[Elec]

I predict that:

The 360 is a good all-arounder but needs more killer titles to win the market. It's already out, price isn't outrageous, and online features are good, which helps.

The PS3 is gonna have a hard time at those prices unless they offer some really amazing things. Needs either a price drop or clearly superior (for this generation) gaming experience.

Nintendo should have used more competitive hardware, may have a hard time getting non-franchise titles (i.e. other than Mario, Zelda, Metroid, DK, F-Zero, etc.) but might still do ok if they can offer both console and games more cheaply than the others.


I'll be buying at least one, but haven't made any decisions yet.

 

[PsychoZX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elec or clearly superior (for this generation) gaming experience.

Which so far Sony has not been able to show regardless of what the fanboys say.

 

[Sladeophile]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kirosia never felt it a chore. (other than the stupid chocobo humping thing)

What was that all about anyway???

 

[Sladeophile]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr.karmalicious And that's where the difference between us Nintendo fans and you Sony fans arises: we'd rather play a game, you'd rather watch a movie. Do yourselves a favor and just buy the DVDs: they're only $10-$20, and the players are <$100. Quite a bit less than a $600 player with $60 movies, eh?

You know, it's this kind of attitude that ruins a discussion. Take this elsewhere.

 

[meat01]

Quote:

Playing the first part of FFX, I played probably just 20% of all the time I was on the screen watching the soap opera introducing characters and background and context etc. etc. etc. Not my type of game.

I agree with you completely. I tried to play FFX and I know it is highly regarded, but it felt more like watching a movie than playing a game.

 

[mr.karmalicious]

Quote:

You know, it's this kind of attitude that ruins a discussion. Take this elsewhere.

Are you kidding? If anything, your comments are the most inflammatory that I've seen in all threads relating to the console-wars.

Quote:

the PSP is widely popular.

It really isn't. Check the sales. Even ask PSP owners: most are relatively unhappy with their own PSPs, and the ones that like them don't like them for the games.

 

[Blitzula]

I personally found FF7 to be a weak game...very pretty, but shallow. I was bored playing it.

If your first RPG was FF7-as it was for many in the mass market-then you might think that was the be all, end all unless you went back and played the older FF games and other classic Square RPGS. I think FF3 and that related FF period were far superior to the later games.

If you've played the older FF games and still think FF7 rules, at least you have a fully qualified opinion, although I disagree with it : ).

As for the console wars:

Nintendo: If you haven't been paying attention, Nintendo will do what they always do: Make high quality first party games and have limited quality games and support from third party publishers. They'll finish third in the sales race. But-as always-they'll be profitable because they manage their costs/revenue sharing agreements well and understand their core franchises and their appeal. Whenever someone says Nintendo is crazy or stupid for their approach, just review their record of profitability and draw your own conclusions.

I think PS3 has too much momentum to lose the crown to the 360 this time around. The 360 has the advantage online, but that isn't as important to everyone as hard core gamers often assume it is-at least not yet. I think the PS2 had more interesting games than the Xbox, and I'd imagine that will continue. The 360 should have had deafening buzz over the PS3 after this open year, and I don't think it's done that; Call of Duty 2 and Ghost Recon are the best games from what I've heard, but there is no 360 killer app.

I think the final order will be:

PS3
Xbox 360
Wiiiiiiiiii

I have no axe to grind...I'll get all three as the prices drop.

On a side note, I'm disheartened by the continual trend towards graphics at the expense of gameplay. I had much more fun with, for example, the Super Nintendo then any of the newer consoles. I also think the Dreamcast died a far too early death-for the amount of time it was out, it had much better games then the PS. That's the point I realized that the market was headed in a direction that would lead us where we are now...sequel after sequel, limited original ideas, and too much time spent developing pretty graphics instead of addictive gameplay.

 

[seeberg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blitzula If your first RPG was FF7-as it was for many in the mass market-then you might think that was the be all, end all unless you went back and played the older FF games and other classic Square RPGS. I think FF3 and that related FF period were far superior to the later games. -------- I have no axe to grind...I'll get all three as the prices drop. On a side note, I'm disheartened by the continual trend towards graphics at the expense of gameplay. I had much more fun with, for example, the Super Nintendo then any of the newer consoles. I also think the Dreamcast died a far too early death-for the amount of time it was out, it had much better games then the PS. That's the point I realized that the market was headed in a direction that would lead us where we are now...sequel after sequel, limited original ideas, and too much time spent developing pretty graphics instead of addictive gameplay.

