# what do you think is the best console?



## tyler (Aug 13, 2006)

I think the best system would be the wii


----------



## Marya (Aug 13, 2006)

I've never owned a console but the Wii definitely has me interested.  The new (and unique) controller, the possibility of games that use it as well as the lower price and the ability to download old Nintendo games (that I've never played) all add to the attractiveness.


----------



## tyler (Aug 13, 2006)

ps3 also looks really good to but i just hope there isnt as much problems with it as there was with the x box 360 but then again the x box 360 was rushed. The one thin id want the 360 for would be to buy halo 3 and oblivionand the graphics on the 360 are really good to, but ih you dont have a hd tv its like playin x boxfrom what i heard. And i like x box i like dat they put "connector thingy" so if u step on the controller coard the system want fall off of where you have it i also have virtual boy  dat really fun to play although i only have 2 gamesbut fun none the less.


----------



## MJRevell (Aug 14, 2006)

I think the 360 has far to much of a lead on the PS3. The Wii will not sell anywhere near as well as either the PS3 or the 360.. so in terms of sales, i think the 360 will be the winner of this generations console war.

In terms of games, the Wii is definitely marketed at a younger target audience. The biggest selling games are GTA and Halo... and again, the 360 comes up top here being the only console to get both.

Internet play seems to be the way forward, and i don't know much about the Wii in this area. I do know that the PS3 is practically copying Xbox Live, which is already well established and successful.

The PS2 won it last generation.. but now i think it's time for the Xbox to take the crown.


----------



## Crymic (Aug 14, 2006)

alot of developers are jumping ship from the PS3. Due to Sony's attitude about their game system, They're acting very high and mighty about it.


In the latest issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly, rumors are abound in all shapes and forms. Although there were many rumors pertaining to all three of the competing consoles, there were a few that could, in fact, change the way people view Nintendo, especially the Nintendo Wii:

*-* _EA is planning on a "massively multiplayer" Burnout but no console specifications were made_
*-* _Many of the companies are shifting their focus and games from the PlayStation 3 to the Nintendo Wii for undisclosed reasons_
*-* _A new music game is in the works by Harmonix_
*-* _Two Star Wars games are in the works for the Nintendo Wii: One being developed by LucasArts which involves wielding a light saber, while the other game is from the Battlefront franchise. Console specifications were not mentioned and Pandemic is not working on the title._

Many have talked about the coming of a Star Wars light saber game just because of how the Nintendo Wii controller is used. The news of Burnout is exciting because whenever EA made the Burnout franchise purchase, they stopped supporting the Nintendo GameCube, after the wonderful Burnout 2. The thing that is the most interesting is the news of companies abandoning the PlayStation 3 for the underpowered Nintendo Wii.
http://www.dsrevolution.com/article.php?articleid=1211


----------



## McMurphy (Aug 14, 2006)

I heard the same as Crymic in regards to Sony's attitude towards their newest system and in regards to game developers' sudden returned interest in the Nintendo console.  There are some franchises, such as Dragon Quest, that have not appeared on a Nintendo console for over decade, and they are now being advertised in Wii's newest trailers.

One thing I do have to note in regards to Playstation III, however.  It does seem that the company has softened a little.  I can only assume it is as a reaction to the negative fanfare about the company's attitude.  Regardless, it is going to be hard to compete with the competition when the competition is about half the price as the next Playstation console.


----------



## Green (Aug 14, 2006)

I think they're all a waste of money.


----------



## Crymic (Aug 14, 2006)

Also didn't help sony thinking giant crabs exisited in ancient japan and if you flip them over you can attack their weak spot for major damage.


----------



## Marya (Aug 14, 2006)

Green said:
			
		

> I think they're all a waste of money.


I'm a PC gamer but I've heard the arguements for and against consoles.  For those that have them, there is a different gaming experience.  You can sit back on the couch and have the game on your TV.  For many people this is a preferred way to game.

As well, you buy a game for the XBox or Playstation and it's ready to go.  No worries about whether your video card can handle it, is there enough RAM, etc.


----------



## McMurphy (Aug 15, 2006)

Marya said:
			
		

> I'm a PC gamer but I've heard the arguements for and against consoles.  For those that have them, there is a different gaming experience.  You can sit back on the couch and have the game on your TV.  For many people this is a preferred way to game.
> 
> As well, you buy a game for the XBox or Playstation and it's ready to go.  No worries about whether your video card can handle it, is there enough RAM, etc.


