change a good thing and they have benn known to take risks

Originally posted by General Kaliero
You know, I read an interesting thing yesterday. I'll try to find the article in a bit, but for now...

Not one of the movies at Sony's E3 presentation was done using the PS3 graphics technology. Why? Because the GPU to be used for the PS3 (codenamed RSX)is still in development - meaning the supposedly real-time demos cannot be real. nVidia's chief financial officer Mary Burkett confirmed that last week. Burkett did concede, however, that nVidia had been working with chips similar in power to the RSX, so the PS3 may indeed be able to deliver such graphics as seen at E3. Right.

Yet more interesting is the info about Microsoft. Their playable demos on the show floor - which at first appeared to be running on the displayed 360's - were in fact being powered by APPLE G5'S behind the scenes!

So the tables have turned, haven't they? Sony had nothing to actually show, and so made a mock up of what they think it will look like? And Microsoft was using MACINTOSH computers to fake their own console, which they said would be out by this holiday season?

Looks like Nintendo is the only one who did the smart thing, by actually telling people they didn't have a console yet.

wow, that's very interesting. not that I don't believe you, but where'd u find this out?

Originally posted by NinjaJJ
I love how people call Nintendo creative when almost all of their recent big video games have just been rehashes of old titles. Nintendo relies too much on their classics to keep their boat from sinking.

PS3 is going to win.

On what grounds do you figure this to be an absolute?

Source here

There ya go. Not much in there I didn't cite, but yeah, there's a source.

And in reply to NinjaJJ:

Why shouldn't they use their big franchises? If you have an awesome series, releasing new games in that series is common sense. Plus, we've reached the point in time where many people haven't played the old marios and the other classics. What bad about bringing back the origins of a famous series? And, if you'd looked at Nintendo's E3 stuff, you would have noticed that many of their new games are just that: entirely new.

I can assure you that Nintendogs will be a huge hit when it gets over here. The closest thing we've ever seen to that is those crappy tamogotchi-whatevers from a few years ago. This will be gold.

Odama. A war game. With a GIANT PINBALL. strange, freaky, but undeniably original and creative.

I personally am excited about Fire Emblem on the GC, because the series is great, and its greatness is just now being recognized in the US. And that's new, because there's no other game like it.

Another interesting bit from Gamespot.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/05/31/news_6126725.html

Its funny how arrogant Sony is. Their right for the picking. If they learned anything from taking the mantle of king of consoles from Nintendo, they would see that casual gamers might not want to pay more money just so they can play on two HDTVs and seven people. If you have the hardware, it probalby be loads of fun but come on, what developer is going to spend tons of cash to create a game that only 1% of its buyers would actually want?

I also dont like how the dude says their using the PS3 to push the whole Blue Ray disc's into the market, considering they think the PS2 was the sole reason for the breakthrough of DVD technology. I think Blue Ray will become the next LaserDisc.
I personally dont think people who would buy the PS3 (if it cost a boatload=hardcore gamers) could care less about buying an HDTV to play it better.
If XBOX 360 is cheaper, the half year advantage in being out, and hopefully some kick ass games. I can see the XBOX 360 beating out Sony's PS3 with Nintendo being second with its niche market.
I was a lil worried that Nintendo might eventually get knocked out like Sony, but from its marketing point of view for the new console, I cant see that. Instead of going for all the marbles like the other two, they're going on thier strenghs, and they will always have those hardcore Fanboys.

I dont like the fact that Ken said that the ps3 is not a gaminng console.

Exactly.

I have feeling that Sony might alienate some customers with this marketing strategy, especially hardcore gamers like ourselves. We want game console, then maybe entertainment centre. Not vice versa. And then if the price is too high it might drive off casual gamers also.

Its going to be really interesting how PS3 does because I dont think having all that power will sway peoples opinions so easily. What would happen if this turns out to be way overhyped and then a big letdown if the games they release do not look like the videos they show at E3.

everyone knows that the game makes the systems.

the polls don't lie ps3... at e3 alls xbox 360 talked about is how you will be able to upload you digital pictures onto you xbox who the hell cares about that crap. at least ps3 had some sweet trailers! and nintendo all they had was Zelda when they should have been concentrating on next gen. like making a controller?

thank you

your welcome

Umm, polls do lie. Polls dont mean shit because they have a chance to be highly unaccurate.
Look at political polls. One day this guy is in the lead, the next day this guy is in the lead.
Dont believe in any of the polls because they do not accuratly represent peoples minds.
Im not saying that people at E3 didnt like the PS3 better, im just saying, that it has a high chance that its not accuratly relfecting the minds of gamers.