Amen, brotha! I think your take on the FF7 thing is pretty accurate. Many of my friends were like this, and still are. They played FF7 first, at the peak of its hype and thus think highly of it still for the impact it made on them. I played and observed FF games since the US release of the first installment, so my impact came back in '94 instead of '97-'98. There was hype for FF3, but not nearly as widespread- there weren't that many copies of the game, and it was expensive. FF7 on the other hand, only cost $50 and sold a massive amount of copies, thus becoming in my opinion the first great widespread RPG, but not the best to me since I started earlier.

And agreed on the graphics thing too- but I'll have to save it for later, got places I gotta be at the moment. Lates!

,
Abe

 

[Sladeophile]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr.karmalicious Are you kidding? If anything, your comments are the most inflammatory that I've seen in all threads relating to the console-wars.

The OP specifically asked for no flaming on this thread. Not that hard to deal with.

 

[mr.karmalicious]

If anything, you're the one who's flaming, accusing everybody who states an opinion different than your own of flaming.

 

[Sladeophile]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mr.karmalicious If anything, you're the one who's flaming, accusing everybody who states an opinion different than your own of flaming.

You're right, you win. Go make fun of more games and systems now, should be great.

 

[Sladeophile]

Quote:

Originally Posted by seeberg Amen, brotha! I think your take on the FF7 thing is pretty accurate. Many of my friends were like this, and still are. They played FF7 first, at the peak of its hype and thus think highly of it still for the impact it made on them. I played and observed FF games since the US release of the first installment, so my impact came back in '94 instead of '97-'98. There was hype for FF3, but not nearly as widespread- there weren't that many copies of the game, and it was expensive. FF7 on the other hand, only cost $50 and sold a massive amount of copies, thus becoming in my opinion the first great widespread RPG, but not the best to me since I started earlier. And agreed on the graphics thing too- but I'll have to save it for later, got places I gotta be at the moment. Lates! , Abe

I agree with you guys too, that final fantasy VII isn't the best RPG. I liked Chrono Cross better on the PS1. I did play some of the older FF games too, they are excellent.

I agree with the graphics thing to an extent too, but I think a game with great gameplay with the added benefit of incredible graphics, IE Halo 1 and 2, only get better with improved graphics. Just opens up so many more possibilities. But pretty graphics with crap gameplay is just useless. I hope they are able to accomplish the former with the newer systems. IE GRAW on the 360...

 

[Idsynchrono_24]

I think the one major thing that MS and Sony could do to innovate their games is to up the AI programming. The consoles are so powerful now that they can program much more complicated AI routines, I'd rather have that then glossier graphics. Although right now, the AI for games is still pretty piss-poor, I foresee a dramatic increase in realism for in game bots and helper characters. Of course, perhaps online gaming will see some sort of explosion in interest and in it would totally defeat the purpose, but for one player games, it would be integral. The only thing more frustrating then seeing clipping issues with hyper realistic characters would be characters behaving erratically and to the contrary of what's needed in a situation.

In regards to Halo, people are always raving about the graphics, they're alright. The one thing that really shines in Halo was the AI programming, which was much better then games spawned after Golden Eye 007. I'm very excited about that new Bioshock game, with its "emergent AI", nothing more exciting then to witness AI that reacts unexpectedly rather then following limited scripts.

On a related note, games may take even longer to come out, so I guess you can't have your cake and eat it too haha.

Catch you later,
Id

 

[The_Duke_Of_Eli]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Idsynchrono_24 I think the one major thing that MS and Sony could do to innovate their games is to up the AI programming. The consoles are so powerful now that they can program much more complicated AI routines, I'd rather have that then glossier graphics. Although right now, the AI for games is still pretty piss-poor, I foresee a dramatic increase in realism for in game bots and helper characters. Of course, perhaps online gaming will see some sort of explosion in interest and in it would totally defeat the purpose, but for one player games, it would be integral. The only thing more frustrating then seeing clipping issues with hyper realistic characters would be characters behaving erratically and to the contrary of what's needed in a situation. In regards to Halo, people are always raving about the graphics, they're alright. The one thing that really shines in Halo was the AI programming, which was much better then games spawned after Golden Eye 007. I'm very excited about that new Bioshock game, with its "emergent AI", nothing more exciting then to witness AI that reacts unexpectedly rather then following limited scripts. On a related note, games may take even longer to come out, so I guess you can't have your cake and eat it too haha. Catch you later, Id

You are incredibly off-topic here. This is about consoles. The 360 and PS3 and Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiii have powerful enough cores to be a small super-computer. It's all about the software programmers. No games will use the full potential of the systems' graphics for another few years. It takes time for programmers to adopt to a new system with graphics and special features. The hardware is there, now it's time for software to catch up. It's always that way.

But you do raise a good point. Console wars aren't won hardware-wise, it's software wise.

 

[Edwood]

Alright, you guys are making post the funny.