Originally posted by GalacticStorm
Not at all CM. What Playstation has going fpr it is third party software support, which makes for the biggest variety of games catering for more types of gamer. Playstation is far from the most innovative brand out of the 3. In terms of hardware its the least innovative. Nintendo was the first with the D pad (Game and Watch handhelds), it was the first with shoulder buttons (SNES), it was the first to have an analogue stick on a home console controller (N64, Saturn and PS1 soon followed suit)
Reread my post, I never said innovation, that is more of nintendo, or was...
Playstation is the most versatile of the three, bar none.
If you actually think about it, most of the third party games are on systems, like GBA. Third party games aren't usually as good, playstation has had a little of everything.
Did nintendo allow you to watch movies? Or listen to music, no.
Microsoft is the hardware end, Nintendo is the game end, and Sony is the blend imbetween, being a master of both.
Originally posted by GalacticStorm
In terms of games Playstation isnt the most innovative either. Mario 64 was the first fully 3d game created for a home console, this resulted in many clones on the PS1 and even on the current gen consoles. Ocarina of Times context sensitive controls inspire many games control systems up until this day.
Playstation has come up with LEGIONS of games for all types of players, genres, and ages. Why do you think it is winning the market for the SECOND time.
Fact is many of the games that go out to both systems, ususally started off at playstation.
Originally posted by GalacticStorm
Nintendo has more games in the top ten best games ever than Playstation could ever dream of.
Before the time? I think not, not now. Nintendo is really losing the race in many aspects, and GAMES make the system.
Much like sega, its unwillingness to adapt, will cause the company to continue to lose, much like sega.
Look around, many of the games and char mentioned here were from playstation.
Twisted Metal, GTA(which I don't like too much myself), Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Crash (back in the days), God of War, Max Paine, Kingdom Hearts, Red Faction, Timesplitters, Half Life.
You can't be serious...
Originally posted by GalacticStorm
Playstation is where its at for variety and choice because it is the market leader, it has the most support, however Nintendo both in terms of hardware and software has proven to be more innovative generally.
In what terms of hardware, the controllers are worse, the games appeal to fanboys and lovers of the games too willing to play anything else usually. Nintendo is good, don't get me wrong, but PS had better controllers, acessories, and games.
Originally posted by GalacticStorm
Xbox wins in terms of online play, first person shooters and tactical squad based games etc.
Actually, I'd go and say that A playstation and PC combo, is better than what the others have to offer.
Xbox wins in halo for the most part. Games like red faction,and timesplitters, were more creative, halo was mostly polish.
Even in handhelds, playstation is doing fine...
Originally posted by GalacticStorm
So far im going by the current generation. Ive got no real opinion on the next generation until Xbox 360 is released and the other two are closer to release.
Okay...
Originally posted by GalacticStorm
So far i think although PS3 seems the most powerful, its games just dont interest me. Thats why im going to get a Revolution and a 360. The Revolution for all of those Nintendo classics and the innovation its no doubt going to bring to the next generation and the Xbox 360 because although im usually against just prettier versions of the same games every generation, i must admit i am looking forward to the updates of some franchises.
If playstations games were anything like they were in the other two generations, I will know what to do, I heard the same thing the last time around.
""""""""""""Did nintendo allow you to watch movies? Or listen to music, no.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Yes but that was its selling point. As a dedicated games machine. This allowed it to be cheaper than its competitors despite its graphical capabilities lying in between the two consoles. In some respects such as lighting and vibrancy of colour the GC won over the Xbox chipset. Most people at the time already had dedicated DVD players and stereos so it wasnt a major disadvantage for GC. You could pick up a cheap DVD player (as well as a GC) which offered better playback than PS2 and still end up paying less than the PS2 at the prices everything had at GC's launch.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Microsoft is the hardware end, Nintendo is the game end, and Sony is the blend imbetween, being a master of both.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Agree with you about MS and Nintendo. Sony however is a good all rounder. It certainly wasnt a master of hardware being the most technically dated out of the three and in terms of games while greater in number, there were fewer masterpieces, fewer truly innovative games. Good all rounder.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""In what terms of hardware, the controllers are worse, the games appeal to fanboys and lovers of the games too willing to play anything else usually. Nintendo is good, don't get me wrong, but PS had better controllers, acessories, and games.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
The controller issue is debatable. Many games magazines rated the GC controller as the best, although admittedly some did prefer the PS2 controllers. Its a toss up. However i much preferred playing Soul Calibur 2 with the GC controller. PS2 did have better accessories though, but it didnt have better high quality games. PS2 improved on the PS1 with the quality of their games. However its still quantity over quality I.M.O. GC had far fewer games but it had more masterpieces most of made by Nintendo themselves and compnies like Capcom and Silicon Knights. All the major titles were multiformaat anyway.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Actually, I'd go and say that A playstation and PC combo, is better than what the others have to offer.