Well, you know that the main selling point of the PSP was that you can do all of that crap you mentioned? IE. downloading digital pictures to the PSP.
Also, you say Nintendo shouldnt of showcased Zelda as much as the Revolution? Well, most reputable magazines and online sites labelled Zelda as the game of the show, which will significantly increase sales of the game and possibly sales of the Revoultion later next year due to the fact its backward compatible.
Also, the went towards Zelda because A. they didnt have much to show of the Revolution which made it more for speculation and less than negative views because if they showed Revolution with out much support and content, people would undoubtable be very negative.
And the controller is already made, they're just waiting to show everything at different time. There is no law you need to show everything at E3. It might be stupid or not, but you dont need too.

yeah but chances are that if you want zelda you will buy it and by the time revolution is out every one who wanted zelda will have alredy bought it!

thats fanboyism though.

yep

What fanboyism? Who me?

Haha.

What I meant about Zelda increasing sales was that at the end of a console cycle, the general public might not want to buy that game due to the fact that a new console is right around the corner. But because this game might be very good, people will be more inclined to buy it because they know they can still play it on the new system.

Your comment about zelda though, is a load of crap. What makes or breaks a game is the people who find out about it due to publicity that buy it. In a years time, that game will probably still sell well.
Half Life was a high seller at the start of release and those are the people who wanted to buy it. What made that company millions was that people bought it after the 3rd year. That was thier highest selling year for that game.

Unfortunately, if you're a PS3 fanboy, you're considered by the populace (which mostly consist of typical ps3 fanboys) to have an unbiased opinion.. god forbid you like nintendo or microsoft though (you know.. developers who realise what quality means)... people start acting like you've committed some rediculous crime

I know.

What I meant about it the question, if they thought I was a fanboy.

But you gotta love those fanboys. They give people much needed humor.

i am guessing that both of you two are hard core gamers witch would mean that you watched e3 witch would mean that i am right so who am i ganna listen to you to or the people at e3 thats what i thought. PS3!

Nah you got me wrong I knew that Zelda was going to win those game award shows, you just cant say no to the Zelda Fanboys.

What people at E3?

The booth babes?
The sweet stained gamer who is high on overpriced hotdogs and beer?
The companies? (like you can trust everything that comes out of those sneaky PR reps)
Or the videogame journalists? They offer opinions which dont really reflect anything at all.

This polls you were talking about?
Who made it. Where was it publish or distrubutied. Who took the info. How long was it on for. Whats the degree of error. Did it actually exist. And who is holding the informations. Like I said, polls dont mean shit.

hehe.. I never trust the supposedly "company released system specifications"... I usually wait it out til some hardcore gamer dissects the consoles and gives us the hard facts

Amen and hopefully w/o bias.

Bias is name of the game on KMC.

I probably admit to bias sometimes. What do you think my fav series is?

(Points to the picture to the left)

Half life is the worst game ever

Originally posted by ScarFace Clone
Half life is the worst game ever

What a moronic statement. No wonder you got banned.

Yeah, hopefully we dont see him for awhile. The guy was stupid, especially with the thread name of Sats is gay.

Oh well, he gave Sony fans a bad name.

And for the record Scarface Clone, if your reading this, Half Life is not the worst game ever. Where would FPS be little man?

hey half life is great because it shows innovation and effort like few other, but likemost shooters single player can get borig especially when you don't know what to do next.

However,he is entitled to his opinion and what did he do anyway to get banned.

Originally posted by CorderaMitchell
hey half life is great because it shows innovation and effort like few other, but likemost shooters single player can get borig especially when you don't know what to do next.

However,he is entitled to his opinion and what did he do anyway to get banned.
he was bashing other ppl

oh my bad.

Wasnt just bashing but being discrimating towards non-straight people.

oh he was doing that, yea thats a ban right there.

