The (Current) Generation Trilogy: Wii, PS3 & XBox 360 (Console Comparison & Discussion)

They have a new controller that is not even close to any controller and works quite differently than others. And it looking more like the PS2 other than tilting back into some cavity. Right now I see no offer for DVD playability, just someone stating that it could happen and for how much who would know. And also what would you download it onto? Does it have a hard disk drive or a memory card like the PS2 which was not that big.
I never had a PS2. I had the xbox any it never gave me guff other than trying to play LOTR fellowship of the ring.
Sony and MS lost money on their knowing they would make profit off the games.

So is this console that does not have any of the features such as DVD playability 5.1 (only stereo)1080i+(only 480p) HDD(I have not seen it mentioned yet) worth 250?

 

After checking up, i think Nintendo have dropped the DVD option. So its up in the air if it will happen.

Im sorry but $250 for a new console is NOTHING.
Yes it may not have the technical capabilites of other consoles, but then youre NOT paying the same price.
And further this console is not about marginal differences in graphics, its about pure gameplay experience.
Obviously you may not like what they have to offer, but thats totally your choice.
But I think complaining about the tech capabilites proves this is not the console for you.

 

First off I am not complaining, I am wondering why NES only went this far? They and the 360 will continue to hurt and punish Sony for their far fetched designs hopes and dreams. But I look at more than just the face of the console! I love the sound. I am a soundman, a musician, a producer. That means everything to me, but with my HDTV and the standard that will eventually put this console to sleep is the video department!

the video part of the console
http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/mario/wii-graphics-get-an-f-and-does-it-matter-197529.php
I read that and to me what is the use?
http://wii.ign.com/articles/699/699118p1.html
this would be the finaly blow. I know I do not want the the Wii, but shouldn't it be made known what it really can do so you really decide on what you want, though it will not make a diff cause the new Zelda game will put Nintendo back in the hunt. Eventually when all is said and done, they will have to offer a way better system and soon. With all the new standards being offered through cable, and analog dying off and digital becoming the main requirment though the minimum req, that technology has to continue and match it or it will become obsolete. NES is on the edge.

 

Nowadays, most people already have a regular DVD player, so actually having DVD capability isn't as big a feature as it was during the previous gen. And with HD-DVD and Blu-ray duking it out, many people are reluctant to choose one over the other until one of them becomes the new standard.

 

HD is still years away from being a standard. Your average person cant afford it yet.

Also another fact; this generations graphical gap is very insignificant (if you compare it to the 16 bit generation to the 32/64 bit jump). Thats why graphics are not a big deal for me as they may have been in the past.
The fact of the matter is the N64 was far far superior to the block PS1 graphics. Yet in the end it was not that important. Nintendo realises this. In the end only the games count.

 

What has disappointed me with Nintendo over the years have benn their lack of generosity. Look at Sony: with PS1 you also had a CD-player. Yes I know, turning on your TV to listen to CDs is stupid, but hey, they gave you the offer none the less. When N64 launched the PS controller was lame in comparison. So they launched a new standard controller with joysticks and built-in rumble. With the PS2, in addition to a console you also got yourself a DVD player at a time when DVD-players were expensive. Buying a PS2 was an affordable and smart choice for the average gaming Joe. When they launched the silver edition of the PS2, they had made an effort to reduce the noise from the fan in new PS2s. The sleek slim PS2 comes with a built-in network adapter. Notice a pattern here? Generosity. You're buying it for this, but hey, it does this too! Nintendo and Microsoft really had some lessons to learn in this department.

However, I'm pleased to see they have both pulled their act together. Microsoft has done away with the ridiculous requirement for a DVD Playing Kit like they did last gen with the original Xbox. Nintendo is offering a free online service and is launching the console with a game packed in. It also connects with the DS out of the box. DS comes pre-loaded with Picto-chat. The Xbox 360 and Wii both overall do much more that just play games, which is nice. I only wish they had included DVD playback in the Wii. It would have made a sleek and handy little DVD player and with the Wiimote it would feel like one too.

