Xbox 360 sucks ass, I would say the WII looks entertaining and the ps3 i'm not really sure yet. But still I think the classic games especially nintendo and original playstation 1 games such as final fantasy 5-6-7 and sega games such as sonic 1-whatever will always be the best. I can always go back to them and never get bored since there more about the gameplay and addictiveness of the game rather then focusing primarely on graphics.
Ok I just read about this "motion sensitivity" incident, and if that's what you are talking about, I hadn't read up on that. And what's this "Sony can't sell stuff?" Hasn't that what they've been beating the other two consoles in for years? I'm not saying the PS3 will do well, it might not, but it still might. For the most part from what I heard most people have left Nintendo alone, be it bias or otherwise.
Originally posted by MadMel
o please...sony blatently ripped off wiis controller
How so? The "wii remote" looked like it had little to do with gameplay, if anything it looked like a gimmick to get attention, Nintendo fanboys were all over it, and if Sony ripped off of what I saw at first, then it its a Sad, sad day. Sony always had teh best controllers.
Originally posted by MadMelYou're mixing up controllers and overall gameplay, big big mistake. Nintendo hadn't beat Sony in years over gameplay, simply mascots. And if they win you are going to simply say it one way or the other anyways. Motion sensitivity my ass, the BEST controller is always the easiest to use period. Looking from last generations controller, they could have done alot better. Playstation's controller was better for a better multitude of games.
..and since nintendo's been wroking on wii motion sensitivity for 5 years, it has a far better chance to out do sony in terms of gameplay--
Originally posted by MadMelIf it wins it wins, which it might very well, but I doubt it will be anything else but purchase price. Gamers are adults nowadays, all of the kiddy stuff like Rumble features and a game may have mattered back on N64, but that has little to do here. It's all about the best games, and pricing. Nintendo has been doing gimmicks for years, but the fanboys simply call it innovation because Nintendo calls it that.
--plus all the other issues, such as the fact that more than half of what sony has said they're making hasnt even been made yet, the rubbish security sustem with ps3's disks, the fact that with the controller doesnt even have rumble and ultimatly, the fact that blue ray's have been proven to be fairly faulty..
id say wii, with 1 free wii game, and 5 free virtual console games with purchase (roughly $300-350 AU) is going to out do sony's $999(AU), a gimmiky controller, and the above mentioned faults..
Originally posted by Tha C-Masterok, "blatently ripped off" was bad word choices....lemme rephrase..sony's tilt sensor controller was clearly a rushed job of countering wii's new controller..and pesonally, i liked the GC's 'wavebird' controller better..
How so? The "wii remote" looked like it had little to do with gameplay, if anything it looked like a gimmick to get attention, Nintendo fanboys were all over it, and if Sony ripped off of what I saw at first, then it its a Sad, sad day. Sony always had teh best controllers.
Originally posted by Tha C-Master
You're mixing up controllers and overall gameplay, big big mistake. Nintendo hadn't beat Sony in years over gameplay, simply mascots. And if they win you are going to simply say it one way or the other anyways. Motion sensitivity my ass, the BEST controller is always the easiest to use period. Looking from last generations controller, they could have done alot better. Playstation's controller was better for a better multitude of games.
Originally posted by Tha C-Masteryoull be suprised how much the little things like rumble actually matter..
If it wins it wins, which it might very well, but I doubt it will be anything else but purchase price. Gamers are adults nowadays, all of the kiddy stuff like Rumble features and a game may have mattered back on N64, but that has little to do here.
Originally posted by Tha C-Masterso im a fanboy because i believe it is innovative??..i know it isnt an "OMFGFKNAMAZNGNNAHVEORGY" type of thing, but im sick of pressing buttons where it would be easier and more realistic to use even the tinniest of arm movements..
It's all about the best games, and pricing. Nintendo has been doing gimmicks for years, but the fanboys simply call it innovation because Nintendo calls it that.
Originally posted by MadMelOk, you mean old school then. I found the logitech controller to be the best by far then, and the parallelism in the controller of the playstation made it ideal for games other than the adventure genre.
ok, "blatently ripped off" was bad word choices....lemme rephrase..sony's tilt sensor controller was clearly a rushed job of countering wii's new controller..and pesonally, i liked the GC's 'wavebird' controller better..