Xbox wins in halo for the most part. Games like red faction,and timesplitters, were more creative, halo was mostly polish.
Even in handhelds, playstation is doing fine...
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Xbox wins without a doubt. How relatively cumbersome is the PS2 combo compared to straightforward Xbox Live? Xbox won hands down this generation when it came to online play.Im looking at the bigger picture not just what i or my friends found to be a novel way of achieving online enjoyment through a PS2.
In terms of handhelds PSP is getting thrashed. Its being outsold in both the U.S and Japan and it hasnt even been released in Europe yet, however DS has sold millions in all 3 major territories. Developers seem more excited about the DS because while it might not win in terms of eye candy it allows them to be creative and make something different. PSP is just getting loads of PS2 ports or PS2 franchises which are modified, dumbed down for the hand held. Metal Gear Acid is a good example.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""If playstations games were anything like they were in the other two generations, I will know what to do, I heard the same thing the last time around.
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Fair enough. I just like a bit of innovation, a bit of magic in my gaming experiences. Not graphically superior updates to old PS1 franchises on a new console ive just paid $400 for. Its not about graphics for me, (although revolution is far more technically advanced than GC) its not about realism (im tired of generic 1st person shooters, squad games, blah blah blah) I want a different kind of experience. I want to experience a new way of playing games and Nintendo if theyre to be believed aim to deliver that in the next generation. Ps3 is exactly what its name suggests. Sony has played it safe, it offers nothing new just the same experience with better graphics. I know what console i intend to spend my hard earned money on.
Originally posted by GalacticStorm
Yes but that was its selling point. As a dedicated games machine. This allowed it to be cheaper than its competitors despite its graphical capabilities lying in between the two consoles. In some respects such as lighting and vibrancy of colour the GC won over the Xbox chipset. Most people at the time already had dedicated DVD players and stereos so it wasnt a major disadvantage for GC. You could pick up a cheap DVD player (as well as a GC) which offered better playback than PS2 and still end up paying less than the PS2 at the prices everything had at GC's launch.
Are you talking about market sales or gameplay?
I still felt that nintendo was better than xbox, but not sony.
Playstation was as expensive as xbox, but look what it offered, it was an entertainment computer system, not a game system, so if you just want games...
Originally posted by GalacticStorm
Agree with you about MS and Nintendo. Sony however is a good all rounder. It certainly wasnt a master of hardware being the most technically dated out of the three and in terms of games while greater in number, there were fewer masterpieces, fewer truly innovative games. Good all rounder.
Agreed
Originally posted by GalacticStorm
The controller issue is debatable. Many games magazines rated the GC controller as the best, although admittedly some did prefer the PS2 controllers. Its a toss up. However i much preferred playing Soul Calibur 2 with the GC controller. PS2 did have better accessories though, but it didnt have better high quality games. PS2 improved on the PS1 with the quality of their games. However its still quantity over quality I.M.O. GC had far fewer games but it had more masterpieces most of made by Nintendo themselves and compnies like Capcom and Silicon Knights. All the major titles were multiformaat anyway.
I don't think that the controller issue is that debateable at all.
The ps2 has better controllers period. Soul Callibur was more button mashy, and didn't need the fluididty in motion.
Ps2's parallel structure made it ideal for all types of games, which is why games like Capcom vs Snk2, was simplified for Gamecube and Xbox, it was because of the control inaccesiblity.
Hell my portable logitech is one of the best things ever made, have you seen the quality in those?