 

Err i dont think making improvements to the PS2 every other month in generous, more like another way for them to make money, so people buy the console AGAIN.
My cousins have 3 different versions of the PS2, pure idiocy.

 

The Wiimote doesn't have nearly enough buttons to operate as a standard DVD player remote. I hated the way the PS2 DVD playback worked, with the menu on screen.

 

I didn't say that making improvements in and of itself is generous. What I'm saying is: the new slim PS2 is a welcome upgrade in and of itself. No-one can argue that if you're looking for a significant reduction in size and weight, you got it here, but in addition to that you're getting a network adapter. Of course, on the other hand, your old network adapter wouldn't fit to this one anyways, so they kinda owe it you. But if you didn't have an adapter you're getting a bonus. For comparison's sake: the GB Micro, which is a slim GBA, doesn't include GBC/GB compatibility while the fullsize versions do. With the slim GBA you're losing a feature, while with the slim PS2 you're potentially gaining a feature.

 

I fail to see whats so good about it, they shoulda had this in the first place.

Nintendo invented the rumble feature. So what if Sony go and make it built in 5 years later, ALL the next gen consoles had it built in.

 

Not 5 years later you schmuck, I was talking about the Dual Shock 1 for the PS1. And the point isn't that their competitor, the N64 already had rumble. The point is that Sony acknowledged a shortcoming with their controller due to the lack of sticks, compared to the N64 controller, so they added sticks and in addition added rumble while they could have just made rumble an accessory like Nintendo was doing at the time.

>>I fail to see whats so good about it, they shoulda had this in the first place.<<

And about this: your hero the big N didn't include this either, and what's worse, the only games that offered online play were the Phantasy Star series, while they had promised online features prior to the console launch. Yes, the Xbox had it on launch, but bear in mind that it also launched 2 years later than the PS2 did. If online play on consoles was unheard of when Microsoft launched Live, then how about 2 years before that?

My overall point with all of this is that over the years Sony has come across as more consumer-minded IMO, and judging by their big lead for the past two generations, I'd say a lot of other people also have this impression, and if it wasn't for the Nintendo exclusives, I wouldn't be owning a GCN nor would I be a devoted Nintendo follower. Now, I'm not gonna discuss how Sony's image is falling apart or changing, or how Sony is digging their own grave and going crazy with the PS3. Because the fact of the matter is that neither PS3 nor Wii has launched yet and there's no way of knowing how the next generation will play out so spare me the prophecies of Sony's doom for now.

 

February 18th, 2009.

 

I disagree that its consumer minded. Its profit minded. They realised the rumble feature would be a good money spinner.

Why did your beloved Sony PS2 not offer 4 controller ports? So they could make MONEY of the multi tap.

And for the record while i have a deep love for Nintendo, im equally a Sega fan...and starting to love MS consoles also.

In the past ive owned SNES, N64, GB Color, DS Lite, GC, Genesis, Dreamcast, PS2 and XBox 360. I have no fanatical loyaltys to companys. If my money situation is good and i see a console that offers me entertainment, i buy it. So unlike you im not moaning in bias.

 

Sony added rumble to their new controllers, rather than making it an accessory, because they had to. Sony controllers don't have memory card slots like the N64 controllers did. There was no way to add the rumble feature without a completely new controller.

And I hardly see the constant hardware updates and re-releases as "generous". They were only fixing the hardware that was already flawed and then selling it at a slightly reduced price form the original. "Hey kids! You love your PS2 but it keeps breaking? Well now there's a solution! Buy a new one! This time it will be $50 cheaper!"

It's no wonder the PS2 sold as well as they did. When your customers have to buy 3 over the console's lifetime (as one of my college roommates did) of course you're going to outsell the competition.

 

true very true, but NES people will fight to the bitter end, though their games really have no spine what so ever

 

the games have no spine?

I play Mario Kart and other games years on.

