Okay, so we've got all 3 companies touting their latest-and-greatest systems to come out in 2005.
Who's gonna win? The only company with a 2 syllable name, of course.
Let's face it. The Xbomb rocks as far as a system goes, but America is the only place buying it. In japan, they sold 100 more PLAYSTAION 1 consoles than Xbox consoles.
Only people who want to jack off to DOA Xtreme Beach Volleyball or play a watered down Metal Gear Solid 2 (aka Splinter Cell) seem to want an Xbox. There's no franchise titles on the 'box, the sales suck, the controllers are crap. Although those gold plated connector RCA jacks rock.
Sony already has IBM and Toshiba producing (not just developing anymore, kids) a brand new microchip technology for the PS3. It's going to, according to recent stats, compare with the graphic processing of McIntosh comps. And, if you know ANYTHING about this, Mac's own everything when it comes to graphics.
What does Microsoft have on the table for the Xbox 2? Speculative names. NeXtBox. XBoxNext. Xbox 2. Not to mention they've already told Nvidio to f-off when Nvidia asked for more money. Folks, after the way M$ treated Nvidia, be surprised to see any quality GPU manufactureres hop on board for the Xbox2 development team. Noones making money off of the Xbomb, and that's the key to success in a capitalist society...remember the TurboGrafx 16 and the NeoGeo?
It's cool you guys spooge all over the box. Nintendo and Sony are going to stamp it in the dust, even as Microsoft continues to pour more money into its failing project and hardware developers refuse to cut their bids to the bone like Nvidia did for Mr. Gates.
Yeah, my bud has an Xbox. Unfortunately, the controls for Madden 2003 suck on it, they never put out a Def Jam: Vendetta for the box, and there's 5 other people we know with PS2's.
and, if you don't treat your ps2 like a piece of shit, the dvd drive won't break. I suppose half the people in here who have had that happen have spilled a beer in it, shoved it into a shelf next to other heat producing elements, or just left in on the carpet.
im gonna have to agree with jungle on this one,I know Nintendo is the best,(most fun original, high quality games)even though nintendo out sells xbox,and in the last week sales have been rising,i cant see nintendo out selling ps2 in this console war,But if nintendo relases their next system before ps3, nintendo will be the victor. basically its not about sales is it is all about timing. still doesnt mean ps2 is good its still low quality,boring and unorignal
oh yeah and nintendo has become the rock of gibralter when it comes to orignality what with the same mario and zelda game on the last 2 consoles. stories may be differnt and graphics (which sorry but ps2 had cell shading before zelda) still the same game controls. not to say im bashin nintendo but facts are facts. iu mean whats origian about gta vice city mgs2 sly cooper (the sleeper hit of the year as far as im concerned) onimusha 1 and 2 jax and daxter maximo rygar all good games that came with a fresh new look at their certain genre.
granted, the ps2 pales in comparison of the graphical titans in the 'Box and GC. And, when theres a multi-port of a game, chances are the ps2 version is going to be the special ed version. But, multi ports are not what i'm concerned about. I've got an Xbox along with my PS2, and a GC coming soon. I'm a GAMER, regardless of console or developer.
I just think that Sony has a leg up on just about everyone. They've got the momentum, the early hype, and the deep pockets (not saying Nintendo or the sickly captial-rich Microsoft don't) to do so. On top of that, who is the most recognizable name, outside (and inside) of the console world? How many people have a Nintendo TV, a Microsoft DVD player?
Again, granted the PS2 is my system of choice. I just think the controller is beautifully simple and easy to use (tho an ergonomic renovation might be in the works), and the game selection is ten times that of its competitors (PS1 games included)
PS2 is a great system but with companys want to devlope hi-tech top end games they are either going to start going with the xbox or gamecube. I think they will choose the gamecube, the market is shifting twoards them anyways ever sence 2003. Nintendo has noticed a big jump in sales for the gamecube latley. PS2 will no longer be the dominate system until sony comes out with there ps3. Also logan the PS2 didn't do cell shading 1st. The ps2 can't do "true" cell shading graphics.
Originally posted by yuiol . Also logan the PS2 didn't do cell shading 1st. The ps2 can't do "true" cell shading graphics.
ok the what do you sly cooper was if not cell shading and robotech for that matter.unless egm is lying (and my eyes as well) looks like cell shading to me. also it doesnt take a genius to figure out why gamecube sales are up and ps2 are leveling. considering gc finally got a couple games that people were wating for (mario,metroid,and zelda) plus the fact that they were giving a way a free game at the same time. and its hard for sony to keep up sales when you can ask just about anyone you know and they probably own one.or own one yourself.
same mario and zelda game
how could you f**king say that man, mario and 64 and ocarnia of time were break throughs on 3d gaming.their sequels mario sunshine.....is so different(maybe the controls are the same, but why ruin perfection?)marios not in mushroom kingdom, and he uses a water pack, hoe orignal is that, and zelda....... this time you ride the world in a boat, a talking boat.majoras mask,that was innovative. zelda is the best dam games bettre than any of your ps2 crap.
as i said on the last 2 consoles. yes ocarina of time and mario 64 were genre changing from the originals. but majoras mask was just a copy of the same game with a different story. not to say thats bad i spent a whole hell of a lot of time playing both zeldas. but as i said the new games are basically the same game with different stories. and i never said gc was crap because i dont think that at all. and to gcs credit metroid prime was a complete different game then the originals. now tell me why couldnt nintendo change there own games in that way . the developers took a huge risk with an already beloved game. i mean the biggest risk zelda took was cell shading ( or at least the biggest hub bub before it was released) and the fact that you were on water for most of the game instead of land(which in essence is the same idea just executed differently). as i said i dont think gc is bad but im not getting burnt like i did with dreamcast or 64 . with the exception of zelda on 64 and rouge squad and bond and of course the wrestling games there wasnt really a game i cared for. and the fact that i dont buy multiplayer games for myself i ended up with a whoping like 3 games for a 2 hundred dollar system. whereas i had alot more for my ps1.
im sorry logan, im just a nintendo fanboy sorry to flame ya, any way i do agree with what you said,but majoras mask was different because of the time thing, ocarina of time was still better though. nintendo might not be the only orignal company but thay are pretty dam orignal.like the fact they can make a game like metroid and turn it into a fps, or succesfully intergrate cel shading into a zelda game. and when i said ps2 was not orignal, i was only meaning an majority, but their are some games, like darkcloud 2 and ratchet and clank, that look fun and interesting. but the final fantasy games are a bit of rehash. but nintendo is the highest quality innovative, and zelda series is the best series, period.
and i wasnt flaming you either. but to say that ff are rehashes is rediculous. 7,8,9,10 have all had different battle systems different magic and different stories. and the time thing was cool but didnt really change the gameplay that much .the new breath of fire uses the same concept but takes it another level since you have to replay the entire game over every time you die or choose to loose exp and money. the only thing majoras mask changed was the mask hunt . which i hunted down every freakin mask there was.but