Originally posted by GalacticStorm
Xbox wins without a doubt. How relatively cumbersome is the PS2 combo compared to straightforward Xbox Live? Xbox won hands down this generation when it came to online play.Im looking at the bigger picture not just what i or my friends found to be a novel way of achieving online enjoyment through a PS2.
Online play, yes. I believe I said I liked having my Ps2 and PC, over just an xbox was my point here.
Originally posted by GalacticStorm
In terms of handhelds PSP is getting thrashed. Its being outsold in both the U.S and Japan and it hasnt even been released in Europe yet, however DS has sold millions in all 3 major territories. Developers seem more excited about the DS because while it might not win in terms of eye candy it allows them to be creative and make something different. PSP is just getting loads of PS2 ports or PS2 franchises which are modified, dumbed down for the hand held. Metal Gear Acid is a good example.
Exactly, its been out longer, but think of the usefullness and fun of a psp compared to the ds. The ds has just rehashed the same games over and over, and most dont even utilize all the "innovation".
If they were out at the same time and the cost was the same, which would you chose?
Also think of the audience, how many parents are going to pay that much for a system for a child? Not many, when they can just shove pokemon into them. PSP has hit a broader range of genres to boot.
Originally posted by GalacticStorm
Fair enough. I just like a bit of innovation, a bit of magic in my gaming experiences. Not graphically superior updates to old PS1 franchises on a new console ive just paid $400 for. Its not about graphics for me, (although revolution is far more technically advanced than GC) its not about realism (im tired of generic 1st person shooters, squad games, blah blah blah) I want a different kind of experience. I want to experience a new way of playing games and Nintendo if theyre to be believed aim to deliver that in the next generation. Ps3 is exactly what its name suggests. Sony has played it safe, it offers nothing new just the same experience with better graphics. I know what console i intend to spend my hard earned money on.
Oh no, I could care less about graphics, the gameplay makes the game, and the game makes the system.
Thats why I still think SNES is the best nintendo system, Playstation was the graphically inferior for 2 generations, and still owned, so you know I'm about gameplay and controls.
I like a little of everything though myself, I just know if playstation keeps up the gran turismos and other stuff...
"Twisted Metal, GTA(which I don't like too much myself), Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Crash (back in the days), God of War, Max Paine, Kingdom Hearts, Red Faction, Timesplitters, Half Life.
You can't be serious..."
Im sorry to say, but if thats what PS has to offer against Nintendo's best, than PS would of surely fallen. Most of those, arnt actually PS
Twisted metel was good for the first game.
Gta was a Pc game first, but Gta 3 was a great game, so id give you that.
Resident Evil, yep pretty classic.
Silent hill is RE knockoff.
Crash is such a knock off on Mario, that Mario would kicked its ass.
God Of War, yep good game.
Max Payne, is a pc game first,
Kingdom hearts, meh, just another Final Fantasy thingy with Disney
Red faction was a pc game and XBOX and GC and PS2, and it also sucked major balls.
Timesplitters was good, but not great at all.
and your disrespecting Half Life by even mentioning it belongs to PS2.
Its a PC game.
Originally posted by Smasandian
"Twisted Metal, GTA(which I don't like too much myself), Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Crash (back in the days), God of War, Max Paine, Kingdom Hearts, Red Faction, Timesplitters, Half Life.You can't be serious..."
Im sorry to say, but if thats what PS has to offer against Nintendo's best, than PS would of surely fallen. Most of those, arnt actually PS
Twisted metel was good for the first game.
Gta was a Pc game first, but Gta 3 was a great game, so id give you that.
Resident Evil, yep pretty classic.
Silent hill is RE knockoff.
Crash is such a knock off on Mario, that Mario would kicked its ass.
God Of War, yep good game.
Max Payne, is a pc game first,
Kingdom hearts, meh, just another Final Fantasy thingy with Disney
Red faction was a pc game and XBOX and GC and PS2, and it also sucked major balls.
Timesplitters was good, but not great at all.
and your disrespecting Half Life by even mentioning it belongs to PS2.
Its a PC game.
Twisted Metal black ruled, red faction ruled, timesplitters 3 ruled.
I know it was on PC, but itwas on pS2, how am I disrespecting half life?
Playstation had many better titles, unless you want to convince me otherwise with fanboy games, like some of the Zelda Clones.