Good points, Mayra.  I, too, am interested in hearing the reasons behind why Green feels that the next generation of consoles are a waste of funds.  I know I am holding off for at least a year before picking up Wii or Playstation III (I highly doubt that Xbox will convert me.  The game franchises exclusively for that system does not interest me.).  I am not enough of a die hard gamer that I need to pick up the newest round of systems instantly, and I would rather wait until they have lower prices and more game selections before making any kind of commitment.  Besides, there is still plenty of games I need to explore on the Playstation II, and I look forward to those games dropping in price as well.  A good game is, after all, still a good game.


----------



## Marya (Aug 15, 2006)

I regularly visit another gaming site/forum and once in a while a console war breaks out (I rather think people get bored and need to have a fun arguement ).  Invariably, after console specs and extras (online capability, blue-ray, etc.) get argued to death, it comes down to the games that are offered. Game lineups, more than anything, tend to influence a console purchase.  Most of the people I know didn't buy an XBox 360 at launch and don't plan on purchasing a PS3 at launch.  They'll wait for the same reasons you are. 

I also know those that bought an XBox 360 or are interested in the PS3 are also interested in the Wii, primarily for the gameplay possibilities that it offers.  



> A good game is, after all, still a good game.


Well said.


----------



## Green (Aug 15, 2006)

Consoles get more and more expensive each time round. How much is a 360? £300 (ish), right? Then you have to add on the extra controller (you'd get one of those free back in the day), and god help you if you want to actually play any games. Those things will set you back about £40 or £50 each. Ouch.

These days, of course, consoles do all the things that a home cinema system will do - play DVDs, CDs, DivX, all that kind of thing, but in a few years they're obsolete. Then you've got a giant, ugly thing in your front room that you only use to play DVDs, when you can get a slimline DVD player with about the same functionality for about £30 these days. They'll be even cheaper in a couple of years.

The last console I bought was a PS2. I bought it about a year after release, and iirc it cost me about £200 with a game, or something like that. Then there was the memory cards, the controller, the DVD remote control, etc. None of these were essential, unless you actually wanted the system to be decent, of course. It was fun for a while, but after a year or so I lost interest in the games. They were already last-generation. I could get the same games on the PC for much cheaper (free, most of the time, and with better resolution and graphics capabilities), and only have to wait a couple of months for them to come out in most cases.

There's the argument that says "if you want your PC to match a 360 for spec, then you'll spend three times as much", and to that argument, I'd say: Yep, that's right. And imo if you spend £1000 or £2000 on your computer just to play games, then you've wasted your money (I'm not talking about the graphic artist who needs all that stuff for their job or whatever, I'm talking about the 17-year-old who wants to play Prey on maximum settings). People will disagree, of course, but you've either got to be rolling in money or have very skewed priorities to spend that kind of money to play computer games.

The Wii will be cheap, so I'm told, but then they're just for kids. PS3/360 with their super-duper-DVD-laser-monkey-butlers-as-standard are aimed at the young professional/spoiled teenager market. Very different beasts. Also, I predict the Wii Wand will be fun for all of twenty minutes.

So my point is not that PCs are that much cheaper (you still have to upgrade, but at least you have that option), but that consoles are a timebomb, just waiting to go obsolete. And I think they're a waste of money.


----------



## SkywardShadow (Aug 15, 2006)

I essentially feel exactly the opposite of Green here. Game systems have been about the same price at launch for the last few generations (PS3 is the first exception to this rule for a long time), but steadily drop in price each year as they get older, and it gets cheaper to produce them. They each tend to have exclusive titles that I love to play, and most of the games are never released on the PC. They never feel obsolete to me, I still enjoy playing some Saturn, Dreamcast, and PSX games that have never been released on another system, and each system has a good run of 5 years before a new generation comes out.

I only wish I could keep my PC upgraded to the newest game requirements for as cheaply as I can buy the new consoles with controllers every 5 years. I also wish the games were as bug-free and polished as most of my console favorites. Even my favorite PC games like Civilization IV launch with a lot of problems, and have high requirements.

While Nintendo is famous for some of their Mario titles and such, which are kid friendly, I doubt those that have played Resident Evil 4, Eternal Darkness, Baten Kaitos, or Fire Emblem would say their systems are made for kids.

As to the original point of this thread, if we are talking about upcoming systems only, it all depends on what games you want to play. My favorite system will probably be the Wii, but I mostly play RPGs, war/strategy games, and mecha games, so whomever gets more of those will get more of my money. I do love what Microsoft is doing with Live Arcade, especially with the recent announcement to let any home-game-designer to make games and upload them. I can't resist FFXIII, so I'll have to pay Sony some bucks too, but I think I'm gonna wait for a price cut there.


