Competion!!!!!!
- Thread starter ramp188
- Start date
wiiener
a.k.a Vega
........................what? :wtf:
are you asking which one is better? uhh ... i would say the 360 because it will have halo 3 and ps3 is 600 dollars...
and do you not speak english as your first language ... or are you a spell check spammer? ......... (no offense)
are you asking which one is better? uhh ... i would say the 360 because it will have halo 3 and ps3 is 600 dollars...
and do you not speak english as your first language ... or are you a spell check spammer? ......... (no offense)
Last edited:
nintendo lover
WiiChat Member
the ps3 is too expensive and no one would buy it
Homicidal_Gamer
Yay I'm dead!
I second that.wiiener said:
NateTheGreat
Pondering Member
wiiener said:
It's his first post, so be easy on him....but I third that.
phiggey
WiiChat Member
You should all remember that even though PS3 is 600 bucks, the XBOX 360 isnt exactly cheap. I figure that some folks will say "whats another 200 bucks for a better GPU, a Blue Ray player, and (arguable) a better game line up. You should all also respect the fact that PS2 sold the most consoles of last generation and will likely have a good number of people looking to stick with the same brand. We should all accept the fact that in order to compete with computers these days, consoles are gonna have to become damn expensive. A top of the line gaming computer these days will run 3000 dollars easily. How do consoles compare to that? The high prices will probably be a new trend. I think that in future gens we will probably see even more expensive systems. As technology increases and the computer graphics improve, the price for consoles will continue to rise. That said, price is not really gonna be a factor between these two because they are both expensive. Wii wins price comparison hands down.
The next comparison for the two mentions systems would be performance. I think it is safe to say that PS3 wins that category (based on specs alone) But is it really 200 dollars better than Xbox360? I would say probably not. But if that 200 dollars gets you the top of the line equipment. . .then people will pay it. Also it gets you blu ray, a risky move in my opinion since blue ray is beginning a fierce competition with HD DVD - both are acceptable High Def Movie formats, but in the end there is only room for one cat on the block. But blue ray movies are around and people can pick up the most popular movies and new releases either on line or at a major electronics store I believe. I htink Xbox offers a High def player as an add on - someone correct me if I'm wrong. I think this one Goes to PS3 because its graphics are, in theory, superior - however HD movies is a toss up. hats off to Sony for including it in the base system however and not requiring expenseve add ons(though you pay for it up front).
Finally there is the most important category - games. Halo is always good and I dont think anyone can deny that. I myself have never owned anything from Sony - And i dont really know what games are out there - but I always hear people talking about how Sony has the most quality games over Nintendo and Microsoft. I think by popular belief this one goes to Sony - though I would put Nintendo leaps and bounds above the rest.
I think that the best of the two consoles may be the playstation - though if I had to pick one, it would be the XBOX 360 because I have never played sony and dont care to. That said - I will own neither in the forseeable future. It is my opinion that there will be more Wii's under Christmas trees this year than anything else. The price from Sony and X box will shut out the casual gamers (except for the rich ones) I think in the end Sony will take the cake of the High performance systems but I think that Wii will out sell all of them - especially in the Asian market where the DS has already taken a commanding lead over the PSP. There are those who will be turned off by Nintendo's new approach - but I also think that for every one person turned away by the wiimote concept - three more will be drawn to it. This is a fascinating idea and it, and the low (relatively speaking) price make this Nintendo's race to lose. Ultimately, nobody will remember who sells the second most. . . As Viper said in Top Gun - "There are no points for second place" The plaque for the alternates is in the lady's room where more people than forseen by the big wigs at MS and Sony will be flushing this gens systems from those respective companies down the toilet and embracing Wii (the Revolution in gaming)
P.S. - who needs highdef when most TV's dont even support HD. I say come back in 5 years with HD - and at that time Nintendo will likely jump on too. I just hope prices dont jump too much.
The next comparison for the two mentions systems would be performance. I think it is safe to say that PS3 wins that category (based on specs alone) But is it really 200 dollars better than Xbox360? I would say probably not. But if that 200 dollars gets you the top of the line equipment. . .then people will pay it. Also it gets you blu ray, a risky move in my opinion since blue ray is beginning a fierce competition with HD DVD - both are acceptable High Def Movie formats, but in the end there is only room for one cat on the block. But blue ray movies are around and people can pick up the most popular movies and new releases either on line or at a major electronics store I believe. I htink Xbox offers a High def player as an add on - someone correct me if I'm wrong. I think this one Goes to PS3 because its graphics are, in theory, superior - however HD movies is a toss up. hats off to Sony for including it in the base system however and not requiring expenseve add ons(though you pay for it up front).
Finally there is the most important category - games. Halo is always good and I dont think anyone can deny that. I myself have never owned anything from Sony - And i dont really know what games are out there - but I always hear people talking about how Sony has the most quality games over Nintendo and Microsoft. I think by popular belief this one goes to Sony - though I would put Nintendo leaps and bounds above the rest.
