Playstation 3 a bargain?

[Krookie]

I've played Wii a few times and the controls aren't that great. The 360 is a median between the two.

 

With PS3, you get high quality graphics and a bunch of extra stuff (that you probably don't need) for a high price.

 

With Wii, you get some inovative features, the option to play oldschool games and that wicked "Wii-Wand!" However, if you're not into the whole "watch me pretend to play tennis, instead of acutally doing it!" then you probably don't want it. That's where I stand on this. Why would I want to make all the hand motions of playing tennis, when I could just go out and play it?

 

And then you have the 360. A classic console for the most part. It serves it's purpose with pretty graphics, an regular controller, and a (for most people) decent price tag for what you get.

 

Personally, I don't see myself picking up another nextgen console (I've got a 360). Niether the PS3's price tag or the Wii's "Wii-Wand" really makes me go "WOW!".

 

(i'm not going to spell check this. i'm sick)

[Epiphany]

After one year's time we shall see which system is tops, Wii, PS3, or XBox 360.  From what I have heard so far Wii and the PS3 have better backwards compatibility than XBox 360.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Have you seen the videos of how horrible the PS3 backwards compatibility is?

[alanschu]

Backwards compatibility is overrated.

[Zachech]

i think backwards compatability is one of the most important things a system has, actually. what's the point of having three system around one when can play all the games? also, there are some old games that never lose their charm, and i wouldn't want to hook up one system for one game and then another for a different game.

 

i have a wii, and sold my gamecube to help pay for it, and the backwards compatability is a nice aspect. of course i don't have any other console, i guess if you had more switching between them isn't as big as an issue because you're used to it.

 

i'm a big nintendo fan, and quite biased, but for me the wii is definitely worth it. graphics are not very important for me. to use someone's argument back at them, why would i want the graphics to look exactly realistic when i can just live and experience those "graphics" everywhere for free? why play racing games that look like nascar on TV when you could go drive cars for real?

 

i think innovation and solid gameplay always wins out over graphics. with the ps3 and the pricier version of the 360, it seems like you're paying for a lot of unnecessary hardware and bonus features that you don't really need and not for a solid gaming system.

 

 

that's my bit.

[Krookie]

i'm a big nintendo fan, and quite biased, but for me the wii is definitely worth it.  graphics are not very important for me.  to use someone's argument back at them, why would i want the graphics to look exactly realistic when i can just live and experience those "graphics" everywhere for free?  why play racing games that look like nascar on TV when you could go drive cars for real? 

 

 

 

that's my bit.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Because if you went and drove a car for real, you wouldn't be able to go 200+ MPH and ram other cars off the side of the road (well, I guess you could if you wanted too...). The point of a video game is to have fun while doing something that most people can't do in real life. This is why you don't see a lot of "Drinking Water" sims, and you do see a lot of "Shoot the Nazi" sims.

 

People like to do things that they wouldn't normally be able to do in real life. And personally (and I think a lot of people feel this way), graphics add to immersion. And immersion adds to fun (atleast for me it does...). Visuals are the most important thing in a video game. Let's take it to an extreme. What if we turned the TV you were playing with off? Would the game be fun? Not really..But on the other hand, lets take away that motion sensor and make you play the game with a regular controller. Is the game still fun? Most likely.

[metadigital]

Xbox 360 Owner Sues Microsoft

Problems allegedly from the fall update prompt user to file a class-action lawsuit.

By Li C. Kuo

Back when Microsoft released the fall update for the Xbox 360, a number of people reported that the new download ended up killing their systems. When we contacted Microsoft for a statement regarding these reports, their reply was, "A small percentage of consoles (less than 1 percent) were affected by the Fall Update. An updated version of the Fall Update was made available on Xbox Live on November 1 which eliminated issues relating to new or refurbished consoles malfunctioning after applying the Fall Update."

 

The company also adds, "Xbox Support is paying for the shipping and repair/replacement of all Xbox 360 consoles that malfunctioned as a result of the Fall Update on October 31, before it could be fixed on November 1. They just need to phone Xbox Support and give them the proper error message indicating it was the Fall Update that affected their console."

