Command and Conquer: Renegade Official Forums - RDF feed
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
Sony steals frime nintendo. They stole download stations and now the controller...
But super smash bros 3 is gonna b the best so...
So what? Nintendo stopped being good long ago. Their only real merit was creating the Nintendo Entertainment System and the SNES... All their games they've released after that end up tearing apart the original story and replacing it with fashionable versions of the original characters and stories. It happened to The Legend of Zelda (Which sucked after A Link To The Past) and the Mario games. I hate companies that totally shit on the story they created... Mario now is like RA2 compared to Red Alert. I have every intention of buying a Playstation 3, and I'll support all of the great developers that create games for it - Especially Namco and their Ace Combat games, with one of the (if not THE best) storylines ever created with musical scores that totally blow away any other game in existence. Fuck Nintendo...
idjit626 wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 16:07 But super smash bros 3 is gonna b the best so... Power Stone for the Dreamcast was better than Super Smash Bros. could ever hope to be.
How could you not ever hope for something to be better than something?
bigejoe14 wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 19:52 idjit626 wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 16:07 But super smash bros 3 is gonna b the best so... Power Stone for the Dreamcast was better than Super Smash Bros. could ever hope to be. Fuck no.
I haven't been too fond of Ninendo since 64 was made. PD and Goldeneye were great games and I used to play hours on end, but no games have been made like that since.
Comrade wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 20:24 bigejoe14 wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 19:52 idjit626 wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 16:07 But super smash bros 3 is gonna b the best so... Power Stone for the Dreamcast was better than Super Smash Bros. could ever hope to be. Fuck no. Fuck yes.
I must say im a little confused by peoples reactions to the PS3 controller and the general consol wars. Why do so many people feel that sony make the best games? I didnt know sony made the games, i thought they just made deals with the game companies. In the first PS consol wars, the psx was out before the n64 and a lot more games got released. The psx didnt have better games then the n64, it had MORE games. The psx had more better games and MORE CRAP games then the n64, infact there was a ton of crap for psx. I have no idea how many games are going to be released for revolution and ps3 but it seems to me that most games seem to come out on all formats anyway. I suppose its fair game if sony manage to get the most game deals but is this reason to think nintendo wont do better this time round? Also dont forget the xbox 360 has been out a while now and i think its coming down in price in about a month. As for the ps3 controller i think sony are complete failures at making game pads. I find it utterly ammazing that they have stuck with the same pile of crap since psx. People who say "why change what isnt broken" are sad fanboys who are happy for sony to throw the same crap back in there faces year after year. Facts - The psx controller was crap, it was to small, your fingers get cramped holding it. Any1 who says the N64 controller has not been one of the best controllers out is simply a psx fan who has been holding that same dam controller for so long that there hands are molded to it. I know what its like, i used to be a psx fanboy. i wouldnt listen to the people who said the n64 was better and it had a better controller. I thought it looked strange and complicated to be swapping hands around to hold the different part and of course it felt wierd when i first held it. But when i sat down with it for a while i realised its a lot more confortable then the psx and there is more space for your fingers. And as for the motion censor thing. To say its not a stolen idea is stupid. Remarks like "is making better technology stealing just because its been done already" shows the blind faith of ps fanboys. Using the same technology isnt necessarily stealing, But releasing a controller, having everybody hate it and then suddenly change it to somthing that another consol is using as its main selling point is CLEARLY nicking ideas. I mean what exactly has sony done in terms of gaming? forget all the extras such as dvd players and what not, we had those years ago. In terms of gaming we have.... updated graphics and other machine specs. We dont need better graphics as much as we need a new way of playing games and interacting with them. This motion censor rip off is very cheap of sony and it wont work as well as the revolution anyway.
Sniper_De7 wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 18:56 not even if they make better games? They don't ... play station games are shit xbox
computers will always own game consoles. And if they're putting the price of the new game consoles almost as high as the price of a new computer, then the choice is easy.