----------



## Crymic (Aug 16, 2006)

SkywardShadow said:
			
		

> I only wish I could keep my PC upgraded to the newest game requirements for as cheaply as I can buy the new consoles with controllers every 5 years.


Technically you can..It's just need to really do the research to find which motherboard is going last the longest.
Also avoid buying parts that come in pretty boxes.. OEM is cheap and the same product.
I generally buy parts off www.pricewatch.com


----------



## Green (Aug 16, 2006)

Aye. Managed properly, your PC can be a very (relatively) cheap, long-lasting and rewarding piece of kit (and PCs can play old games as well as new).


----------



## MJRevell (Aug 16, 2006)

In an attempt to save this from the 'which is better - console or pc' debate, i'll pose a question.

What do you make of this new Wii controller? Do you think this technology is going to work for the long run? I notice the Ps3 is doing something similar (though only to a smaller extent) with their controller - but the only game it is working on so far is a helicopter one.

I personally like the good old, controller controller, with no weird movements required.


----------



## Green (Aug 16, 2006)

It's a gimmick, and puts me off more than it interests me. Think back to the power glove.

Give me a PS2 controller any day


----------



## McMurphy (Aug 27, 2006)

It is a shame that the age of the classic Playstation controller is over.  It really was the apex of controller evolution.  Unfortunately, however, Sony lost an extremely expensive lawsuit over patent violations in regards to the rumble kit in their controllers, and it has prompted Sony to abandon any interest in keeping the controller design the same.


----------



## MJRevell (Aug 27, 2006)

McMurphy said:
			
		

> It is a shame that the age of the classic Playstation controller is over. It really was the apex of controller evolution. Unfortunately, however, Sony lost an extremely expensive lawsuit over patent violations in regards to the rumble kit in their controllers, and it has prompted Sony to abandon any interest in keeping the controller design the same.


 
Are you sure about this? Because the controllers of the PSone and the PS2 still vibrate. As do the X360 controllers.


----------



## kyektulu (Aug 27, 2006)

*Im totally happy with my PS2, I dont get to play games much anyway, yet PS3 looks great!

I vote PS2, as it is the only console I have got! *


----------



## dustinzgirl (Aug 27, 2006)

In my house (remember--five kids) we have 3 pc's, two xbox's, three gamecubes, one original nintendo (over 100 games), two nintendo 64's, one original atari (so far, only have pitfal and pong and tron for games) two PS2's and I think we have three PS1's.

Now--the Nintendo I have had since 8th grade. It has never stopped working. The atari was my dads, again, never stopped working, and niether has the 64. The PC's have all had recent body part swaps. The ps1's and 2's have all had 'eye' swaps. The gamecubes--alll three of them---continually shut themselves off, even after being 'cleaned,' the xbox's work pretty well, except sometimes they refuse to read movies and the controllers have to be constantly replaced--the good controllers, not the generic ones. Occasionally have had to replace the ps controllers too.

So, my vote, being the frugal kind of gal I am, is on the nintendo, nintendo 64 and atari. Everything else is made cheap and crappy these days.

PS: I really vote nintendo. I own Tetris and Mario. Mainly because, um--the new controllers are so dang confusing!!!!


----------



## McMurphy (Aug 27, 2006)

*Sony versus Immersion*



			
				MJRevell said:
			
		

> Are you sure about this? Because the controllers of the PSone and the PS2 still vibrate. As do the X360 controllers.


Positive.  Sony has been fighting this lawsuit, which could cost them up to thirty million dollars, for several years now, and all of their legal recourses have pretty much run out after the courts keep finding them guilty of patent violations.  Because of the lengthly legal battle (and under the impression that they could, in fact, win eventually), Sony went ahead and continued to use the Duel Shock design for the PS2.  The company can't go for a third round with the same design now that it is clear that they have lost.

As far as X360, Microsoft isn't included in the lawsuit since it has settled out of court and has agreed to pay a licensing fee to Immersion (the company holding the related patents). 

Below is a link to an article about the lawsuit that even includes the patent numbers that Sony has used without permission:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060313-6366.html



On the topic of past systems and how they have held up throughout time like Dustinzgirl has discussed, my breakdown (in both senses, I suppose) is as follows:

Atari 400:  Worked perfectly without incident until a couple years ago, but I have a feeling that it is more due to the fact that is was placed in storage and suffered heavy dusting.  I still need to open it up and clean it out.  Perhaps, it will go back to unflawed working order then.  The old Atari joysticks all need replacing.

