System Wars(Sony vs. Nintendo vs. Microsoft)

[pitch]

gwpharoahman54 said:

pitch said:

I can just picture two or three years in the future, Sony will be criticizing Nintendo for making a console that can play games...

OMG, I ALMOST RIPPED OUT MY WISDOM TEETH STITCHES FROM SMILING SO MUCH WHEN I READ THAT. But it's soooooooooo true. Sony has never been about games.

~~~~~~

Mario Kart DS is the start of these ULTIMATE games because of the Wi-fi capabilities. PLAYING WITH ANYONE IN THE WORLD WITH THE SAME LANGUAGE AS YOU FROM YOUR LOCAL STARBUCKS DOESN'T APPEAL TO YOU!!!??!? WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!?! Another ULTIMATE game on the horizon is Animal Crossing DS. Ok, if you look at that list and you say "What are those games?" then one, you're not a gamer, or two, you've been so jaded over you distaste for DS that you've never heard of them.

Well I'm glad you enjoyed that. And... sorry. lol

Second, don't forget us gamers who are stuck in the last generation. The only Mario Kart game I've ever played, apart from a little demo of Double Dash in the stores, was the original(that was on the SNES, right?). In fact, I STILL play the original A LOT. And Animal Crossing. I've heard of it but never actually played. Either way really looking forward to the DS versions..

[Darfox8]

I fohnd this thread at the Gamespot.com Forums. I thought it was pretty funny.

Click here

[pitch]

lol well Sony themselves have said it's not meant to be for gaming, but for media. =/ Games are an extra now. lol doesn't really matter what people buy it for now, in fact, more power to the people that buy it for extra crap. I mean if someone decided to buy the thing for games, when Sony made it clear that that isn't they're real intention for it, then said PS3 purchasing person is stupid.

[feldinaut]

I made a comment to PharaohMan the other day that went a little something like this:

I can't wait for another company like Nintendo to come along, one that makes its own consoles and games. I don't think Nintendo is a perfect company by any means, and I wouldn't call myself a fangirl. However, Nintendo is the only game company around that is still interested in (and always has been) advancing video games and creating new, original ways to play them. Sony and Microsoft are gigantic entertainment and computing companies. They don't know games like Nintendo knows games. That's why we get crap like games evolving more increasingly into slightly interactive movies and consoles becoming more like computers than gaming machines.

If a company like Nintendo came along, I should hope the competition between those two would blow the gaming divisions of Microsoft and Sony out of existence. Casual gamers don't really care about what Nintendo is doing on its own, but what if they had nothing to choose from but REAL video games? What if Nintendo wasn't forced to play keeping-up to all the ridiculous, unnecessary features Microsoft and Sony are coming out with just to stay in business? If I want a computer that plays games, I'LL BUY A DADGUM COMPUTER. If I want to watch DVDs, I'LL BUY A DVD PLAYER. If I want to listen to MP3s, I'LL BUY AN MP3 PLAYER. I don't NEED these stupid multi-function consoles that cost a fortune when all I want it for is TO PLAY GAMES. Geez!

So I wish that would happen. I hate to see gaming deteriorate like it's doing.

And that's all I have to say about the system wars.

[Darfox8]

I totally agree with Feldinaut, except with the "slightly interactive movie" comment. Because it sounds like shes slamming Metal Gear. And if she is. Well, theres certain games for certain people. Video game are(whether you know it or not) an art form. So it's alive and changing. Different types games need to be made. Would you like every game to be Mario. Heck no. Would you like every game to be a Final Fantasy. Even worse.

So I say you need companies like Sony and Microsoft kinda like you need good and evil. Nintendo is respectable since it actually makes a wealth of really good first party games. MS... has alot of money but no first party games. Sony would be in the middle I'd say. It has 3 or 4 really good series but not much else. Most of it's success lies in it's third party support. And thats honestly why I buy Sony systems. It has my favorite franchises. I like Metal Gear, Megaman, Final Fantasy, and Tenchu more than I like Mario, Zelda, and Metriod. It's that simple. I don't care much for the extras. Though I think some are cool, I already have a computer to do that and it does it better. I've already given my analogy about the bording house like five time so I wont do it again because someone might kill me.