All of PS most popular games are sequels and rehashes.

GTA
GT
Pro Evo
FIFA
Metal Gear
Tekken
Ridge Racer
Final Fantasy
ResiEvil
list goes on and on

When was the last an original game came out on the PS and was a success?
Im not saying all those games are bad, some are pure classics! But there is no big deal in a game which a new version will be out after one year.
Originality is what I look for. And Sony offers less originality than Nintendo, MS or Sega. Thats a fact.

You call that spine?

 

no cause I am not nor will I be a PS guy EVER. I am a true blooded native of Washington who will only use a XBOX 360 BABY! But come on man, how may different versions of Mario do we have to deal with till it dies? It is like how many versions of Land Before Time or any versions after the real GI Joe and the real Tranformers do we have to see? It all makes me want to spew. Are you smacking on sports games? You have to upgrade the teams and add the new teams. There is no way out of that! I will give yah props on the FF binge though.

 

Forcing yourself to game only on one platform shows how limited your gaming experiance truly is and how little your opinion matters.

 

God of War. Although it is a bit dirivitive of DMC games.

Sony is not being generous. If they were generous they would make game systems that didn't constantly break down if you look at them wrong.

And on Nintendo's constant sequels, if you look at them, they are a lot fewer real sequels then you would think. Mario Party is the worst case. There is no need for 5 versions in a single gen, but everything else is kept to a minimum really.

Mario sequels are kept to 1 a gen after the NES, and those are almost always new tech break throughs.

Metroid has had 3 Sequels, and 3 spin-offs and the Prime series is ending at 3.

Star Fox a remake and one real sequel

Mario Sports aren't really Mario games. They are more like sports party games, and they get updates with less regularity then "real" sports games

Zelda doesn't really have sequels (with a few exceptios) as they do games that have a similar characters and that may or may not all exist on a sire timeline. And those are limited to 2 a gen.

Mario Kart gets 1 update a gen.

Now compare this to successful Sony properties

Rachet and Clank:4 a gen

Jak and Daxter: 3 a gen plus spin-offs

Now those happened in a single generation. And all the games are essentially the same with updates. Nothing truley new or ground breaking. Not that they are bad games, but they aren't substantially better as to warrent that kind of speedy delivery.

Microsoft has like what.. 1 orginal title? Blinx? Even that got a sequel in less then a few years.

So the Nintendo has sequelitis arguement isn't a very good one.

 

Yeah

Although MS are making some nice games slowly on its consoles...Kameo, and Mistwalker RPGs...they are slowly building nice semi in-house games.

 

limited? I have searched and searched for reports on all the consoles, and my decision last year was the best $400+ decision I have made so far. The games I am looking for, the HD DVD player that I want, and 1080p that i need! I think it is noted well enough. I have enough dirt on all the other consoles! the DB DVD will take too long to push man. I am set, and thanks for the opinion!

 

limited? I have searched and searched for reports on all the consoles, and my decision last year was the best $400+ decision I have made so far. The games I am looking for, the HD DVD player that I want, and 1080p that i need! I think it is noted well enough. I have enough dirt on all the other consoles! the DB DVD will take too long to push man. I am set, and thanks for the opinion![/quote]

Its nice being happy with your choice! But at the same time, its narrow minded that you dont respect others.

I for one feel that all 3 consoles will make for great systems for their intended audience, and its about finding out where you fit in best.
For me I know that Wii AND the 360 are great choices. Ive had the PS experience and its not to my taste, but i still enjoy playing it with friends.
You dont have to be so blindly passionately against the others. Long past are the days where you ended up getting a console with no good games.

 

So you bought the only next-gen console that was availible? You're not comparing the 360 to the PS2 and Gamecube are you? Because they're not supposed to be equal, hardware-wise.

 

give me an understanding of respect? Respect is giving the truth about what is needed, and not telling others that they are dumb, their opinion does not count, etc......that isn't respectful at all. I am encouraged that you feel so strong about the NES systems.