Originally posted by CorderaMitchell
Twisted Metal black ruled, red faction ruled, timesplitters 3 ruled.I know it was on PC, but itwas on pS2, how am I disrespecting half life?
Playstation had many better titles, unless you want to convince me otherwise with fanboy games, like some of the Zelda Clones.
I know Twisted Metal rocked.
Come on Red Faction sucked ass. (My mistake in saying it was on all three systems, but it was on the PC first and the sequel is one the cube)
Timesplitters 2 was the best. 3 is just the same. ( I really had fun with TS2, but it Timesplitters are on all three systems, so its not really a PS2 game)
I know HL was a PS2 game but the port was awful, and if somebody who has never played HL and plays the PS2, they will say it sucks, and then they will never play the PC version which is a hundred times better.
I dont disagree that PS had good games, just mention some that are actually PS exclusive. Most of the games you mentioned are on some other system making your arguement kinda of pointless.
Dont call Nintendo fanboy games because PS also has a ****load of crappy Metal Gear Solid, GTA clones that suck balls. Each system has clones of other games, but your going to tell me that PS doesnt have Mario and Zelda clones either?
Originally posted by Smasandian
I know Twisted Metal rocked.
Come on Red Faction sucked ass. (My mistake in saying it was on all three systems, but it was on the PC first and the sequel is one the cube)
Timesplitters 2 was the best. 3 is just the same. ( I really had fun with TS2, but it Timesplitters are on all three systems, so its not really a PS2 game)
I know HL was a PS2 game but the port was awful, and if somebody who has never played HL and plays the PS2, they will say it sucks, and then they will never play the PC version which is a hundred times better.I dont disagree that PS had good games, just mention some that are actually PS exclusive. Most of the games you mentioned are on some other system making your arguement kinda of pointless.
Dont call Nintendo fanboy games because PS also has a ****load of crappy Metal Gear Solid, GTA clones that suck balls. Each system has clones of other games, but your going to tell me that PS doesnt have Mario and Zelda clones either?
No no, not what I meant.
I'm saying that many of the nintendo games have games that people play, and just because it has a name on it.
I love nintendo man, I just think SNES was the best.
The new metriod and zelda games rocked, but other than that, I usually see subpar games, with little creativity, you see what I mean?
I myself play what I like, and I hardly like what the critics like, so you and me will always see differently, thats cool.
I liked games like: Yu Gi Oh, but I didn't like some of the MGS titles, so I'm pretty random in that aspect.
Originally posted by CorderaMitchell
No no, not what I meant.I'm saying that many of the nintendo games have games that people play, and just because it has a name on it.
I love nintendo man, I just think SNES was the best.
The new metriod and zelda games rocked, but other than that, I usually see subpar games, with little creativity, you see what I mean?
I myself play what I like, and I hardly like what the critics like, so you and me will always see differently, thats cool.
I liked games like: Yu Gi Oh, but I didn't like some of the MGS titles, so I'm pretty random in that aspect.
There were many games on the GC that rocked, there was Eternal Darkness, Pikmin 1 and 2, Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Resident Evil 4, Killer 7, Luigis Mansion, P.N.03, Baiten Kaitos, Tales of Symphonia, Metroid Prime 1 and 2 the two Zelda games and the upcoming Twilight Princess. All are innovative games with a quirkiness and originality you just dont get on PS. PS to me as ive said tends to be the good all rounder. I just like that Nintendo magic, that innovation and creativity of heir games which you just dont get with Sonys games. The only stand out agmes on PS are G.T.A and ICO. The rest are third party clones which really dont cut it, or are multiformat anyway so dont really count. In terms of masterpieces, really top of the range games Nintendo comes out on top of PS , even MS has come out on top of PS with the likes of Halo, Jade Empire, K.O.T.R, Fable (in some peoples opinions) and many more. From what ive seen so far XZbox 360 is coming out on top because while it might not be quite as powerful as PS3 its games are a lot more interesting and with Revolution the ideas behind it sound amazing, and it promises to bring a whole new way of playing games to the next generation. Only time will tell, however Nintendo has never let me down before, its own games are amazing and i cant miss out on them which is why im getting a Rev and a 360. With PS3 im seeing the same old tired games with better graphics. That really isnt enough for me anymore. If thats enough for you then fair enough enjoy Metal Gear 4 and 5, Tekken 6 , Killzone 2 , Ratchet and Clank 3 and so on. Nintendo make sequels but with each generation they revamp them, they bring something new to the table.