[pitch]

Nintendo's certainly not a perfect company. But that doesn't go to say I'm a fan of theirs just because of their... shall we say integrity(ya know they focus on video games when it comes to video games, and don't try to sell you the other stuff). Their games are amazing. Maybe not in the graphics department(though I played a demo of Metroid Prime 2, and was totally blown away), but geez. I just got Advance Wars DS yesterday and could hardly bring myself to put it down to type this, I spent hours on end playing Super Mario 64 back in those days(and now again on my DS), I've beaten Super Metroid at least a hundred times, and I must know like every pixel of any NES Mario game insidedown and upsideout(except 2, I never really got very into that). And like look at like Pokemon! Sure it gets a little more redundant with each game(though the features added in some of the newer ones as time went on were neat), but it's hard to find a person who was a gamer in that period(I mean EARLY Pokemon) and wasn't addicted to it. Nintendo knows what they're doing and it shows in their games. I ♥ them.

But when it comes down to it, the console of your choice depends on your taste in games(and yes darfox, the bording house analogy is pretty tired). It's not like this line hasn't been drawn before. Before it was Nintendo vs Sony it was Nintendo vs Sega(when it came to games being "kiddy"), and I just have two words for ya on that one: Sonic Advance. (it's actually a pity because Sega was behind a lotta great games, and the Dreamcast was absolutely wonderful, but I just like making the comment about games being "kiddy") So yeah. I was done bashing Sony until that one moron posted that one thing about the DS being gimicky. I personally think that for that they deserve all the bashing in the world.

[Dashe]

It's so sad, seeing what gaming has become. Everytime I read an article about the new consoles, it's all specs, specs, specs. A poll in this month's GamePro revealed that while PS3 is the most-wanted console, most people would rather have a 360 if the PS3 didn't come with a prepackaged hard drive. Whenever I try to read about the new consoles, all the articles contain so much computer jargon that I can hardly read them anymore, and they always seem to care more about gHz and Megabytes and all that stuff. It's so much harder to find a list of the systems' launch libraries! I don't give a crap about how good the graphics are, I just want good GAMES! While Sony and Microsoft are arguing about specs, Nintendo has already revealed some of its launch concepts--we all know we're getting more of Mario and Samus and the whole gang. Even if they are being secretive about their controller, it shouldn't matter, because the games are what people SHOULD want. But, as always, the ignorant masses shove the software aside and battle with hardware...what is this world coming to?

This afternoon, I had one of my friends over, and he brought his XBOX with him. My mom found us playing Fuzion Frenzy, and she kept gushing about how wonderful the graphics were. "Why don't we have one of those? The graphics are WAY better than the ones on your PS2 and Gamecube!" I think it's a shame how XBOX has such great potential, yet they waste it on stupid party games and mediocre shooters. If they didn't put so much effort into making sure each and every game has more detailed graphics and sound than the comptetition, they actually might have been able to create something worthwhile.

Also, completely off-topic, OMG THAT GAMESPOT FORUM WAS SO FULL OF SPAM I WANTED TO BASH THE COMPUTER SCREEN IN!!! It's so nice to know that the majority of the people here can post intelligently.

[Santa Melty]

There is recompense there. Sony and Microsoft’s machines may have better overall visuals, but from what I’ve seen, they process it much slower. I get a good bit more slowdown on the PS2 then on the Gamecube. If you were to play a sound-barrier-breaking game such as F-Zero or Super Smash Bros. Melee on a Sony consol, I promise you that you’d never be able to match the pace of the Gamecube. Graphic-wise, I’d never considered them any different.

