I hate these kind of topics because it always ends up as console wars, and I have to say I have a ps1 + ps2 and neither have had any problems, what have you been doing to make a playstation burn or melt a disc, or even make the console fry at all? That is crazy poo.
For the PS1, I tried to play resident evil and watched all the videos, doing so heated up the playstation enough to warp my RE disc, Keep in mind, it was a First Generation PS, the really heavy one with the cd reading track on the opposite side of the rest of the playstations.
For the Ps2, it just stopped working. (And no, it's not that ribbon cable problem, where after a time, the thin band that attaches to the DVD lens eventually wears down and breaks the connection.)
Between myself and my friends, we have about 5 or 6 dead playstation 2's, that we occasionally steal parts from to fix other PS2's that have stopped working.
My PS1 died after a month. A tooth on one of the little sprockets in the laser assembly broke or something, and the laser extended enough to scratch up my CDs.
There's no question that Nintendo builds better quality consoles. MS and Sony don't make bad ones, exactly, but they're no better quality than normal consumer electronics. The difference is that it's rare for a million people to rush out and buy a VCR on launch day.
I think it's always a bad idea to buy launch consoles. Production is rushed to meet demand, and that demand means you'll get ripped off more often than not. The X360 launch lineup was abysmal, too. But I guess there's no accounting for fanboyism.
I only have handheld systems, all of which are from Nintendo, so I can't really compare them to the Xbox, the X360, or the PS, PS2, or PSP. All I can say is that the DS has great features that really lead to interesting gameplay, and interesting games (I don't think you will ever see another system that has a game that's all about dogs). The Revolution sounds pretty cool too. I think that Nintendo is really the leader in new technologies, any everybody else is just sort of following them. Ever see a feature in a Sony or Microsoft machine that Nintendo hasn't already released? Anyway, that's just my opinion.
Custom soundtracks
Online play on a grand scale
Dual-Analog controls
3D graphics
CD-based game format
High-def graphics output
3rd-party support (zing!)
Custom soundtracks
Although not by Nintendo (unless you count Mario Paint minigames), that's not a MS or Sega innovation. PC games have done that for ages.
Online play on a grand scale
Ever heard of the Sattelaview? Nintendo was running huge online competitions with special games in like 1995. They were very popular.
But in respect to the modern massive online play we enjoy today, Sega did it first in consoles.
Dual-Analog controls
That's been around for ever in arcades. I remember a couple of N64 games that allowed you to use two analogue sticks at a time, too. Robotron for example.
3D graphics
Star Fox, Mechwarrior, others. Elite and old vector games on the 386.
CD-based game format
Yep, Nintendo neeeeever thought of that. Sega actually released one.
High-def graphics output
IIRC it was possible to order special Gamecubes directly from Nintendo that had the high-definition output they scrapped in the production model (they determined that only a miniscule fraction of users would benefit from it).
I was under the impression we were talking about consoles only, and features that actually made it into final production units (or were implemented on a grand scale and not on a few select titles) rather than being scrapped by Nintendo for whatever reason. I was also under the impression that we were simply talking about stuff Nintendo hadn't accomplished first. I'm well-aware that Sega had online on consoles first (long live the Dreamcast, the last great home-arcade system), but the point was that Nintendo didn't. I do have hope for the Revolution though. Nintendo is finally taking initiative and thinking outside the box rather than trailing behind their competition as they have the last 10 years. It's the first time they've done anything significant since the SNES and here's hoping it works out.
I was also under the impression that we were simply talking about stuff Nintendo hadn't accomplished first.
So you listed a bunch of stuff that neither Sony nor MS did first either? You know, Nintendo didn't invent plastic either. Better add that to your list.
It's the first time they've done anything significant since the SNES
Analogue sticks. Rumble packs. Pronged controllers. Memory cards. The 3D Platformer. Dedicated camera controls. The controller trigger. Quad controller ports. Digital click on analogue buttons. Wireless controllers. If none of those are significant, how come they're on every console now?
3rd party support? you mean how the PS3 is lacking it and the Rev is gaining it?
i love a good console argument especially when its based on myths. OMG NENTINDO HAS KIDDIE GAEMS ONLY!
funny thing about the online too. even the NES had online, where users could go shopping, check bank accounts etc. The Snes had that satellite system. The N64 had the best. you could stream music, download games, browse the internet, play against other folk. They dropped online support in the cube because online wasn't working at that time. but they're sure as hell making up for it now. Mario Kart DS anyone? 45% of players have been online with it.
I'll get a 360 when they drop in price (something reasonable would be nice), stop charging for full online play, if Halo 3 is better than the terrible Halo 2 and if they make it just a teeny bit smaller.
All consoles suck. PCs are better than any, graphically, technically, or otherwise... with the only disadvantage being a non-vibrating controller that's hard to hold (for now) and a small problem playing multiplayer games on the same thing without a LAN.
Consoles are an outlet for casual gamers who don't have the time or space to install games. I just wish the developers would stick with putting hardcore games on PCs and leave the casual ones to consoles.
