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 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.
__________________ DarkCrawler is my hero... RESPECT LEONARD NIMOY!!!
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.
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.
__________________ "If you tell the truth, you never have to remember anything" -Twain
(sig by Scythe)
Gender: Male Location: The Faroe Islands - Thorshavn
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
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.
WARNING: The above post may contain sarcasm and/or sophisticated satire. Any psychological damage sustained is purely your fault.
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.