Originally posted by CorderaMitchell
No no, not what I meant.I'm saying that many of the nintendo games have games that people play, and just because it has a name on it.
I love nintendo man, I just think SNES was the best.
The new metriod and zelda games rocked, but other than that, I usually see subpar games, with little creativity, you see what I mean?
I myself play what I like, and I hardly like what the critics like, so you and me will always see differently, thats cool.
I liked games like: Yu Gi Oh, but I didn't like some of the MGS titles, so I'm pretty random in that aspect.
I know, but Sony has little creativity too. Personally, I cant remeber every single game that Nintendo and Sony has.
But to say that Nintendo has little creativity while Sony doesnt, is pretty wierd.
I do admit that Nintendo has alot of games that are similiar, but Sony does too.
The Suffering, Manhunt and all those games are pretty much the same game. People like them though because they're violent and might be fun. There's numerous Need For Speed ripoffs, and countless stealth games that suck balls.
To me, both are the same in terms of games. I feel Nintendo has better quality based on the fact they have less games than Sony does and that Metriod and Zelda turned out to be best of the year when they were released. But Im not discounting the fact that Sony also has good games but to say they dont have ALOT of crappy games that nonbody remembers, its pretty stupid.
(You should be shot for the playing Yu Gi Oh) 🙄
Originally posted by Smasandian
I know, but Sony has little creativity too. Personally, I cant remeber every single game that Nintendo and Sony has.
But to say that Nintendo has little creativity while Sony doesnt, is pretty wierd.
I do admit that Nintendo has alot of games that are similiar, but Sony does too.
The Suffering, Manhunt and all those games are pretty much the same game. People like them though because they're violent and might be fun. There's numerous Need For Speed ripoffs, and countless stealth games that suck balls.
To me, both are the same in terms of games. I feel Nintendo has better quality based on the fact they have less games than Sony does and that Metriod and Zelda turned out to be best of the year when they were released. But Im not discounting the fact that Sony also has good games but to say they dont have ALOT of crappy games that nonbody remembers, its pretty stupid.(You should be shot for the playing Yu Gi Oh) 🙄
I macked yugioh, then sold the damned game for 200$
As for manhunt, it sucked.
But variety is the key, remember when those 60$ N64 cartridges came out?
I would want 10 cool games, than one Mario 64, no matter how great the game is, I get bored...
Originally posted by GalacticStorm
There were many games on the GC that rocked, there was Eternal Darkness, Pikmin 1 and 2, Mario Kart, Smash Bros, Resident Evil 4, Killer 7, Luigis Mansion, P.N.03, Baiten Kaitos, Tales of Symphonia, Metroid Prime 1 and 2 the two Zelda games and the upcoming Twilight Princess. All are innovative games with a quirkiness and originality you just dont get on PS. PS to me as ive said tends to be the good all rounder. I just like that Nintendo magic, that innovation and creativity of heir games which you just dont get with Sonys games. The only stand out agmes on PS are G.T.A and ICO. The rest are third party clones which really dont cut it, or are multiformat anyway so dont really count. In terms of masterpieces, really top of the range games Nintendo comes out on top of PS , even MS has come out on top of PS with the likes of Halo, Jade Empire, K.O.T.R, Fable (in some peoples opinions) and many more. From what ive seen so far XZbox 360 is coming out on top because while it might not be quite as powerful as PS3 its games are a lot more interesting and with Revolution the ideas behind it sound amazing, and it promises to bring a whole new way of playing games to the next generation. Only time will tell, however Nintendo has never let me down before, its own games are amazing and i cant miss out on them which is why im getting a Rev and a 360. With PS3 im seeing the same old tired games with better graphics. That really isnt enough for me anymore. If thats enough for you then fair enough enjoy Metal Gear 4 and 5, Tekken 6 , Killzone 2 , Ratchet and Clank 3 and so on. Nintendo make sequels but with each generation they revamp them, they bring something new to the table.
Me and you gonna talk about that multiquote problem.