*GASP* No 360 vs. PS3. vs. Revolution Thread!?!?!
 

Ok, maybe one was created earlier, but I went look throught the pages of the this forum and couldn't find one.

So, what's the story? Who's buying what and why? Who's all sent their pre-orders for Xbox 360?

I personally am going to buy all 3 in time, but I currently have my sights set on this winter with the 360. I just hope these consoles live up to all the hype.

General note: I remember how sickeningly fanboyish the "DS vs. PSP" threads would be at times. I've got an idea: Let's not repeat that.

I'm not at all interested in the XBox 360, mainly because if I want a computer I will go out and buy one; besides, there's precious little on the current XBox that serves as a buying incentive for me, so there's quite a lot that would have to change in the next generation.

The same goes for the PS3, largely. Those two just kind of irk me. The difference is that there are a bunch of interesting games on the PS2; if that trend continues, I might buy a PS3 at some point, but definitely not right on day one.

So, unsurprisingly, the Revolution sounds best for me at this point, even though details are as rare as with the other two. I trust Nintendo to come up with original and fun ideas, however, and the talk about wireless capabilities intrigues me, especially thinking about Super Smash Brothers. Then there's the whole "back catalogue" thing, obviously. I missed out on quite a few good N64 games, so that is probably a good opportunity to catch up. I might well get one on day one or at least very soon after release.

Actually, I think an outright ban on X vs Y vs Z game systems should be put in place until *AT LEAST* the things have been released. I mean, all people can do right now is quote specs, and laud on about games that have yet to be released.

Rather pointless if you ask me.

I mean, beyond specs & a few scant games we'll almost certainly fall back on personal preference.

And I for one can't stand Nintendo fanboys... :)

SWK

True enough. Yeah, I suppose we'll do that if things get ugly in here.

I've been playing since the Nintendo. I loved Mario, I loved Sonic, Bonk was my hero, Crash Bandicoot was cool, Halo was a long thought out process.

Why do I need to learn new mascots and play supposedly updated games when there's so many in a backlog to play?

Great it's got improved graphics. Honestly, I'm not picking up a DS until Advance Wars comes out for it. Gears of War looks great on the 360, but it just doesn't FEEL right! Same goes for all the other systems. No real characters it's all about the graphics of them for the most part.

Each company has their strategy for world domination. but the money still comes from us. I gladly would choose the Revolution if I could if they came out with more Earthbound games. Sadly, I've always had eclectic tastes and I'm not going to change the reasons why. I have no interest in paying for an online experience thru the 360 and if the other two offer it for a low price (read: FREE!!!) maybe I'll consider it.

Honestly, it's silly to try to fight over it. I'd love to see someone clash about the games that were, just to show how a machine truly did.

*cough PSRdirector cough*

I'm going to go ahead and say I'm so pissed about the multiple systems right now, I'm not buying any of them until I see a price drop. I'm not going to go into lenthy debates, but I don't want to see these three nearly identical systems - just look at the specs and look at the minor differences - until they're at a more reasonable price, say 200-150.

I did it with the last 'next gen' consoles, too.

On an ironic note, I'm going to buy a Gamecube once the Revolution comes out. Isn't that funny?

Im gonna go for the 360, there are a few games that I want, mainly elderscrolls IV.

i'm going for the ps3. Cause by then I should be done with the old ps2 games and xbox game ,I'm going to get the 360 eventally but not when it's realsed.

I'm going with Revolution. I'll finally have a chance to play the SNES games I missed out on, plus you all know that Super Smash Bros. Online > all.

I'm leaning towards a Revolution at the moment. The PS3 and 360 haven't really sparked my interest at all. The reason is that I am biased towards Nintendo (i admit it, but I'm not a fanboy), and I really like the idea of online Super Smash Brothers. I don't really give a hoot about specs and ports and whatnot, all I want to see are games lists and game clips. Not rendered videos, not cutscenes, actual game playing. And some things I absolutely do not want to see are mindless celebrity endorsements and someone trying to convince me that playing game X will make me more popular.

Just as a side note, IMO, Tony Hawk is the best celebrity to listen to when it come to video games. He says stuff that usually sounds like something a normal gamer would say (unlike some other celebrities would shall remain nameless).

Personally, I'm not going for either of the three at release, mainly because I have yet to finish a good majority of the games I have now, aswell as the fact that I can do most of my gaming on the PC. Consoles seem to be getting dangerously close to PC's nowadays, and I fear that is hurting the PC gaming market, as more developers change over to console games.

Also, I hear the nexgen systems are going to cost in the $450 range. Yikes. I don't have that kind of money to throw around for a game system. Just thinking how much the games for those monsters will cost makes me shiver.