Originally posted by MadMelBut like I said I could do the same thing. I was more referring to old school anyways, because honestly I thought PS2 had an excellent controller, so the new one was gimmicky in that, because it was trying to use unnecessary style.
all reviews, previews, first hand accounts, interviews, fanmail ect has proven that the wii's controller is easier and more comfortable to use..and dont say that im basing it on the opinion of people i dont know..one of my best friend's somehow got his hand on wii sports, and he thought it was amazing..
Originally posted by MadMelYou'd be surprised how much they don't, I can't think of many who bother with the function on the old controllers, and that includes Playstation, N64, PS2, and GC controllers. My point was that anytime Nintendo comes up with something that has little to do with gameplay then it's "innovative", but when Sony does the same thing it's "blatantly ripping off", and when xboxs does the same thing then it's "horrible". lol
youll be suprised how much the little things like rumble actually matter..
so im a fanboy because i believe it is innovative??..i know it isnt an "OMFGFKNAMAZNGNNAHVEORGY" type of thing, but im sick of pressing buttons where it would be easier and more realistic to use even the tinniest of arm movements..
Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Ok, you mean old school then. I found the logitech controller to be the best by far then, and the parallelism in the controller of the playstation made it ideal for games other than the adventure genre.
Originally posted by Tha C-Masterand name..😖
But like I said I could do the same thing. I was more referring to old school anyways, because honestly I thought PS2 had an excellent controller, so the new one was gimmicky in that, because it was trying to use unnecessary style.
Originally posted by Tha C-Masterpoint..but nintendo thought of it first..😛
You'd be surprised how much they don't, I can't think of many who bother with the function on the old controllers, and that includes Playstation, N64, PS2, and GC controllers. My point was that anytime Nintendo comes up with something that has little to do with gameplay then it's "innovative", but when Sony does the same thing it's "blatantly ripping off", and when xboxs does the same thing then it's "horrible". lol
The ONLY complaints I've heard from people about the Wii are the graphics and the name.
To the first; I say that graphics don't make the game. The Wii will have great graphics regardless, even if they are sub-par compared to the 360 and PS3. However....they will only be subpar at first. The Gamecube also had far poorer specs than the Xbox and PS2 - look at Resident Evil 4. Case in point.
As far as the name goes? Grow up. "Haha! I wanna get a wii!" "Wanna go play the wii?" Yeah, yeah, they did it on purpose. It got people talking, right? And now they can use lame marketing ideas like "Wii are together!"
Meh.
So, with those two complaints out of the way, we get to the BIGGEST selling point of the Wii (besides its low price) - the controller. Who the HELL doesn't want to be able to ACTUALLY swing a sword, fire a gun, etc?
This will be REVOLUTIONARY for first person games. It will be notably less so for other types - but look at the mario gameplay video that uses the Wii's nunchaku controller. Bad. Ass.
Besides - I don't know what the current news is, but I seem to recall hearing of Nintendo making a gamecube-ish controller 'shell' for the wiimote. You could plug in the wiimote, use regular old analog sticks/triggers/etc. and STILL have the motion-sensitive capability. Imagine the racing games where you can actually TURN.
Summation:
-name (Grow up)
-graphics(not very important - and besides, developers know how to use their software. They'll pump out some pretty games)
-Controller (may be hard to utilize in some instances - BUT, they are likely going to make gamecube-style controller games, as well. If not an additional 'classic' controller for the Wii)
+Price (A thousand dollars for a PS3? PSHAW!)
++++Controller (I want to fire my gun, swerve my car, slash my sword....Im tired of pressing buttons :-D)
+It's once-namesake...Revolution. Who wants to play the XBOX 1.5? It's the exact same damn thing with a home button, and better graphics. Same for the PS3 with a tacked-on motion system. The Wii is new, fresh, changing. Beautiful.
Wii for the win.
WII!
Originally posted by grey fox
http://www.screwattack.com/Flash%20HTML/ANN/WiiSalute.htmlLol
man, that...was great 😖mart: 👆 lol
Okay need help badly, i'm only getting one console, because i upgrade my computer regularly, so unless i come into something, its not likely i'm going to be able to get two. So the question is, which question do i get??