Because Xbox had an awesome amount of great games, right? Seeing as how it's your biased opinion, that's fine. In reality, PS had games like FF7,8 (I'm sure 9 and 10 were good, i haven't bought them) They have Gran Turismo, Civilization, Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Chrono Cross, Metal Gear Solid, Vagrant Story, Xenogears, Parasite Eve, Dino Crisis, Twisted Metal, Suikoden, Lunar Story. The list goes on, really. Xbox is primary the reason why I stopped playing console games because Halo was boring and repetitive as was Halo 2(I didn't even get passed like four levels) Anyways, back on track here. The controllers with PS are fine. Actually, if I could, I'd rather go with SNES controller than anything else. Though less buttons, it still is nice (which is why I like the PS controller because it's similar to the SNES one (I don't know why you're saying it's small, it isn't - if you want small look at S/NES controller) I played N64 for a long time (Goldeneye, Mario Kart, Perfect Dark) and at the time the controllers were fine, just a matter of getting used to them. If I went and played Goldeneye now, or pretty much anyone who hasn't played N64 in 2 years, they would find it funny just as they would with any controller. Also, no one in this thread said Sony created the best games. I'd have to say they have companies create a lot of good/great games, but not the best. I'll still rather enjoy my classics (Super Metroid, Zelda:ALTTP, Chrono Trigger, etc) more than most other games that are created on consoles now. (seriously, I don't think any games are going to be out that are going to be creative as 16 different endings for a game not to mention a fucking frog on your team(check avatar). Anyways, I'd rather have Sony make more greater games and crap games than fewer great games and fewer crap games (Hello? Just buy the better games.....holy shit) Not to mention, having a variety is nice because some people might want to play certain games instead of others. The more games, the bigger the variety. And please, never say "fanboy" again. 'less you want to make a fool out of yourself. I've got SNES, N64, Genesis, XBOX, PS1/2. I'd like to think that just because people feel one way about something (ie, if i liked sony's controller better) that i somehow suddenly become their "fanboy". It's called being unbias, and you should probably look it up. Quote: Facts - The psx controller was crap, it was to small, your fingers get cramped holding it. Any1 who says the N64 controller has not been one of the best controllers out is simply a psx fan who has been holding that same dam controller for so long that there hands are molded to it. This is not a fact. In fact, this is a severely biased opinion that makes me sad to hear you pass this off as a fact. I'm sorry, but just because YOU and whoever else you know doesn't like the controllers for whatever stupid reason, doesn't mean it's true. For example, if you're 8 years old, the N64 controller isn't exactly suiting you perfectly is it? No, it's not, but don't let that stop you from throwing your bias opinions out there. It's just a matter of preferences.
There is no such thing as a 'fact'. Everything is a result of a subjective interpretation.
"I don't know why you're saying it's small, it isn't" I dont know why your saying it isnt. I consider the fact that my fingers dont fit round the freaking thing and that they are cramped as a fact, my hand size is pretty average and the n64 fits perfectly, if perfering what fits the average hand size is being biased then im biased, if i had a childs hands or if i had massive hands i wouldnt be making judgment on my personal oppinion and i would be taking that into consideration. Overall im not saying the psx controller is terrible, there has been a lot worse (dream cast) but I realy do find it amazing that people are happy with the same thing over and over, but hey whatever its there money, spend away.
luv2pb wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 03:40 Sniper_De7 wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 18:56 not even if they make better games? They don't ... play station games are shit xbox honestly, other then halo, what does xbox have that play station doesnt?
hunteroo2 wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 16:49 luv2pb wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 03:40 Sniper_De7 wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 18:56 not even if they make better games? They don't ... play station games are shit xbox honestly, other then halo, what does xbox have that play station doesnt? I can name very few but I can't name a one for ps.