Frankly, I could care less about the PC gaming market. I mean, pratically the only good PC games are either Multi-Player On-lines, or ports of console games. Which don't always work either, Psychonauts still has majorly buggy movies for me, even after 2 patches, and I'm starting to wonder if a 3rd one will ever happen. PCs don't have universal specs, consoles do. When you make something for a console, you don't have to worry about 150 different video cards, a number of various CPUs, motherboards, RAM types and... well you get the idea.

I also remember a time when PC computing only dealt with the casual gamer, and the computer was tool first & a gaming machine second. There was a lot more variety back then, and because PC games were harder to sell, there usually was a bit more effort made into making them.

If games switched back to consoles, I don't think it'd be a bad thing by any means. It'd push up the quality of PC games, and that's only a good thing IMO.

SWK

SWK - Thanks for thinking that PC computing isn't as good, presenting a rational viewpoint, and supporting PC gaming at the same time. That was impressive.

I have already slowed so drastically on my gaming right now, I don't see how I could shell out money for any game so far. I have to beat Star Ocean, Xenogears, Baldur's Gate II, Planescape:Torment, and several others, and those are all games two consoles ago.

I've got my work cut out for me.

I have a sort of sentimental attachment to consoles. PC gaming is great, and a lot of times more fun. But I hate watching a preview for a computer game and wondering "Will my computer run that? And even if it does, will it look like crap?" People complain about a console costing 400-500 dollars, and while I agree that is a LOT of money for some people (including myself), that price is still way cheaper than gaming on a PC. When you buy a console, there are little to no upgrade costs. With a PC, it becomes outdated instantly and in a year or so you have to end up buying more RAM, a better video card, etc. While this does lead to prettier games, it is far more expensive than spending the upfront cost for a console.

I had heard somewhere that the Revolution will be cheaper than the PS3 and the 360.

My console Plans...

1. As soon as the PS3 comes out, run my little butt out and buy a used PS2 (One of those little mini ones. Oh so cute!!)
2. Buy a buttload of games, specifically RPGs, maybe some of the platformers. I hear Ratchet and Clank and Jak 2 & 3 are good. Pick up any stray games I want for my Gamecube, such as Legend of Zelda, Metroid Prime, replacement of Tales of Symphonia.
3. Wait 6 months, buy a Revolution. Play SSB online. Own all of you with Ness.

Because Ness is unstoppable.

Hm.. personally, I'll be picking up the system that gets the best RPGs (Though definitely not at release. Dear Gods, they're minimum of 400, last I saw). Now no offense to Nintendo, but I don't think it'll be the Revolution. It's a really spiffy, new, and different idea, so it's unlikely 3rd party developpers will be attracted to it for long, IMO. I mean, honestly, developping for that controller is going to do the same thing that happened to the DS; Games are either going to just ignore what they have available to them and make you wish they'd just released it on a more standard platform, or they're going to do right by Nintendo's new technology. Neither is going to happen all the time, but I'm willing to bet the former will top the latter.
Between PS3 and X-Box 360, X-Box as it is now has a lesser selection of exclusive RPGs then the PS2. That can change, but I'm not betting on it yet. I'm probably going to wait for a few months, then when the prices come down, rent each for like a week and play the RPGs available. Of course, if Nintendo can pick up some decent RPG company names (Or no names; I just don't want to see Camelot or summat like that in charge), that'll be rented too, I'm just.. again, not betting on it, as it took Nintendo forever to get good RPGs onto GC. All two of them (Groundbreakingly awesome though ToS was).

Maybe I wasn't entirely clear, so I'll try to rephrase it. I basically feel that, as it currently stands, the PC market is full of too much crap. I remember the time when PC games had a whole lot more trouble selling themselves, and because of that, they tended to bend over backwards, trying to make games that stood out.

Currently, aside from Multi-player (mostly clones), no effort whatsoever goes into making good PC games. Throwing money at the problem doesn't seem to be helping, or at least I don't see the PC market improving all that much, even with all the Mult-Player games (again, too many of which, are simply clones). Thus, I am of the opinion that turning the PC back into the casual gaming system it once was, would be helpful.

You can disagree, but please cut out the sardonic & sarcastic reply.

SWK

Not entirely true. Effort is being made, but unfortunately people aren't educated well enough to know that Game X sucks. They see the "Guy Game" and think it'll be funny, but its stupid. Or they'll see Extreme Paintbrawl and think "hey cool, something I like!" when its really crap.

People buy these crap games, and can't exchange them. The money goes to people who spend little to no time on their games, but can come up with the coolest license. The consoles are heading towards this trend as well, just a bit more slowly. (Superman 64 anyone?)