Game-wise, the Playstation series has many more games then any other consol available, mostly because the PS2 can play games from both PS1 and PS2 generations, and because games from many different companies are compatible with it. It’s only natural that people would have a greater number of favored games from that pool. Consider Nintendo’s games of higher quality if you so choose, but Sony has sheer numbers on its side, giving people much more of an incentive to buy it over other councils. Options are good as far as games go.

I dislike most extras, but I can definitely appreciate Microsoft’s use of an integrated computer hardrive. As Dashe said, it has great potential. I hate using memory cards, and this eliminates the need. Allowing it full Internet capabilities was also an excellent idea, although I’d much rather have a combination of the X-Box and Gamecube. Imagine a system with the Gamecube’s repertoire of games and its graphics processor with the smoothness of the X-Box’s graphics, as well as the lack of need for a memory card and full Internet access. It would be an absolute dream for games like Animal Crossing, which scream for such wide player access. The Playstation offers none of this. Simply the ability to play music, games, and videos, all rolled into one. If it wasn’t for their huge list of titles, It’d be last on my list. But alas, it truly is the games that supersede the specs. Thus, It’d be second only to Nintendo in my opinion, with the X-Box falling into third. Real shame that they don’t utilize the X-Box to its potential. I can appreciate a good shooter now that then, but something with thicker substance would be a definite improvement.

Just a few of my thoughts upon reading the posts here.

A couple more in fact:

I still stand by my opinion that the DS’s touchscreen is somewhat gimmicky. Still, it entertains me that Sony would have probably called it ingenious and innovative had THEY been the ones to make it. But of course, they weren’t, so it’s a gimmick that will never hold its own in the market.

Nintendo does not need any more competition. Trying to be original enough to make up for the lack of computer-like features on their consols is the standing challenge. It has a tough enough time staying in the game as it is. Another company like Nintendo would only draw business away from them and probably put them both out of business. The only way such competition would be a boon for them is if this new company somehow diverted consumers away from Sony and Microsoft and on to them, but if they make the same kinds of games, that would be tough to pull off. Another company with some of their own imagination would be beneficial though. Tis a scary thought that if Nintendo goes down, there would be none left...

Pokemon is just far too repetitive for my tastes at this point. Its beginnings were great, but after Gold/Silver, the creativity rather dropped dead. Small graphical improvements to the sprites and battle animations are nothing. The wireless adaptor was an excellent add-on, but really, at that point, I knew so few people that played the game that there was no point. They also could have very well used that same technology to bolster other games’ playability, but never did. I still buy the games, sure, but it’s more out of habit then anything. Hopefully, this upcoming Coliseum sequel on the Gamecube should prove better.

Finally, that gamespot forum seemed rather... empty. But they prove my point about the PS3 having the most games and the appeal that such a thing provides, so I commend them nonetheless.

[Darfox8]

Well I can safely say that Sony puts more attention on it's games than Microsoft. Just look at the Press Confrences.

This is a link to Gamespots E3 2005 media page

The link to the three press confrences are close to the top of that page. They are all long(the shortest being about 40 minutes) but you should still see them if you haven't yet.

You'll notice that an insane amount of Microsofts press con. is about its features. Infact I estimate that they only talk about games for some 10 minutes. Sony on the other habd showed a crap load of really cool games. It's split about 50/50 between their new Cell Porcessor and their games. Nintendo is all about their games(Nintendogs and Electro Plankten to be exact). They only talk about features at the very end. And it's features envolve downloading games to play.

You should really watch them because it gives you a perfect purspective of how they all do their business. Don't take my opnion for it. Since all three of them are talking about them selves as if they're the best watching all three would be the best way to get an unbias opinion.

[Paragon]

Well, I started my VGing on Nintendo, then moved on to PS. With this news in mind, I still believe that Sony could still sell the most. But you know what's interesting? Companies have "betrayed" Nintendo for Sony's better hardware many times, and then they come crawling back to Nintendo for about 1-2 games.

