DCK Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Not to mention that Sony keeps a 'constant price strategy'. As the PS3 (and PSP) is so expensive to produce, price drops aren't going to happen anytime soon; we're lucky to see it in two years.
Smiter Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 The Wii aint future proof at all, the PS3 is. Time will tell, mark my words. You can't "future-proof" anything. All you can do is hope it lasts for years. The most obvious application is... PC. :P Shops keep selling "future-proof" PCs which only last a few years. You simply can't predict what will be developed in technology. The PS3 does certainly have pretty-looking graphics, but it's not that far advanced from Xbox360 at the moment. LittleBigPlanet looks sweet, but I admit I'm taking that with a pinch of salt at the moment. Prerendered "real time" Killzone2/MGS4/Motorstorm anyone? For traditional-style gaming with HD graphics, the Xbox360 is the better deal. £300 gets you a Premium with two games at GAME. That's £125 cheaper than the PS3 (with no game). You can download games and HDTV content with it. There's even a new Xbox360 with HDMI output and 120GB HDD coming out in the US at the end of April (story is on Kotaku). Wii is off to a slow start (speaking in software terms), but the third-party support is looking better (even if Ubisoft keeps shovelling crap at us - Rayman was still good though), and there are big hitters still to come this year. The majority of people do not have a HDTV, and Joe Public will never splurge £425+ for a games console. Once the big games hit, I think Wii will go from strength to strength, same as what happened with the DS (Slow start -> omgwtf sales).
Shyguy Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 i laugh because everone is amazed saying HD is the the future cause it can display 1024x resolutions.... which the standard PC has been able to produce for years now... and the standard PC now displays 1280x1024 so i dont know what all the fuss is about
Hellfire Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 i laugh because everone is amazed saying HD is the the future cause it can display 1024x resolutions.... which the standard PC has been able to produce for years now... and the standard PC now displays 1280x1024 so i dont know what all the fuss is about Yeah, we've been with HD for years, what's the big fuss? People just let themselves get taken in by marketing.
shade Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Don't worry I would say that probably nearly half of the population are not taken in by it.
Cube Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Yeah, we've been with HD for years, what's the big fuss? People just let themselves get taken in by marketing. The big fuss is now it's called HD, rather than just a resolution. So people can pretend they understand it, and brag about it.
Fresh Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Don't worry I would say that probably nearly half of the population are not taken in by it. Your right, that 30 million people market who are taken by it is nothing.
Mr. Bananagrabber Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Yeah, we've been with HD for years, what's the big fuss? People just let themselves get taken in by marketing. What's the differnce between them and people who are happy to listen to anything Nintendo say. The people claim that Nintendo are the only ones innovating, and are happy to ignore all the sequels that are almost exactly the same but with added waggle? there is no point in getting a Ps3 anymore becouse all the good games that where suposed to be on ps3 are all coming to 360 to. Yeahno. There's plenty of games a lot of people want (myself included) that are PS3 exclusives. You either a) Haven't even checked whats coming out on the PS3 or b) Don't care about whats coming out on the PS3 and are happy to ignore it to futher your points.
McMad Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 I'll sure be a happy bastard if MGS4 and FFXIII do make the jump to 360 too though. The only game that I'm definately gonna miss out on the PS3 is the next installment of the ICO series, ah well... Anyone else think the Wii is a bit shit right now? We need some good (looking) games.
Cube Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Anyone else think the Wii is a bit shit right now? Not really. I'm not that interested in the 360 or PS3 becase theres more Wii games that I want than I can afford.
Mr. Bananagrabber Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 I'll sure be a happy bastard if MGS4 and FFXIII do make the jump to 360 too though. The only game that I'm definately gonna miss out on the PS3 is the next installment of the ICO series, ah well... Anyone else think the Wii is a bit shit right now? We need some good (looking) games. I'm kinda in the same boat as you. But the Ico team working on PS3 games alone is enough to make me own one. Never mind everything else. I can't afford 3 machines, but I need them all for so many different reasons. (Except maybe the Wii unless it hits its stride pretty soon.)
Zell Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Tbh, there's more franchises I want on PS3 than on 360. And since I'm going to get a 360 after exams, I'll be in a bit of a dilemma, seeing as I don't want to buy all three consoles.
Jonwah Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 I just got my hd cable for sky the other day, so I can watch some channels in high definition. It's beautiful. But after watching some gobsmackingly good pictures, I realised I'd rather just be watching something I really enjoyed in normal resolution. So I feel kind of idiotic, getting excited about high definition and then finding out I actually would rather have fun over beauty. But Nintendo couldn't care less about this discussion we're having. It's about money and they're making it. Why should anybody care if the ps3 sells more? Doesn't mean they're more financially successful. In my opinion I don't think the ps3 will outsell the wii, because it'll just turn out to be the same as the ds for the average non-hardcore gamer. I could be wrong but I don't care as long as I have fun.
Teppo Holmqvist Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Happy to ignore all the sequels that are almost exactly the same but with added waggle. Sony is not much different when it comes to milking its properties and doing same shit again and again. Don't want to believe? Let see... * Four Jax & Dakter games in five years (Five if we count PSP iteration) * Four Ratchet games in six years (Six if we count PSP and PS3 iterations) * Two God of Wars in three years (Three if we count PSP iteration) * Three Sly Cooper games in four years * Two Gran Turismos in five years Can you really say that any of the series had drastic changes between sequels (well, Sly actually changed quite bit between 1 &2)? For comparsion: * Two Metroid Primes in five years (Three if we count Hunters) * Two Zeldas in five years (Three if we count Minish Cap) * Two Pikmins in five years * Three Donkey Kongas in 1½ years * Four Mario Parties in five years (Five if we count GBA) And that's it. No other Nintendo properties had sequel during last generation.
Cube Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Doesn't mean they're more financially successful. If anything, last generation proved that. Yea, I see HD as a tempoary "wow", then nothing once you get used to it. I sill enjoy watching Enterprise just as much in low-quality flash, even after watching it in HD.
Mr. Bananagrabber Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Sony is not much different when it comes to milking its properties and doing same shit again and again. Don't want to believe? Let see... * Four Jax & Dakter games in five years (Five if we count PSP iteration) * Four Ratchet games in six years (Six if we count PSP and PS3 iterations) * Two God of Wars in three years (Three if we count PSP iteration) * Three Sly Cooper games in four years * Two Gran Turismos in five years For comparsion * Two Metroid Primes in five years (Three if we count Hunters) * Two Zeldas in five years (Three if we count Minish Cap) * Two Pikmins in five years * Three Donkey Kongas in 1½ years * Four Mario Parties in five years (Five if we count GBA) And that's it. No other Nintendo properties had sequel during last generation. Of course Sony milk franchises. It you'd actually read what i'd written you'd discover that I didn't say they didn't. My point was Nintendo do aswell, Sony just don't talk about innovating an entire industry at the same time:rolleyes: Try reading next time love.
Teppo Holmqvist Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Of course Sony milk franchises. It you'd actually read what i'd written you'd discover that I didn't say they didn't. Except that I just listed it so people could compare stuff. It wasn't really meant for you, though I quoted you. Love.
Mr. Bananagrabber Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Except that I just listed it so people could compare stuff. It wasn't really meant for you, though I quoted you. Love. Gizza kiss
AshMat Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 I've really stopped caring in crap like this these days. Since i got a 360, i know i'll have the best of the 3rd party games should the worst happen to Nitnendo again. And i've got my Wii for Nintendo's own games, and Wiimote exclusives.
Hellfire Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Also coxy, that "it's not innovative, it's just waggle" shit just doesn't stick anymore.
Mr. Bananagrabber Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Does for me. I haven't seen a game they couldn't be done on any other machine
Hellfire Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Does for me. I haven't seen a game they couldn't be done on any other machine Wario Ware? And it's not the point of being able to do or not do, it's to be more fun or accurate for example. Playing Zelda is much more fun on the Wii, pointing the Bow and Hookshot, swinging the remote and fishing, Excite truck wouldn't be half as fun or absorbing without tilt controls, etc... Aiming wiht dual analogues seems primitive to me, when I play Halo or GoW, it just doesn't click anymore.
Mr. Bananagrabber Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Wario Ware? And it's not the point of being able to do or not do, it's to be more fun or accurate for example. Playing Zelda is much more fun on the Wii, pointing the Bow and Hookshot, swinging the remote and fishing, Excite truck wouldn't be half as fun or absorbing without tilt controls, etc... Aiming wiht dual analogues seems primitive to me, when I play Halo or GoW, it just doesn't click anymore. I guess it's all down to personal opinion once again. I don't really think the controller feels that natural. At least to me. Whenever i'm playing i'm always thinking I could be playing a better game with a better control system. Maybe mine is on the wrong setting?
Hellfire Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 I guess it's just not your style, what can I say?
Mr. Bananagrabber Posted March 21, 2007 Posted March 21, 2007 Sounds about right Still. Once Super Paper Mario comes out, I have a feeling everything i've ever said will become null and void.
Recommended Posts