 

For Xbox 360 owner Kevin Ray, this is too little, too late. Ray downloaded the fall update at the beginning of November, after Microsoft says it fixed the update. This download resulted in a nonfunctioning Xbox 360 console for Ray. After contacting Xbox Support, Ray was told that Microsoft would not pay for the cost to repair or replace his console. On November 29 Ray filed a class-action lawsuit against Microsoft on the behalf of consumers who experienced Xbox 360 hardware failures after downloading the fall update.

 

The official complaint filed by Ray's lawyer says, "The members of the Class for whose benefit this action is brought are dispersed throughout the United States ... Plaintiff believes that Class members number in at least the thousands." The complaint also says, "Despite acknowledging the existence of the problem, Defendants have refused to make complete restitution to owners of Xbox 360s damaged by the Fall 2006 update." Ray's class action complaints are for breach of contract, violation of the consumer protection act, and negligence. The suit seeks $5 million from Microsoft in damages to affected Xbox 360 users.

clickie

So much for consoles not suffering from update bugs. "

[Llyranor]

Visuals are the most important thing in a video game. Let's take it to an extreme. What if we turned the TV you were playing with off? Would the game be fun? Not really..But on the other hand, lets take away that motion sensor and make you play the game with a regular controller. Is the game still fun? Most likely.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What kind of stupid example is that? We all know that not being actively stabbed in multiple places at once is the true gateway to fun. Try playing a game without being actively stabbed in multiple places at once. Then try playing it while actively stabbed in multiple places at once. Still fun? Most likely not. This is true immersion.

[alanschu]

i think backwards compatability is one of the most important things a system has, actually.  what's the point of having three system around one when can play all the games?  also, there are some old games that never lose their charm, and i wouldn't want to hook up one system for one game and then another for a different game.

 

It depends on how often people on the whole keep wanting to play their old games.

 

i'm a big nintendo fan, and quite biased, but for me the wii is definitely worth it.  graphics are not very important for me.  to use someone's argument back at them, why would i want the graphics to look exactly realistic when i can just live and experience those "graphics" everywhere for free?  why play racing games that look like nascar on TV when you could go drive cars for real? 

 

Because video games put you in positions that I'm not capable of being in in real life. Unfortunately, my abilities to compete in NASCAR racing is a bit limited at this time. As is my ability to be a superspy/ninja ala Sam Fisher.

 

i think innovation and solid gameplay always wins out over graphics.  with the ps3 and the pricier version of the 360, it seems like you're paying for a lot of unnecessary hardware and bonus features that you don't really need and not for a solid gaming system. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's nice and I don't disagree, but I've seen many good games get overlooked because of poorer graphics, and crap games get a ton of attention because they look nice.

[angshuman]

i think backwards compatability is one of the most important things a system has, actually.  what's the point of having three system around one when can play all the games?  also, there are some old games that never lose their charm, and i wouldn't want to hook up one system for one game and then another for a different game.

 

It depends on how often people on the whole keep wanting to play their old games.

Not necessarily. One of the reasons I personally would like to buy a PS3 is because there are a lot of PS2 games (JRPGs mostly) that I've never played and would now like to try out. But I guess there aren't many people like me; most PS3 buyers would probably be PS2 owners already.

[alanschu]

Fair enough, there is that sample as well. I don't own a PS2 (nor an XBOX), so I could see some value added.

 

But I still feel it's overrated.

[mkreku]

Visuals are the most important thing in a video game. Let's take it to an extreme. What if we turned the TV you were playing with off? Would the game be fun? Not really..But on the other hand, lets take away that motion sensor and make you play the game with a regular controller. Is the game still fun? Most likely.

Well, in one case you're REMOVING the graphics altogether, while in the other case you're just replacing one controller with another. That's not really a fair comparison. A better comparison would be to switch from a 1080p TV to a 480p TV and then ask if the game would still be fun, like this:

 

What if we replaced your HDTV (1080p) with a normal TV (480p)? Would the game be fun? Most likely. Let's take away that motion sensor and make you play the game with a regular controller. Is the game still fun? Most likely.

 

 

 

Great graphics are nice to have, but they aren't near as important as you make them out to be.

[Oerwinde]

It depends on how often people on the whole keep wanting to play their old games.

 

I still play Suikoden, Suikoden II, Xenogears, and Final Fantasy Tactics. Suikoden II is still the best console RPG I've played.

[alanschu]

There's always going to be exceptions.

