Why the heck can't you guys just get along. tongue.gif Personally, Nintendo lost me after the N64, and Sega never had me. Playstation never got me too excited either. I pretty much stick to my computer for games. Yes it costs more, but I don't see anyone's DC or PS or N64 playing Quake 3: Arena at 60fps @ 1024x768. I played through Quake II a couple of times on the PC, and then saw a demo of it on the N64 at EB. I was shocked. The textures were horrible. The resolution was poor. It had that damn fogging. Overall, it just didn't cut it. Plus, it is so much worse than the PC version just because of the fact that it plays on a TV. Until we get Hi-Res HDTV, it will NEVER match PC gaming. Each system has its own pros and cons. I havn't played a console that I really liked since the SNES or the NES. Since that, its just been a race to churn out the best looking games as fast as they can. Consoles can add DVD, internet, etc. but it isn't the same. I bought a PS JUST for Final Fantasy VII when it came out. I was not disappointed. I bought a N64 JUST for Goldeneye. Am I disappointed? A little bit. You can't see 20 feet in front of you INSIDE because of the fog, and it runs at like 15 or 20 fps, which doesn't cut it. And under certain situations, I have brought the frame rate down to 1 or 2 fps, which shouldn't happen at all. I didn't buy a DC, because I don't trust Sega (Sega CD, Saturn or 32x anyone?). The Dolphin is a bad idea because Nintendo should have stuck with cartridge-based games, and not gone to CD. I easily pick my PC over any console, but I will buy a PS2, and not a x-Box/Dolphin/DC etc. I think they should actually focus on content more than flashy graphics. VERY few console games actually HAVE content. And in my opinion, EA Sports is just plain stupid for not having Dave Strader as their announcer for the NHL series. Everyone knows that he is one of the best that ESPN has. Anyways, I've said enough, and I'm outta here.