As for durability, Sony makes the worst hardware in the world... and that's not just consoles. CD drives, portable CD/tape players, speakers, EVERYTHING. The PS2 is the MOST durable thing they've ever made. They used to make fairly ok stuff, but it seems that they tossed aside quality for profits since the digital era. I'm surprised that Sony's still considered a quality brand name by some people . I dare anyone to find me a Sony appliance that could be used for 3 years without breaking (besides the PS2).
Microsoft's actually a good company, but the only problem with them is that they tend to rush into things too fast, only to forget one VERY important thing that the media people have fun bashing. I'd feel sorry for them if only they had better customer support. And less profits.
And Pete, surely you'd be pissed if you spent about $1000 on a console that blows up while you're away having lunch . Of course, the point isn't about whether you can drop it down the stairs, it's about whether it'll still work if you accidentally kick it in the middle of the night.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
All consoles suck. PCs are better than any, graphically, technically, or otherwise... with the only disadvantage being a non-vibrating controller that's hard to hold (for now) and a small problem playing multiplayer games on the same thing without a LAN.
Consoles are an outlet for casual gamers who don't have the time or space to install games. I just wish the developers would stick with putting hardcore games on PCs and leave the casual ones to consoles.
Your anus must seriously hurt after extracting all that.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Muz, you realize the console industry makes more money right? Console games have their advantages; you don't have to configure the controllers to all hell (Ever try to play Quake 2 on a Dual Analog Setup, I did, it was a failed experiment), patches are all but non existant, and consoles have a cleaner appearance and cost less than a properly maintained PC.
The things that PC gaming has that is leagues better than consoles? Freeware games, and Mods. It's that simple, there are thousands upon thousands of free games for the PC, and thousands more mods that add infinite hours of replayability to old products. Better graphics and such also naturally come with the PC, but at a huge cost.
More money coz it's easier and trendier to buy a console rather than a PC. Doesn't mean it's better though. Ever compared GTA: Vice City on PC and PS2? For the more hardcore among thee, there's Mafia... and there's a significant difference in fun between the PS2 and PC versions. How bout the classic PC Baldur's Gate 2 vs PS2's Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance? What about strategy games, turn-based or RTS?
Only part where consoles truly shine over PCs is when it comes to sports/racing games, wrestling games, and beat-em-up. But those games tend to be over a bit too quickly. Though BG: DA 2 and the WWE Smackdown games aren't too bad..
In this country, you could get a PC twice as powerful as the latest console at about the same price. Much, much cheaper power-cost ratio if you wait a few years.
Either way, I still prefer PCs. Can't play X-Com 2 on an X-Box 360. Though if they ever made a good-looking remake for that game on any console, there might be a chance that I'd buy one. Heck, if there were graphical versions of ADOM, Conquest of Elysium, or some other obscure, yet fun PC game, I'd reconsider my stance.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Non-existent patches = unfixable bugs
No. Ever seen a fatal bug that necessitates patching immediately after purchase in a console game? Because of the dedicated and standard hardware, not only do developers have an easier time developing games but they can reliably make them bug-free to begin with.
More money coz it's easier and trendier to buy a console rather than a PC.
What? The profit margin for consoles is fucking insignificant in comparison to PC software, unless you're Nintendo. Very few people that have a console don't also have a PC.
Doesn't mean it's better though. Ever compared GTA: Vice City on PC and PS2? For the more hardcore among thee, there's Mafia... and there's a significant difference in fun between the PS2 and PC versions. How bout the classic PC Baldur's Gate 2 vs PS2's Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance? What about strategy games, turn-based or RTS?
RTS games simply don't work on consoles, but that's an interface problem. Besides that, what the hell are you on about? Ever play Resident Evil 4 on a PC? No, you haven't because it's a console title. If it were cross-cross-platform, it would require one damn monster of a PC to render. Which would cost you what, upwards of US$1000? As opposed to playing it on the GCN, which would cost you maybe US$170 max, software, hardware and required periphs (a memory card...) included.
Paying an extra eight hundred buckazoids for the same game doesn't make you 'hardcore', it makes you a fucking moron.
Consoles are dedicated gaming machines. They can provide high-end performance at a much lower cost because they're designed to do only one thing well. The standard hardware, devkits and manufacturer support makes then exceptionally developer-friendly, leading to better games.
PCs are great, and I say this as someone who uses a computer more hours a day than he sleeps, but they aren't jesus' gaping rectum of gaming goodness.
In this country, you could get a PC twice as powerful as the latest console at about the same price. Much, much cheaper power-cost ratio if you wait a few years.
No. Seriously, no. Consoles are designed with specialized game-oriented architecture that lends them performance superior to what their specs would indicate. Even if that weren't the case, MICROSOFT AND SONY ARE SELLING AT A LOSS. If they can't build a machine with exactly the power of the latest console at exactly the cost of the latest console, even given Sony's ungodly in-house manufacturing facilities and MS's third-party love, how in the blue centipede-packed vagina universe can you possibly expect anyone you believe you could?
Can't play X-Com 2 on an X-Box 360
Uh, if you were 'hardcore' you could. Easily. You could do it on an original Xbox if you wanted.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by the Author.
. I dare anyone to find me a Sony appliance that could be used for 3 years without breaking (besides the PS2).
. Of course, the point isn't about whether you can drop it down the stairs, it's about whether it'll still work if you accidentally kick it in the middle of the night.