Grim_Reaper_666 wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 15:20 "I don't know why you're saying it's small, it isn't" I dont know why your saying it isnt. I consider the fact that my fingers dont fit round the freaking thing and that they are cramped as a fact, my hand size is pretty average and the n64 fits perfectly, if perfering what fits the average hand size is being biased then im biased, if i had a childs hands or if i had massive hands i wouldnt be making judgment on my personal oppinion and i would be taking that into consideration. Overall im not saying the psx controller is terrible, there has been a lot worse (dream cast) but I realy do find it amazing that people are happy with the same thing over and over, but hey whatever its there money, spend away. Maybe - just maybe - they're happy with it because it fits them fine and they aren't complaining? Either you're just a special individual or all these people don't fit the "average hand size" or whatever *you* think is "average". And yes, overall you *are* saying it's terrible. Unless of course "pile of crap" isn't terrible. If it isn't, then you should have a steaming pile of 'crap' thrown at your face because it wouldn't be terrible, OK? Besides all of that, comparing controllers is pretty stupid when if I'm going to buy a console, i'd rather have good games than a controller that makes me mildly irritated (even though if I actually played it enough, I'd ignore the difference, but that'd make too much sense) luv2pb wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 16:10 hunteroo2 wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 16:49 luv2pb wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 03:40 Sniper_De7 wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 18:56 not even if they make better games? They don't ... play station games are shit xbox honestly, other then halo, what does xbox have that play station doesnt? I can name very few but I can't name a one for ps. Hi. Quote: PS had games like FF7,8 (I'm sure 9 and 10 were good, i haven't bought them) They have Gran Turismo, Civilization, Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Chrono Cross, Metal Gear Solid, Vagrant Story, Xenogears, Parasite Eve, Dino Crisis, Twisted Metal, Suikoden, Lunar Story. If you seriously say all of these are horrible then I'm just going to ignore you from now on, because an unbiased objective person who, even if they weren't interested in these games, would say they were *good* games - just they wouldn't interest them.
I'm getting the Wii anyway, hot graphics are for my PC, true fun and entertainement with friends (and my girl, obviously) is what I want on consoles, not just pwetty graphics. I'm hoping it'll be as popular as the DS was (versus the PSP).
Goztow wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 10:14 There is no such thing as a 'fact'. Everything is a result of a subjective interpretation. So the fact that humans need Oxygen isn't a fact? Or the fact that if we don't eat, we'll die? Science has proven your theory wrong. [/offtopic]
When I think about it, the cheaper PS3 will be only about 58$ more expensive than Xbox premium(in Ontario), and that 58 could be considered one time fee to play over the Internet. So basically you will be getting system that has/will have more games among with free(or with time fee) on-line gaming. I know that more games does not mean that all of them are good, but more games equals better selection and better selection equals better chance that the console you bought will have the games that you want to play, and that is basically the only logical reason to choose one console over the other. Gaming is 90% about the games, and much less about what you play them with. Prove me wrong, I dare you. If gaming is for you more about what you play the games with, go buy 6000$ Alienware and forget about consoles. THE END
hunteroo2 wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 13:49 luv2pb wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 03:40 Sniper_De7 wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 18:56 not even if they make better games? They don't ... play station games are shit xbox honestly, other then halo, what does xbox have that play station doesnt? Call Of Duty, and a decent controller, and an affordable pricetag.
If your stubby little hands can't hold a Dual Shock and use it well, I fear for your ability to use a phone, mouse, or keyboard... Maybe it explains why the Dual Shock haters can't write very well.
I like the duelshock just fine, I just think the world is ready for something that ISN'T a small variation on the original PS1 controller. Also, something that isn't retarded and boomeranged. Even so, I'd take the DuelShock over the POS that the PS3 is coming with. They took out the rumble and added the motion sensor, which is supposed to be some kind of consolation...?
Dualshock is the best controller I've ever owned. I find it to be far more pleasant to use than the old N64 controllers (which I have several of- the best of which is a 3rd-party design that plays like a Dualshock with only one analog). Every button is in reach at all times. The only games I can't stand to play on them are shooters and RTS games, neither of which I play on consoles with any kind of frequency anyway. I know plenty of people who prefer the Gamecube or XBox controllers... frankly, I don't know what sort of drugs they could be taking. As for it being styled after the PS1 controller...well, sometimes they get it right the first time. Never throw out a good design when you can take it and make it better.
Xbox has done a pretty good job of not Impressing me at all. Halo was never fun at all to me. Building off of what De7 said, it's nothing more than mindless fragging of even more mindless AI characters. Also, renaming the Revolution to "Wii" won't pull Nintendo out of the spiral of suck its been in since the mid 90s. Don't get me wrong though, I'm holding off for a while on my decision to even get a PS3. It's totally dependent on the games that come out for it. Namely, if they begin production on a remake of Final Fantasy 7. By the way, if anyone has news of a remake, let me know because I haven't been following E3 much this year.