 

 

It wasn't so much a query as to who here still plays old games. The thing is, if you were the only person that still played old games (which I doubt), then I'd suspect backwards compatibility would be a moot point for companies to provide.

 

So, as I said, it depends on how often people on the whole keep wanting to play their old games or as angshuman pointed out, are interested in the older library of a games if you don't own the older console (though I wonder how much impact these people would have. Sure you might have some people that might as well fill out their game library with some of the PS2 games, especially when the game library is still small at release. But if the PS2 game isn't worth buying a much cheaper PS2 for to play, would it really impact someone that doesn't own the original system? The only people I see really making up this part are those that wish to hold of buying a system because a new one is around the corner).

 

It's good that you like FFT (I love that game) and the Suikodens. I still play Ultima VII (a 1993 game) on occasion. But I rarely miss the lack of backwards compatibility for old DOS games. Maybe if I am trying to play an old game that I missed out back in the day. Even then I require an emulator because my computer is a million times way to fast for it. The thing is, if your current console didn't support it with backwards compatibility, would you actually stop playing those games? Or would you just put up with the inconvenience of having two consoles?

[Hell Kitty]

I didn't play my old PS1 games on the PS2 anywhere near as much as I expected, then again it was never really a selling point for me, rather a nice extra. I've got room for an extra old console afterall.

 

The PS3, however, I believe is region free for games, and I assume this includes PS1 and PS2 games as well? If so, it would be great to get games that were never released in my region, providing they are still available to buy, of course.

[Oerwinde]

There's always going to be exceptions.

 

 

It wasn't so much a query as to who here still plays old games.  The thing is, if you were the only person that still played old games (which I doubt), then I'd suspect backwards compatibility would be a moot point for companies to provide.

 

So, as I said, it depends on how often people on the whole keep wanting to play their old games or as angshuman pointed out, are interested in the older library of a games if you don't own the older console (though I wonder how much impact these people would have.  Sure you might have some people that might as well fill out their game library with some of the PS2 games, especially when the game library is still small at release.  But if the PS2 game isn't worth buying a much cheaper PS2 for to play, would it really impact someone that doesn't own the original system?  The only people I see really making up this part are those that wish to hold of buying a system because a new one is around the corner).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The backwards compatibility is one of the selling points for me for the Wii and 360 because I was never interested in buying those consoles, but with the 360, there are some games coming I want to play, plus I can play the 2 or 3 Xbox games I missed out on by not having the system. With the Wii theres the same thing, plus the ability to play old school SNES games that just aren't as good with an emulator.

 

With the PS3, as I already have a PS2, its more for convenience. Also, my PS2 has lasted longer than anyone elses judging by the whining about how badly built the system is, so it should give out at any time. (I got it in 2001)

[Llyranor]

Well, I have a DS and a 360, and I haven't actually gone out and played any GBA/Xbox games on them.

 

That being said, I'll be all over the Wii's Virtual Console once it comes out. But that's really for nostalgia's sake. Replaying stuff like Double Dragon, Contra or Ninja Turtles. Hehe, good old coop days.

[alanschu]

The backwards compatibility is one of the selling points for me for the Wii and 360 because I was never interested in buying those consoles, but with the 360, there are some games coming I want to play, plus I can play the 2 or 3 Xbox games I missed out on by not having the system. With the Wii theres the same thing, plus the ability to play old school SNES games that just aren't as good with an emulator.

 

With the PS3, as I already have a PS2, its more for convenience. Also, my PS2 has lasted longer than anyone elses judging by the whining about how badly built the system is, so it should give out at any time. (I got it in 2001)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

That's nice. I'm sure you're not the only one.

 

I was never debating how much Oerwinde likes the backwards compatibility option though.

[thepixiesrock]

Nice sidestep Allan.

[alanschu]

It's not a sidestep.

 

I have doubts as to how important backwards compatibility really is for most people.

 

It's just an opinion, since I don't have the facts nearby (nor does anyone else). It's nice the Oerwinde values it. I'm sure there are other people that genuinely do as well. But that doesn't mean that he is (or is not) part of a small minority.

[Llyranor]

Well, I'd consider it a nice bonus, but not much more.

 

I mean, yes, the PS2 has a massive library of good games, but I can get it for <100$. It doesn't justify the 600$ box if the PS3 can't justify itself on its own merits.