Didnt you see that thread
Is Satsujin gay?
Or who's gayer Sats, blah blah blah?

Dude Smasandian, just let it go ps3 will be the best and everyone knows it so let it go

mmhmm... June 2005... united states... a pattern me thinks? :P

I'm still undecided about the future of the consoles however

i am just playin around... no personal attacks

http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=582&type=mov&f=1

http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=582&type=wmv&f=1

E3 Reloaded
a very nice compiliation of all E3 had to offer (MOV and WMV formats)

Originally posted by Smasandian
Didnt you see that thread
Is Satsujin gay?
Or who's gayer Sats, blah blah blah?

No i probably arrived on the scene of the games much later.

No, they were made a couple of days ago.

Im also undecided about the next gen. I love FPS, so I might just keep on going to the PC route.

I used pc for the big half life stuff, but bottom line is game makes consoles,no matter what extra stuff it can do, only after games are mastered, should come hardware,

However i still choose sony, even in the past because, the variety, and the hardware was an extra, only if i played sports games I don't because I play alone, then I would've chosen some'thing like an x box.

the real battle is between xbox and playstation nintendo screwed themselves when they had almost no good games for GAYcube aka gamecube

.........

is that scilence for because i have a point?

No, because the gay references to a game system are old and very tiresome.... and also because silence has only one C in it.

thnx i didn't c that oops.............besides y r u speaking for someone else was i asking u no

good point but the subject is on the new game consoles

But wouldn't you need to know about computers first to put those upgrades on?

on wat?he's talking about computers

lol

wat?

back on the assined subject plz

Originally posted by Primitive Screwhead
No, because the gay references to a game system are old and very tiresome.... and also because silence has only one C in it.

Ebert and Roper give that 2 thumbs up


on a side note.. is it just me.. or are the vs. threads out there getting just a tad out of control... o_o

yes............yes they r

jealousy and people with no lives,and have never touched a girl before........

hahahahahahahaha

lol i try

Yes Stats they are getting out of control.

I don't mean to

nintendo posted some stuff about revolution on their website.. not sure
if it contains any new info though..

http://www.nintendo.com/newsarticle?articleid=5aa8631e-d4a0-45d9-a88c-e5931b807091

the ps3 controller looks like a boomerang

Great for playing games AND defending yourself from rampaging kangaroos...

lol, is it backwards compatible,

PS3 will own them all the same way PS2 did. I mean, just look at it!!! And yeah, the controller is two-in-one, controller and weapon

its 2 in 1?

Controller and weapon! duhh!......PS3 is ganna own all systems!

thank you this is obvious by now right?

Its not.

How can it be?
Nothing is out now.

Dont take Sony's position as king of consoles coming into next gen too much. Any company can go down. Also, Sony looks prime to be taking down by the XBOX. I am more intrigued from MS has to offer with its online than any sort of power and entertainment Sony has.
Both systems have generally the same amount of power, so I think the online will take over. Its pretty awesome what MS has for that, and PDZ and Gears of War look more promsining than rehash of Sony staples.

Killzone 2 online will be awsome! and The cell processor for the PS3! i just think ps3 will take over but that is just my opinion and i could be wrong!......but i dont think i will be.

I agree, but its that people were using the "power" excuse for not buying a playstation system, but now that it has that and versatility, it should do as good or better than ever.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Its not.

How can it be?
Nothing is out now.

Dont take Sony's position as king of consoles coming into next gen too much. Any company can go down. Also, Sony looks prime to be taking down by the XBOX. I am more intrigued from MS has to offer with its online than any sort of power and entertainment Sony has.
Both systems have generally the same amount of power, so I think the online will take over. Its pretty awesome what MS has for that, and PDZ and Gears of War look more promsining than rehash of Sony staples.

mmmm... Perfect Dark Zero...

Killzone 2 MP?
Yeah, like anybody knows anything about it. it could be monkeys throwing banana's at each other for all we know.

Well, history doesnt show that the system with the most "power" wins out. PS2 won the console race but had less power than the other three. So now because its the most powerful, Sony fanboys thinks it will be the best. Power doesnt mean anything at all. It means its going to be the most expansive, which isnt good sometimes. People who did buy the console used the less power because it was cheaper than the XBOX. You might just see a reverse in people buying the console.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Killzone 2 MP?
Yeah, like anybody knows anything about it. it could be monkeys throwing banana's at each other for all we know.