The pros and cons of each console that come to mind to me:
PS3
Pro - Perhaps the best at handling all the different kind of games
Pro - the more powerful of the 3
Pro - familiar controls
Pro - Blue Ray
Con - Not as many signature games
Con - Been called a failure, before its release (I live in UK)
Con - Does have anything really special, Wii's got its montion thingy-ma-bob, Xbox has got its play anywhere or what-not
Summary: i have a ps2, not complaints, so if this is simple the ps2 renewed, that good enough for me
Wii
Pro - its montion sensors
Pro - Active gameplay
Pro - Aimed at all people, thus flexible games
Pro - Smallest
Pro - Cheapest
Con - Not a relaxing console
Con - Need room for the games
Con - Multiplayer is going to be room demanding
Con - No HD
Summary: Well, since i play PC anyway the active gamplay sounds like fun, although i'd have to rearrage some things before i'd have to room to play with friends
Xbox 360
Pro - Games on it
Pro - Smallish itself
Pro - Good extra's, webcam etc
Pro - powerful machine
Pro - Not too pricey
Pro - Brilliant online gamplay
Con - Not exactly cheap either
Con - As a ps2 player i had troube with Xbox controller
Con - Many people think its the middleman, but don't think its on top, so that kinda suggests its the bottom player
Summary - Could be worth having with the team of online brilliance and great games, but is that what its relying on?
Finally, if anythinks wrong with the pros and cons, i'm not too bothered, i just want to know which one would better suit myself, quick scanning gave me those facts so they probably are all wrong/bias
Mes,
The Wii doesnt need alot of space outside a few games. Bowling needs a bit but all the other Wii sports doesnt need any space.
Also, a game like Zelda, you can relax on the couch and play it, you dont need alot of room because a simple motion will trigger it, not some overblown motion that is shown on the TV and what people say.
Overall, for the Wii, you dont need alot of space. You can literally sit on your coach, rest your arm like you do when you play the regular controllers and play.
The XBOX 360 is the middleman, but outside of PS3 exclusive games (which are fewer than usual), most ports, if not all ports will look better on the 360 due to the toughness to program the PS3, thus making developers weary of adding more graphical features to ports due to the money factor.
Ill just say this....if you want some new and exicting, get the Wii....and if you also want your regular gaming, get the 360. Both of them combine cost the same amount as one PS3. Unless your dying to play Metal Gear Solid 4, Final Fantasy, GT and Devil May Cry...you really dont have alot going for you on the PS3....(and they'res rumors aboud that MGS4, Final Fantasy will not be PS3 exclusive anymore)
But do you what you will
Originally posted by SmasandianThats kind of a biased opinion, you nore I have any idea what the PS3 will reveal, what it has now cannot be compared to the others, and PS2 wasn't great because of simple titles like MGS, GTA and Devil may cry, I didn't keep my PS2 for that, so what are you meant to be impying? That that is what PS2 and PS3 is good for? I could say the only thing 360 is good for is Halo, but that again is biased, I don't think statements like this really make much sense.
Mes,The Wii doesnt need alot of space outside a few games. Bowling needs a bit but all the other Wii sports doesnt need any space.
Also, a game like Zelda, you can relax on the couch and play it, you dont need alot of room because a simple motion will trigger it, not some overblown motion that is shown on the TV and what people say.Overall, for the Wii, you dont need alot of space. You can literally sit on your coach, rest your arm like you do when you play the regular controllers and play.
The XBOX 360 is the middleman, but outside of PS3 exclusive games (which are fewer than usual), most ports, if not all ports will look better on the 360 due to the toughness to program the PS3, thus making developers weary of adding more graphical features to ports due to the money factor.
Ill just say this....if you want some new and exicting, get the Wii....and if you also want your regular gaming, get the 360. Both of them combine cost the same amount as one PS3. Unless your dying to play Metal Gear Solid 4, Final Fantasy, GT and Devil May Cry...you really dont have alot going for you on the PS3....(and they'res rumors aboud that MGS4, Final Fantasy will not be PS3 exclusive anymore)
But do you what you will
There are lots of games that were great on PS2, GTA just happened to be one of them, FF has lost its zest, 10 was nothing special and MGS was never that much the most awesome game ever on PS2, it was just good. So I have no idea what you're talking about, its these sorts of comments that make a person sound like a fanboy 100% and nothing else.