Nintendo (NES):  Like many systems of that generation, it had to work against an uphill battle with the side-loading cart position.  Such a design makes it easy for the port within the back of the machine to shift and have problems loading games (people, stop blowing on the carts!  It will only make matters worse!).  Throughout my childhood, the system became more and more fickle until it would only play a game after a half of an hour or a full hour of monkeying around with it.  I took it apart in college, cleaned each part, and reassembled it...and now it works well again.  Still using the original controllers.  One still works perfectly, but the second one needs to have the rubber matting under the directional pad replaced.

SNES:  Worked perfectly, but I bought the last generation of it so it never had much use outside of playing Mario Kart.  Controllers had no problems....not even the generic ones.

N64: My first system worked without incident.  Controllers worked well, also. The system didn't take kindly to the generic memory cards, though.  I lost that system to an ex, so I have another (green) N64 now.  It sometimes doesn't load the carts.

Playstation:  I never had a problem with this system.  The memory card ports also worked flawlessly.  The controllers, however, were a headache.  Had to replace the original one and made the mistake in doing so by picking up generic controllers.  

Playstation II:  The system has worked without issue.  It came with the internet part, but I have never used it, so I can't vouch for its stability.  The only problem I have come across with this system is that the slot 1 for the memory card doesn't always read.  At times, I need to take back out the card and try again.


----------



## Green (Aug 28, 2006)

Seeing as how I won't be buying any new consoles, I'm not fussed what Sony do with their controller - I'll just keep using my PS2 pad for my PC. The only worry I have is that if it breaks (which it's liable to do, those things rattle from day one), I won't be able to buy a new one.

My console history:

NES - never broke, no complaints. Nowt.

Gameboy - same again.

SNES - ditto.

PS1 - hmm. Had to play it on its side to load up some games. God knows why.

PS2 - no problems.

I never owned a Sega or an XBox, though I've played on plenty. Bad controllers combined with uninspiring franchises put me off them (although, Nintendo's good record with gamepads was raped by the abysmal N64 controller. So long, old friends.)

Imo, Sony can stick their rumbling gimmicks up their arse if it means I can keep the pinnacle of gamepad evolution for ever more.

Seriously, does anybody care about rumbling that much? I actually find it annoying, and it's not exactly realistic, is it? "The gamepad is rumbling! This must mean that the dragon has just bitten off my ass! Lo and behold..."


----------



## McMurphy (Aug 29, 2006)

Green said:
			
		

> Seriously, does anybody care about rumbling that much? I actually find it annoying, and it's not exactly realistic, is it? "


I never minded it all that much.  In fact, I look forward to the feature when it is used correctly in games.  Most over-use it because the designers most likely didn't really know what to do with it, but felt as if they had to take advantage of the system's feature.

In the end, I am glad the rumble feature exists (you can always turn off the rumbling in virtually all game set-up menus or simply press the button on the controller to deactivate it, you know), and I wouldn't doubt if Sony decides to cough up money in the future to continue having a version of the rumble pack capable in the next generation of gaming.


----------



## Green (Aug 29, 2006)

Too many gimmicks. Maybe for the PS9, Tekken 54 will come with a free* Filipino boy who will sit next to you and punch you in the arm when you get hit.


* Actual cost = £57.99, included in console price.


----------



## SkywardShadow (Aug 30, 2006)

Would you have to feed him, and let him use your restroom, or would there be a monthly subscription plan to deliver new ones consistantly?


----------



## Green (Aug 30, 2006)

Once he dies, you would have to buy a replacement. £450. Or you could get him in special _Metal Gear Solid 6 Edition_ pants, for £499.

Course, back in the day of the NES, you would have got two of them for free with the console


----------



## Crymic (Aug 30, 2006)

Green said:
			
		

> PS1 - hmm. Had to play it on its side to load up some games. God knows why.


The laser head on the ps1 was pretty shotty. I had to replace mine several times by taking it apart.


----------



## sidewinder (Nov 12, 2006)

Having played almost every games console from the VIC 20 to a PS2 my favourites are the SNES, Dreamcast, PS2, Gamecube and Xbox in no particular order.
Each console has its pros and cons and are great for single player when you want to escape stupid reality.
As for multiplayer games I prefer to use the PC at LAN tournaments there is nothing quite like vaporising the guy sitting next to you at one of these events


----------



## ColecoVisionist (Aug 26, 2007)

PS2.

Great controllers, backward compatability with the PS1, tons of great games (Maximo, RE4, God of War, etc.).

Brett Weiss: Words of Wonder


----------