Well, history doesnt show that the system with the most "power" wins out. PS2 won the console race but had less power than the other three. So now because its the most powerful, Sony fanboys thinks it will be the best. Power doesnt mean anything at all. It means its going to be the most expansive, which isnt good sometimes. People who did buy the console used the less power because it was cheaper than the XBOX. You might just see a reverse in people buying the console.
u have a point but more people ended out with XBOXs

Microsoft still loses money on each xbox they sell so it really dont even matter.

they... lose money for selling?.. o_O.. how does that work?

Works when it costs more to make it, and you sell it for a cheaper price then it costed you to make it.

yep yep yep, nice sig and avatar

I love wolves.

PS3. Because PS2 had better games IMO.

Thanks for giving economics 101. I think Sats question was rhetorical.


Every console company makes no money from the sale of a console. They make most of the money from licensing fees that they charged to the guys who make the game. What would a company rather do. Sell a console for 100 bucks and make no profit from the actual sale, but make 10 bucks per game copy sold. For 5 games a person buys, the company has made 50 bucks profit. Multiply that by a million purchasers for just 5 games. Thats 50 million bucks right there.
Whats more viable?

Sorry, i tried to edit the above post, and it took too long. heres a much better example. (Damn 15min rule)


Sell a console for 100 bucks and make no profit from the actual sale, but make 10 bucks per game copy sold. 5 people buy the same game for 10 bucks, company gets 5 bucks each copy sold due to fees. Thats 125 dollars profit. On the other hand, 5 people buy 1 console each for30 bucks, company gets 15 dollars from each console. Thats 375 profit. Its look much better but remember, those 5 people already have the console so the company will only make 375 bucks from them.
But what if those 5 people in the first scenerio each buy another game, thats 250 bucks. It will continue to increase until the stop buying games, which they will because thats the reason why the bought the console in the first place. Understand?

Money is made from software sales, not hardware. Why do you think theres alot more independent developers on the PC?

Hmm I sorta see.. I was sorta thinking it meant , since most of microsofts fanbase already has an x-box.. that people who bought an xbox currently are less likely to purchase the 360, so they'd be losing money in that sense.. but Im not really big on economics.. or math for that matter

also.. were you referring solely to the reduced price of the current gen consoles? or does this apply to the brand new consoles as well? (like in the 250 to 300 dollar range)

I think we simply mean the big 3

Microsoft make millions on Xbox Live as far as I know

Yes they do indeed, the next big console sony was going to have more live play, and I have a computer anyway.

I think it also includes the current consoles.
Selling a console at non profit price wil also increase fan base due to the fact its cheaper. They would rather have an extra 50 thousand people buyin the console at the lower price because they will also buy tons of games.

The fact is that XBOX did not lose money with the XBOX. Its stupid to think that. If they did lose alot of money, why would they continue with XBOX`360? For bragging rights? To be cool? Gates wanted to decrease his fortune for shits and giggles? To make people buy more MS Windows stuff?
They obviously made money.

I agree or they would have quit

Microsoft is so rich they dont care.

They do.

Companies care when the lose millions. Shareholders care.

true ^

people upon people get payed in the process of making, shipping, and advertising this alone, someone cares.

Apparently they'll be releasing halo 3 when the ps3 ships... if that happens then this world is phucked...

Since the X-box 360 is being released before the ps3 I don't really know what's going to happen.

Buy a 800 dollar console or a 100 dollar game that pwns?

I'd go the game... but that's cause I'm an x-box fan

GEARS OF WAR FOREVER...

And the three 3.2 gig processors.... pwned...

PS already rules the games department , sorry

We dont actually know if its better or not. Spec wise, it is. But performance which is how you can tell if its powerful enough, we cant totally say it is. We dont know, we havnt seen it in any action.

Specs mean something but hows its used that will tell the story. Seen a computer with more RAM and stuff like that underperform computers that have less specs? Just check some PC reviewd in PC Gamer.