[Tale]

Backwards compatibility is immensely important to me. My SNES died so I bought one off a friend to play Super Mario RPG. My PS2 died so I bought a new one for that library. I can no longer buy a SNES off my friends. What will I do to play Super Mario RPG when this one dies? What will I do when the PS2 is discontinued and I want to play Final Fantasy VII?

 

I mean, FF VII! As a gamer the idea that I will no longer be able to play VI, VII, Tactics, Super Mario RPG, Metal Gear Solid, Wind Waker frightens me! I would gladly buy a new console for no other reason than to stave off the death of these classics.

Edited December 21, 2006 by Tale

[Deraldin]

Backwards compatibility is immensely important to me.  My SNES died so I bought one off a friend to play Super Mario RPG.  My PS2 died so I bought a new one for that library.  I can no longer buy a SNES off my friends.  What will I do to play Super Mario RPG when this one dies?  What will I do when the PS2 is discontinued and I want to play Final Fantasy VII?

 

I mean, FF VII!  As a gamer the idea that I will no longer be able to play VI, VII, Tactics, Super Mario RPG, Metal Gear Solid,  Wind Waker frightens me!  I would gladly buy a new console for no other reason than to stave off the death of these classics.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You'll do what any other gamer does and go online and download an emulator?

Edited December 21, 2006 by Deraldin

[alanschu]

I mean, FF VII!  As a gamer the idea that I will no longer be able to play VI, VII, Tactics, Super Mario RPG, Metal Gear Solid,  Wind Waker frightens me!  I would gladly buy a new console for no other reason than to stave off the death of these classics.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

How many people replay games as often as that? I loved playing Rescue Raiders on my Apple IIe, but I don't particularly long to play it. I did get an option to play it again not too long ago and did. It was fun because of the nostalgia, but I doubt I'd be disappointed if that opportunity never presented itself again.

 

I played through Metal Gear Solid probably about 3 or 4 times. I started to replay it again with a friend on his PS2, but we didn't make it past Raven in his tank before moving on. The unfortunate thing is that these games are not new. The thrill of playing them rarely comes close to the excitement of playing it the first time.

 

Every now and then a kick of nostalgia will build up and my friends and I will play some old NES and stuff, but it's hardly the end of the day if we would not be able to play them.

 

 

I see backwards compatibility as added fluff.

[Llyranor]

Haha, how many people actually finish the games the first time around?

[Tale]

I mean, FF VII!  As a gamer the idea that I will no longer be able to play VI, VII, Tactics, Super Mario RPG, Metal Gear Solid,  Wind Waker frightens me!  I would gladly buy a new console for no other reason than to stave off the death of these classics.

 

 

How many people replay games as often as that? I loved playing Rescue Raiders on my Apple IIe, but I don't particularly long to play it. I did get an option to play it again not too long ago and did. It was fun because of the nostalgia, but I doubt I'd be disappointed if that opportunity never presented itself again.

 

I played through Metal Gear Solid probably about 3 or 4 times. I started to replay it again with a friend on his PS2, but we didn't make it past Raven in his tank before moving on. The unfortunate thing is that these games are not new. The thrill of playing them rarely comes close to the excitement of playing it the first time.

 

Every now and then a kick of nostalgia will build up and my friends and I will play some old NES and stuff, but it's hardly the end of the day if we would not be able to play them.

 

 

I see backwards compatibility as added fluff.

 

It's not "the end of the day" but it's still far more than nostalgia. Progress is an illusion. A game from several years back can still be as good as any game released today. Replays be damned. Counter-Strike, a 6 year old game, is still the number 1 online action game and stands as a testament to older games lasting value even in the mainstream. Trivialization of the value of old games is an illusion. One we accept for some reason I won't even try to explain here. The IE engine on which Baldur's Gate is built still has a loyal following. You can see many of these people in related forums and even in the signatures of people in this forum. They're not just in it for nostalgia.

 

And even if it is just nostalgia, think of it as never being able to watch Star Wars again. That wouldn't be "the end of the day" but it should never be discarded and considered only fluff.

 

Personally, I think the ideal solution to the problem is rereleasing. Many of these games could be reworked and resold and I firmly believe they would sell well. Though I have no evidence to back that up. While that didn't entirely work for Star Wars, I imagine it can be done with better restraint to changing the core.

Edited December 21, 2006 by Tale