I already know that Ace Combat 6 (or 7, depending on whether or not Namco considers Zero to be 6) is coming for the Playstation 3. If all goes well, I can expect three Ace Combat games for the PS3. Even playing one is worth the price, especially since I don't want to buy a Blue Ray player just like I didn't want to buy a DVD player... So I'll let my PS3 do it for me.
Up untill this E3 i was a hardcore Playstation fan. I would have arguements with my friend over which is better Nintendo or Playstation. And I hate to admit it Nintendo impressed me alot more then Playstation did this year. The only reason i would get a PS3 would be A: Final Fantasy XIII B: Metal Gear Solid 4 C: Blue Ray But the WII looks like it has more. It looks like after im done with the 3 main games i would buy (Mario, Smash Bros, and Link) there would still be a reason to keep it for all the shitty little games that would come out on it. Unlike the shitty little games that come out on the PS3 i would play the ones on the WII because its something new.
There's something definitely better for me about the XBox controller than the PS3 one, and I've played on both. I don't know if it's the placement of the thumbsticks or the thickness of the controller, but it's more comfortable and easier for me to maneuver with the sticks. The buttons seem to be in a slightly better position relative to the rest too. Just to highlight how biased I am, I'm really looking forward to Halo 3...
gbull wrote on Thu, 11 May 2006 18:05 Xbox has done a pretty good job of not Impressing me at all. Halo was never fun at all to me. Building off of what De7 said, it's nothing more than mindless fragging of even more mindless AI characters. Also, renaming the Revolution to "Wii" won't pull Nintendo out of the spiral of suck its been in since the mid 90s. Don't get me wrong though, I'm holding off for a while on my decision to even get a PS3. It's totally dependent on the games that come out for it. Namely, if they begin production on a remake of Final Fantasy 7. By the way, if anyone has news of a remake, let me know because I haven't been following E3 much this year. I hate Halo as well, never saw what was so great about it. 1 character model for multiplayer, no bots, stale maps. Now a third is coming out...Pfft. FF7 is the best game of all time though, none of the others can hold a flame to it. Edit: Oh and Dover Duel = Confrontation Dual = Two
When Nintendo or Xbox buys Harmonix, then I will abandon Sony. I brought Guitar Hero to a Halo2 party (the host told me to), two guitar controllers, and a small TV. The Halo players screamed heresy, but allowed me and a friend to play in the same room. 4 Halo TV screens, 1 4-way-projector-split-screen, and one small TV with Guitar Hero. 20 SPARTANS, 3 Guitar Heroes. -20 minutes later...- 2 Spartans, 20 Guitar Heroes. A lot of people asked why they had bought an Xbox. Many of them told me that Guitar Hero made them want to go buy a PS2 right then (not the smartest business move). Oh, right, the point. The point is, Sony games do, in general, suck. But the fact that they have that small sum of games that are better than anything Xbox spewed out made me buy it. Xbox hasn't made games like Jak and Daxter, Guitar Hero, and the '.hack' series. Gamecube games were too... happy, and the console was too freakin' small for a DVD/CD player. Even the bargain bin games look better with a Sony cover. For twenty bucks, I could either get Kinetica... or Super Monkey Ball. Which do you think I took? If Nintendo grows up and Microsoft gets a little more creative, then I will consider a 360 or a... wait, is the Revolution even being made? PS: It seems Sonic isn't dead yet. This new game actually looks good. No motorcycles or guns in sight yet, this might be the real Sonic! Welcome back, bud. We missed you. ...Wow. I was really bored.