Originally posted by Smasandian
We dont actually know if its better or not. Spec wise, it is. But performance which is how you can tell if its powerful enough, we cant totally say it is. We dont know, we havnt seen it in any action.

Specs mean something but hows its used that will tell the story. Seen a computer with more RAM and stuff like that underperform computers that have less specs? Just check some PC reviewd in PC Gamer.
u like 2 type huh

I know what you mean, but I know that for 2 gen it has had the game playability and versatility, but not polish and graphics, however still weighing out for the playstation systems, and I expect the same, thats all.

Originally posted by CorderaMitchell
PS already rules the games department , sorry

Yeah but remember the only reason why the PS2 was such a success with games because it was released earlier than the X-box. Now both consoles are going to have a good chance at the title of games...

But with processing power...the ps3 is going to own with the experimental chip... 3 3.2 processors doesn't match it... phuxor...

I don't fully agree, many of ps2 titles, were then made on other systems, except for a few exceptions.

But this could be argue in some of the technical flaws of the system, for its own favor...

because ps2 came out first obveiusly.... thats why they came out on the other systems.

Ps3 by far!

you don't really know what's going to pwn or whats not until the actual battle begins. I think since X-box 360 is coming out earlier it may have the upper hand on sales and because its getting most of the live 2007 games and sh17 but I don't really know...

since the ps3 has the better specs then... it should be up to who is faithful and who isn't... but halo 3 being released on the date of the ps3 release will really phuck up the sales of it.

i doubt that... i believe it was more to the fact that it had backwards compatibility, so it made sense for anyone with a playstation to buy a ps2...

Originally posted by Commando_164 ST
you don't really know what's going to pwn or whats not until the actual battle begins. I think since X-box 360 is coming out earlier it may have the upper hand on sales and because its getting most of the live 2007 games and sh17 but I don't really know...

since the ps3 has the better specs then... it should be up to who is faithful and who isn't... but halo 3 being released on the date of the ps3 release will really phuck up the sales of it.

OF course, this is all speculation.

Originally posted by pr1983
i doubt that... i believe it was more to the fact that it had backwards compatibility, so it made sense for anyone with a playstation to buy a ps2...

Maybe, but it somewhat helped that it was the first out and it was such a big leap in technology that people needed to get it.

This time around though, the consoles dont really leap out to me on a technology scale.
Sure the graphics are prettier but not as much compared to PS1 to the PS2. Or the NES to the SNES, or the SNES to N64

Originally posted by Smasandian
Maybe, but it somewhat helped that it was the first out and it was such a big leap in technology that people needed to get it.

This time around though, the consoles dont really leap out to me on a technology scale.
Sure the graphics are prettier but not as much compared to PS1 to the PS2. Or the NES to the SNES, or the SNES to N64

of course...

thing is though, with me personally, i know games like pro evolution soccer and metal gear solid will be on ps3, and with all the games i have i'd end up getting a ps3 anyway... unless it turns out to be crap... the infa red controller ports piss me off...

i was never really into the xbox, and only a few games on gc interested me... so thats why i'd choose ps3...

And thats a good reason to buy it.

Not because of power but because the games you like are on it.

What if though, those games were on the Revoultion, would you buy it instead?

playstation man myself...but the Revolution may be worth saving so cash for too.

Thats my point games over graphics, which is why some old games with the same characters are simply better.

Heres is how ill make my choice

The 360 and Ps3 are both gonna have great Graphics, so you cant go wrong either.Ill make my choice on the games. Ive always liked PS better. I play sports games the most. and sports games are usually better on the PS2. But i also love fps's. And Xbox has Halo 3, Prey(which looks awesome) and other that i dont feel like listing. Xbox 360 is gonna have Perfect Dark Zero too, which has a 50 player XBL thing. Thats crazy. It also has Saints Row, which looks pretty good. it will evenully get the next GTA. And its not like it wont have all the sports games, they are just better for the PS2 IMO. ANd also the new features to XBL look really cool.

So far, Xbox 360 is winning. Hopefully ill be able to get both. but i dont know.

Xbox was only a sport and shooter console for the most part.

PS3 had great titles as well, but its how you see it.

I'll probably start with whichever is cheapest (like I did last time they had the three systems) and it'll probably be the Nintendo one. Later, when the price goes down, I'll get the PS3