That plus consoles tend to be a bit higher quality because developers for consoles know that all the bugs need to be squashed, while PC developers say "We'll fix it in the next patch" (Yes, I'm looking at YOU, World of Warcraft.)

I don't know. Elder Scrolls 4 has my attention, but it and Halo 3 are the only reason I'd get an Xbox 360. The Revolution's relatively economic price and guarantee of certain fun games (SSBM Online) would make me get it, but where I live I'd be one laggy, LAGGY Link on the field, unless Ecuadorian severs are set up. And I haven't kept up with the PS3, but I think it might work out.

Regardless, I'll wait until the system I want is at $200. I'll use the time to figure out which is the system I want. I'll pray and hope Elder Scrolls 4 comes out for PC in the meantime.

And, lastly, has there been news on the Revolution controller? I am ignorant, foolish, and would appreciate the help.

I must agree with PhoenixFlame on this one. With consoles becoming frighteningly close to PCs, it has the potential to harm the gaming market because consoles are losing sight of what they should be: pure gaming. By adding in all the "ooh shiney!" bells and whistles you create unneccecary complication (like incompatibilities, hacking, viruses, "we'll patch it later" developers, etc). By creating unneccecary complication, you scare away potential gamers. By scaring away potential gamers, the gaming market suffers.

And SWK, what PC games have you been playing and looking at?

There are advancements being made all the time on the PC, though they're more subtle than the time in which "PC games had trouble selling themselves" seeing how all forms of gaming have established themselves with a solid fanbase and overcame the big obstacles it took to get there. You can't expect there to be huge leaps and bounds at a time in the PC area than you do with consoles, because the technology gradually increases, not like consoles leap, stagnate, leap, stagnate. You can't expect something like ragdoll physics to develop overnight with the release of a new console, it has to be developed and done right over time on the PC, then by the time a new console is ready to come out, there are new game mechanics passed on that will justify the new hardware.

It's hard to justify your "no effort" claim when you look at titles like Half-Life 2 and The Elder Scrolls III - IV. After 5 years of development, HL2 has pushed itself into position as the best FPS in many areas. With it came many new things, a revamped game engine, new physics, animations, and even rethinking how a FPS story is told. The Elder Scrolls III set the standard for open ended gameplay and massive RPG scale. The Elder Scrolls IV (set to come out Holiday '05 for PC and Xbox 360) is due to take it even further. Looking at both the games, that brings up the mod community, an invaluable tool for extending a game's life, something consoles have yet to develop. Sure there's crap games out there, but as with console games, there's something for everyone

I agree with this to a point. True, complex and versatile consoles are going to be more likely to have problems, but in this case I think the "risks" outweigh any complications. How many people on this forum bought a PS2/XBOX and have never used its DVD capability? I know for some parents it was a major selling point. Look at the Gamecube and its sales. Love it or hate, the system is a "pure gaming console." The cube never took off, and now has become a very expensive paper weight for me. Personally, I say spice 'em up.........

Woah woah woah, back up a minute. I wasn't being sarcastic. I was serious, I liked what you said (rough translation)

"Well, I don't like PCs, the games are pretty much shit, and they need to become non-gaming units, that way it benefits them in the long run."

You claimed you hated a certain console, said how the games suck, and then said how it could improve in a rational way. That was impressive, and I wasn't sarcastic, I didn't even know it was possible to insult a console as per your preference then say "Well if it died it would be better, here's why."

I'm sorry, but this is the major thing... I could care less about game mechanics. A good game for me, is one that has a decent storyline/plot & decent play controls. I could care less if a game is pushing the very fabric of space-time & breaking the barriers of technology. In other words, I want something that draws me in, and I enjoy playing. The PC market, even moreso than the console market, seems to be going for the whiz-bang feature more often than not.

I used to buy more titles than I do now, but at this point, I can generally tell from reading the box & checking out a few reviews, whether I'll like a game or not. Plus, I'm in a dial-up only area, so no Multi-Player for me (not that I could fit it in if I wanted too), and even if they were an option I doubt I'd get one. There's something about an overly used & re-used concept that I just don't find all that compelling.

Oh & sorry to go off on you MG. I just assumed you were sarcastic. My bad.

SWK
- Of course, I just bought Metal Slug 4/5 & love it to bits (well mostly), so my opinion doesn't count for much. Well, I suppose I wouldn't mind it if the levels were a bit longer, had a tendency to have more vehicles (so if you lose one, you get a second bite at the apple) & collected weapons had more ammo (like Contra). But other than that, I love it.