I think that the best of the two consoles may be the playstation - though if I had to pick one, it would be the XBOX 360 because I have never played sony and dont care to. That said - I will own neither in the forseeable future. It is my opinion that there will be more Wii's under Christmas trees this year than anything else. The price from Sony and X box will shut out the casual gamers (except for the rich ones) I think in the end Sony will take the cake of the High performance systems but I think that Wii will out sell all of them - especially in the Asian market where the DS has already taken a commanding lead over the PSP. There are those who will be turned off by Nintendo's new approach - but I also think that for every one person turned away by the wiimote concept - three more will be drawn to it. This is a fascinating idea and it, and the low (relatively speaking) price make this Nintendo's race to lose. Ultimately, nobody will remember who sells the second most. . . As Viper said in Top Gun - "There are no points for second place" The plaque for the alternates is in the lady's room where more people than forseen by the big wigs at MS and Sony will be flushing this gens systems from those respective companies down the toilet and embracing Wii (the Revolution in gaming)
P.S. - who needs highdef when most TV's dont even support HD. I say come back in 5 years with HD - and at that time Nintendo will likely jump on too. I just hope prices dont jump too much.
None the wii is in its own leage
NateTheGreat
Pondering Member
Wow! I didn't even understand this thread's question, but obviously you've grasped it...I think.
I disagree a bit. The original Xbox sold for $500 at launch, the Gamecube for $200, and the PS2 for $300. So, only Sony's console has really increased in price and that's because it's quite a bit better than the PS2 in terms of graphics, CPU power, ports, etc. and a Blu-ray player (which I really have no confidence in, but who knows). I'm guessing future consoles will remain in the $200 to $500 range, unless a new company joins the trifecta (Sony, Micro$oft, Nintendo). Also, if you build your own gaming rig, you could have a fairly good system that would smoke the Xbox 360 and probably the PS3 for $1000-$1500. Of course, graphics also depend on the games themselves; some games like Resident Evil 4 on the GC looks better than certain games for Xbox because the developers cared, not because the hardware was better. Back to pricing, it's sort of like the iPod. It's advanced soo much, yet it's still $300-$400.
I agree; we don't have two versions of VHS or DVD (except for widescreen but I'm not counting that), so there can only be one HD video format and from the news I've heard, I think Blu-ray may go the way of the UMD for PSP.
If you just mean franchises, it's really debatable. If you like a lot of franchises that come out on all consoles, then Xbox is the winner because of the reasons above.
If you mean great and indearing franchises, Wii wins because it has Zelda, Metroid, Mario, etc.
If you mean original franchises, that's sort of between the Xbox and PS2 because Xbox had games like Halo, Ninja Gaiden, Splinter Cell (which used to come out late for all the other consoles and I would still consider it played best on Xbox and thus unique to it), and The Chronicles of Reddic.
However, PS2 have a lot of music games, Amplitude & Rez, odd but cool games like Katamari Damacy, and platformers like Jak&Daxter, Rachet&Clank, but they really don't have any good first person shooters, which is a major downfall.
I do think, however, that all consoles should have a monitor port because it's great for LAN parties.
Other than that, I say stick with what you've got. If you think it looks pretty good, then who cares if it's quote, unqoute HD!
phiggey said:
I disagree a bit. The original Xbox sold for $500 at launch, the Gamecube for $200, and the PS2 for $300. So, only Sony's console has really increased in price and that's because it's quite a bit better than the PS2 in terms of graphics, CPU power, ports, etc. and a Blu-ray player (which I really have no confidence in, but who knows). I'm guessing future consoles will remain in the $200 to $500 range, unless a new company joins the trifecta (Sony, Micro$oft, Nintendo). Also, if you build your own gaming rig, you could have a fairly good system that would smoke the Xbox 360 and probably the PS3 for $1000-$1500. Of course, graphics also depend on the games themselves; some games like Resident Evil 4 on the GC looks better than certain games for Xbox because the developers cared, not because the hardware was better. Back to pricing, it's sort of like the iPod. It's advanced soo much, yet it's still $300-$400.
phiggy said:
I agree; we don't have two versions of VHS or DVD (except for widescreen but I'm not counting that), so there can only be one HD video format and from the news I've heard, I think Blu-ray may go the way of the UMD for PSP.
I don't know. What do you mean by quality games? Xbox always has the best version of whatever game you can think of because it can do custom soundtracks, true 5.1 Surround Sound, better loading times, etc.phiggy said:
If you just mean franchises, it's really debatable. If you like a lot of franchises that come out on all consoles, then Xbox is the winner because of the reasons above.
If you mean great and indearing franchises, Wii wins because it has Zelda, Metroid, Mario, etc.
If you mean original franchises, that's sort of between the Xbox and PS2 because Xbox had games like Halo, Ninja Gaiden, Splinter Cell (which used to come out late for all the other consoles and I would still consider it played best on Xbox and thus unique to it), and The Chronicles of Reddic.
However, PS2 have a lot of music games, Amplitude & Rez, odd but cool games like Katamari Damacy, and platformers like Jak&Daxter, Rachet&Clank, but they really don't have any good first person shooters, which is a major downfall.
Um...no comment, I guess.:wtf:phiggy said:
Exactly!! And not only do a lot of people not have HD TVs, but their normal tube TVs many times look better than an HD display, without the need to buy high def versions of everything from TV cables to DVDs to get a true HD experience.phiggy said:
I do think, however, that all consoles should have a monitor port because it's great for LAN parties.
Other than that, I say stick with what you've got. If you think it looks pretty good, then who cares if it's quote, unqoute HD!
registerednerd
Wii online moderator
notarizeO D S T said:
