Better idea: DS or Revolution ?

[clearacell]

damn, I forgot you Europe guys get the games later. I've spent well over 40 hours on Meteos and I haven't been able to put down Advance Wars for a while. The DS is quickly eclipsing my PC in time of play.

[user]

yeah i think theyre equal too..

[Bowser57]

From what I've played of the Rev, it's got to be the DS.

[Hellfire]

I think of DS as an alternative and Revolution as a... revolution.

[Innovance]

The DS was the better idea. Simply because it was to prove their concept. It was a stroke of genius to release the 3rd pillar an expensive experiment and they couldnt have launched at a better time, its like sony walked right into it.

 

People are quick to say you cant compare the portable and home markets, yet sony was predicted to easily take the "win" due to their home market performance.

 

Anyway DS was the better idea because revolution was coming with or without ds (nintendo invested in gyration in 2001). But DS allowed them to prove their strategy against arguably the toughest competition they could have faced (at this moment in time anyway)

 

but to answer your real question id say intheory Revolution

[Shyguy]

I would say Revo because its the most outrageous idea yet, which no1 could guess here

[Raven]

Jesus Christ why do people compare things that aren't ment to compete with each other?

 

i wholeheartedly agree.

 

i havent read the rest of the posts but i believe that you cant really compare handheld systems to console.

but arent the ideas between the ds and the revo basically the same? with "direct" user interactivity with the gaming environment?

 

the only games ive played on the ds are warioware touched and nintendogs, and i think that they used the stylus technology plenty good.

[Mimternet]

The DS was the better idea. Simply because it was to prove their concept. It was a stroke of genius to release the 3rd pillar an expensive experiment and they couldnt have launched at a better time, its like sony walked right into it.

 

People are quick to say you cant compare the portable and home markets, yet sony was predicted to easily take the "win" due to their home market performance.

 

Anyway DS was the better idea because revolution was coming with or without ds (nintendo invested in gyration in 2001). But DS allowed them to prove their strategy against arguably the toughest competition they could have faced (at this moment in time anyway)

 

but to answer your real question id say intheory Revolution

 

 

Revolution is the better idea and DS was a testing ground for it. They wanted to see if they could replace a much loved system (Gameboy) with a radically new control scheme. They were careful about it with the "3rd pillar" label. If it didn't work, they could back out. As it happened it has been a success and Gameboy will be fazed out (doubters of this will just have to wait and see.)

 

The reason this was a test for Revolution is because they couldn't do the same with a home console. They couldn't introduce another home console, it wouldn't work. Yet they wanted to radically change the concept of the console (in the same way that DS changes the Gameboy). Now they know the gaming market is open to input change, in fact, they're craving it.

[ndreamer]

what i like about the ds is that there is finaly original pocket games, i own the orignal gameboy, gameboy color, gameboy advance and i have like 4 games for all those systems combind now with the ds the game selection is just amazing.

 

the revolution i hope will do the same as the ds is doing now, applying to more people and hoppfully bring in new types of games and new ways to play existing ones.

 

at the moment i pick ds and i hope that the revolution sucesseds becouse we need the change.