Examples: Square moved its FF series from NES/SNES to PlayStation after FF6, and then gave Nintendo Crystal Chronicles for the Gamecube, and the FF Tactics Advance for Gameboy Advance (duh?). And Capcom moved its MM series to Playstation after X3, I believe. And then gave Nintendo a dumbed-down Legends 1, and a few GC Mega Man games. And Nintendo has been "betrayed" again by Namco by having the Tales series moved to PS2. Companies only give systems games for the hardware. That's the only thing they care about. If the system can handle the game, they'll put it there. If it can't, or they didn't sell well enough on that system, they'll move to another. The companies themselves only care about whether a game sells well, or about how well the hardware handles the game.

So, considering this, I believe Sony will sell the most.

(Wow, my first extremely long post since I joined)

[Darfox8]

Whether you love or hate Playstation. You need to see this Gamespot Special Feature.

FlashBack: Playstation
(Man almost everypost I've done lately its been linking to other websites)

They did it because it's the ten year aniversary of the Playstation. But don't let that lead you into thinking that this is all about praising the Playstation. Alot of editors who speak about it talk bad about it. They even talk to the first employee of the Sony videogame department. And he gives alot of insight. One thing he says that the PS was very cheap for it's time(and people now a days accuse Sony of overpricing their stuff). Also he says that Ken Kuturagi(SP?) actually said in anger "We'll burry Nintendo!"(but he actually got riped of by them first so it's not as bad as it sounds.).

And they do talk alot about the games. The good and bad ones. And they even have a quick FF7 vs. FF8 talk.

GO and watch the videos now!!!!!!

[Rage]

Mircosoft is going down and that sony dude is any idoit. I love the gamecube ,ds, psp, and PS2

[Darfox8]

OMG!!!!!!!! Someone revived System wars. Too bad it's not a big deal...

Well i take this chance and beg people to go see that PS1 FlashBack video I posted. It's really good.

[aarond]

I'll say a few things.

One, Sony's hardware has the consistency of trash. I can't believe how many broken PS2s I've seen recently. It's amazing. My own PSX broke like three months after I bought it, and someone I know had a Sony Vega TV break in a similar amount of time. The problems with PSP are numerous as well. Remember this: PSP was not made to compete with Game Boy or DS: It was made to introduce UMD as a media format, which is why the movies are outselling the system's games. Of course, you could pay half the price and get a DVD which has bonus features, or get a video iPod and have a media machine which doesn't suck, but why pay less?

The PS3 will play Blu-Ray movies, Blu-Ray PS3 games, DVD PS3 games, PS2 games, CD (blueback) PS2 games, movie DVDs, CD-Roms, PSX CDs, and music CDs. That's nine different types of disks, which means the laser eye will have to use two different kinds of beams and five or so different elevations. It will probably also crack if you breathe on it.

The 360 will only play HD-DVDs if you get an add-on drive. I'm going that route this generation, especially because they've got Japanese developers actually making stuff for it. That makes a big difference, especially Mist Walker.

Also, I'll get a Revolution, because it will be cool and probably inexpensive. But that was a given.

I'll only get a PS3 if MegaMan Legends 3 is on it. I don't know whether to cross my fingers or not for that.

[Aim]

....I'm still getting a PS3 for the game selection, I guess.

I just don't particularly care for any of the Nintendo Superstars, (And I have a decided dislike of Link by now, whom I'm sure they'll launch like a volley of fire arrows. Not that I dislike the series or anything.), and I can't recall a single Gamecube game I really liked besides Super Smash Brothers: Melee. I mean, I bought quite a few, but I still like the PS2's selection much more.

The DS does continue to sound better and better though, and I might not be able to dodged the silver bullet that is the new Super Smash Brothers series game for the Revolution. I guess only time will tell.

And Rage, you do know that PSP and PS2 are both put out by "that Sony idiot?" Or were you just reffering to the guy who said no imports?