Originally posted by Smasandian
Mes,The Wii doesnt need alot of space outside a few games. Bowling needs a bit but all the other Wii sports doesnt need any space.
Also, a game like Zelda, you can relax on the couch and play it, you dont need alot of room because a simple motion will trigger it, not some overblown motion that is shown on the TV and what people say.Overall, for the Wii, you dont need alot of space. You can literally sit on your coach, rest your arm like you do when you play the regular controllers and play.
The XBOX 360 is the middleman, but outside of PS3 exclusive games (which are fewer than usual), most ports, if not all ports will look better on the 360 due to the toughness to program the PS3, thus making developers weary of adding more graphical features to ports due to the money factor.
Ill just say this....if you want some new and exicting, get the Wii....and if you also want your regular gaming, get the 360. Both of them combine cost the same amount as one PS3. Unless your dying to play Metal Gear Solid 4, Final Fantasy, GT and Devil May Cry...you really dont have alot going for you on the PS3....(and they'res rumors aboud that MGS4, Final Fantasy will not be PS3 exclusive anymore)
But do you what you will
I much agree. With the whole lot. Even bowling doesn't take up much space... It is turn-based.
Originally posted by Pulse2
Thats kind of a biased opinion, you nore I have any idea what the PS3 will reveal, what it has now cannot be compared to the others, and PS2 wasn't great because of simple titles like MGS, GTA and Devil may cry, I didn't keep my PS2 for that, so what are you meant to be impying? That that is what PS2 and PS3 is good for? I could say the only thing 360 is good for is Halo, but that again is biased, I don't think statements like this really make much sense.There are lots of games that were great on PS2, GTA just happened to be one of them, FF has lost its zest, 10 was nothing special and MGS was never that much the most awesome game ever on PS2, it was just good. So I have no idea what you're talking about, its these sorts of comments that make a person sound like a fanboy 100% and nothing else.
GTA I take it is Grand Theft Auto which is also now on Xbox and 4 is going on to the 360. Also most of those games on the PS2 were made by third party developers which many (almost all) have jumped onboard with 360 to make games and even now many jumped onboard with Wii.
Originally posted by ESB -1138Theres no signs of the games I've played jumping yet 😖 So I dunno what you're on about and what you mean GTA is NOW on the Xbox, it was always on the bloody Xbox, lmao. It only came out late, all Microsoft did really this time was pay a whacking some of money just to get the game on the same day as the PS3 did, PS3 still gets GTA, it still gets its own exclusive missions, it still gets its own unique stuff, and the experiences will be completly different from each other, 360 will have rumble so attacking will be better and the rumble of machinery etc, PS3 will have motion sensing, making flying and other vehicle driving easier I'm guessing.
GTA I take it is Grand Theft Auto which is also now on Xbox and 4 is going on to the 360. Also most of those games on the PS2 were made by third party developers which many (almost all) have jumped onboard with 360 to make games and even now many jumped onboard with Wii.
So although they are the same game, they aren't too much alike except for the basic game and the levels etc.
Konami haven't decided if its making the switch, but it looks to be negative, if 360 does get it, it will be later, much later, not that that will bother many PS3 owners as by then the game like Oblivion would be far completed.
Nintendo makes its own games, the other two rely on third parties, while Nintendo is only now gaining all third parties it was slowly loosing, which is a good sign, I would like to see a GTA on Wii sometime in the future.
Despite GTA's release on 360, its the only game that 360 gets from Rockstar, if LA Noire dominates more then GTA, then too bad for those who thought GTA was the best game on Earth.
Im going with the PS3 mostly cause im a big fan of MGS and i cant wait for MGS4 GOTP, but each system has a game i want to play, like the 360, i want to play halo 3 and hope its a lot better than 2 which the ending sucked, and the Wii, well i would say LOZ TP but im getting it for gamecube because i dont want to waste my cash on a new system when all that has got my attention from nintendo is LOZ TP🙂