John Carmack once said:
"Story in a game is like story in a porn: It's expected to be there, but it's not that important"

I was assuming technology was relevant seeing how advancements in that area allow players to become more immersed in the storyline/plot than ever before. I acknowlege that a great storyline/plot can even make Interactive Fiction like Zork attractive to some in this day and age (hell, I'm working through Wishbringer myself), but if you can deliver the same story in real time giving you a level of control more than "pick up key and put key in box" and letting you see more than "you stand atop a hill, there is a post office to the west, the door is closed." ... most will chose it over an all-text version. Sometimes you just want to explore every inch of the island instead of being confined to the beach. Sometimes you just want to try to assassinate the "invincible" king. Sometimes you just want to see how much you have to harass a guard until he chases you down the hall. You just can't do that with older games.

With more advanced gaming platforms we gain access to more storyline and plot devices than before. It's still possible to tell a fantastic story in a game on older devices, but the possibilites can be so much more, with dynamic content, branching storylines (replay value anyone?), and an increasingly epic scope of the story told on the newest technologies.

But what developers are doing that? Pushing the envelope and not staying in one spot. Pushing the SNES, PSX, or the PS2 for all it's worth? I still think that people can make a game on older systems that are different and work within the limitations to tell something new.

But a belief that the PS3 is going to push the branch further? I doubt it. Stockholders along with publishers have to get their money somehow. And with the licensing being so high on the consoles when they first come out, someone like Atlus won't be coming out with a game that advances to new genres.

You can only take things so far. There's only so many genres, there's only so much potential in a generation of hardware to tell different playable stories. To cover new material, you have to be able to move deeper, include more characters, tie in more motives, events, etc. Only so many tales can be told from an isolated one-horse town. Throw in a bandit camp, supply lines from different towns, visitors, natural disasters and you have more possibilites that something interesting might develop. To obtain more materials with which a story could be developed requires an advance in technology. You just can't tell an author to write 20 best-selling novels, each with a completely different plot, each in 100 pages or less.

With newer games comes an increasing amount of freedom. That very freedom can create bits and pieces of story that add to the experience as a whole. For example, The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion will have all NPCs run a 24-hour variable goal schedule that can affect your gameplay and the storyline as a whole. If your assassination target has a fascination with fishing and carpentry, you might have to go check out the nearby streams (dealing with wildlife as needed) and not find him. After getting back and resting from a nasty encounter with a bear you go by a building you caused a fire in two days ago only to find him working there. Then you would have to deal with how to kill him. Can't do it in broad daylight while he's working (too many potential witnesses), so you might have to hang around and follow him home when it starts to get dark. It could have gone down at the stream, It could have gone down in a dark alleyway, all of the events before the plot event is fufilled becomes a little extra bit you take away as your story. Sure it could happen in any other game on most platforms, but including a similar feature across multiple towns with dozens of residents... that sort of thing takes new technology.

I don't think that this console cycle will be the big one. I'm thinking the next one.

http://www.nuklearforums.com/showthread.php?t=10322

But, in this console cycle, I'm betting on PS3/Revolution. The PS3 will attract the people who want the big games, with the big graphics, while the Revolution will attract the nostalgic people, while introducing the next versions of the games we all know and love. (SSBM, anyone?)

I'm getting a Revolutin. Eventualy.
I love Nintendo because it has so many exclusive games. Honestly, the only reason Nintendo really sells is because you can't get your Mario/Zelda/Kirby/Pokemon/Earthbound/Pikmin/Donkey Kong/Metroid/Fire Emblem fix anywhere else.
Of course, thats also why I continue to shell out cash for Nintendo.
Plus, every time I see a picture of the Revolution I drool. And I know you all do too. Right? Right?
VIVA LA REVOLUTION!

Earthbound has YET to be released. I bought an N64 for that EXPRESSED purpose. *&%$*^#$*#

Oh and the rumors of getting dls of old games on the Revolution...

Game Informer shot it down in the most recent edition. I swear that Nintendo is constantly stabbing themselves in the foot. HD not recommended, not giving the older gamers what they want (Metroid was a step in the right direction, but No EB and no word of some of the older franchises...), no new push for varied characters in their already considerable repertoire and a feel that Mario, Wario, Yoshi, etc. are what they need to focus on to make the money.

In about a day, I'm probably going to have something up... You've all been warned!

Agreed. IMO, the PS3 and 360 will do very well, with PS3 probably "winning" in sales. Nintendo will fall short, again, and lag behind the others in just about every category (seriously, Nintendo has some great franchise characters, but what you get past that, they have nothing except fanboys).

But all in all, I think the 3 systems will be pretty much the same. What I'm truly looking forward to is the next next-gen consoles. I can see it now: PS4 vs. Xbox 720 vs. .........what's that other company called again? What are the 3 consoles going to do then? Make the games even more pretty? Ooooohhh. Aaaahhhh.

The next brawl will have to involve something more, well, revolutionary.......
especially from Nintendo.

Pun definetly intended.