SpyGuy246 wrote on Fri, 12 May 2006 22:50 There's something definitely better for me about the XBox controller than the PS3 one, and I've played on both. I don't know if it's the placement of the thumbsticks or the thickness of the controller, but it's more comfortable and easier for me to maneuver with the sticks. The buttons seem to be in a slightly better position relative to the rest too. Just to highlight how biased I am, I'm really looking forward to Halo 3... Yesterday i held an xbox 360 controller for the second time and yes, its more comfortable then the psx controller, its molded much better to a pair of hands then the psx is. This is what most people seem to ignor, the duel shock is old news. there is nothing special or groundbreaking about it, it dosent even fit in your hands as well as other controllers. People go on about its how good the games are that matters. Seriously games aint going to get much better sticking with standard controllers. The graphics improves, game engines get improved but nothing groundbreaking stands out to me. I look at the 360 in the shops and i see the same games and the same way of playing them. The only thing that is impressing me at the momment is the revolution. Quote: As for it being styled after the PS1 controller...well, sometimes they get it right the first time. Never throw out a good design when you can take it and make it better. Its hard to see whats been made better other then slapping wii technology in it at the last minute, and hasnt the rumble now been lost? Quote: Gaming is 90% about the games, and much less about what you play them with. Prove me wrong, I dare you. http://wii.nintendo.com/home.html <-- Just check out the "fresh experiances" video. This is the way forward in my opinion. I cant see the ps3 offereing any kind of interactivity that matches this. even with the rip off wii that they have put in, i dont see how it will be as practicle. Quote: FF7 is the best game of all time though, none of the others can hold a flame to it. Yes FF7 is the best, the only reason i would ever buy a ps3 is if the remake of 7 was released.
Iggy (double post)
Im going to buy me a Wii. The best games are coming out for the Wii. And I like the gamecube controller much better than the 10 year old dual-shock thingy...
Grim_Reaper_666 wrote on Sat, 13 May 2006 06:59 Quote: Gaming is 90% about the games, and much less about what you play them with. Prove me wrong, I dare you. http://wii.nintendo.com/home.html <-- Just check out the "fresh experiances" video. This is the way forward in my opinion. I cant see the ps3 offereing any kind of interactivity that matches this. even with the rip off wii that they have put in, i dont see how it will be as practicle. Actually let me rephrase my statement. What I wanted to say is "Gaming is 90% about the games, and much less about what you play the game them on". By this I mean that no matter what console the game is on, as long as it is good.
Gran Turismo series is reason enough to stick to PS..
Gran Turismo is pretty lousy now compared to games like Forza Motorsport.
bigejoe14 wrote on Sat, 13 May 2006 21:19 Gran Turismo is pretty lousy now compared to games like Forza Motorsport. And Need for Speed, though I'm pretty sure that all the NFS games are on the Sony consoles.
Need for Speed in an arcade game, not a simulation, genius. Forza has better AI, 2 more cars on a track simultaniously, online play and a damage model; GT still has a lot more cars, courses, the kickass 900° steering wheel, a more complex tuning section and better graphics. It's a matter of preference I would say...but perhaps you're just talking about GT1 vs Forza
For your information I currently own all four Gran Turismo games and I still find Forza Motorsport to be far superior to all four. So yes, it is just a matter of preference.
Do you own the DFP steering wheel? Because equipped with that, GT4 becomes a whole new game.
JohnDoe wrote on Sun, 14 May 2006 09:00 Do you own the DFP steering wheel? Because equipped with that, GT4 becomes a whole new game. how much might that cost?
Mine cost about 100 bucks...You'll need to build yourself a cockpit too tho (unless you want to buy one for 300+$). I build this one http://www.firetooth.net/wiki/PastProjects/Cockpit and tbh GT4 kicks major ass like that.
[quote title=Sniper_De7 wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 17:10] Grim_Reaper_666 wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 15:20 "I don't know why you're saying it's small, it isn't" luv2pb wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 16:10 hunteroo2 wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 16:49 luv2pb wrote on Wed, 10 May 2006 03:40 Sniper_De7 wrote on Tue, 09 May 2006 18:56 not even if they make better games? They don't ... play station games are shit xbox honestly, other then halo, what does xbox have that play station doesnt? I can name very few but I can't name a one for ps. Hi. Hi.
Xbox 360 has: - Halo 3 - A comfortable controller - Gears Of War - Fable 2 - A good Splinter Cell - Call Of Duty 3 - A fair price tag The Xbox is solid, no question. If only it was this good at launch... The Wii has: - Smash Bros + Snake - Most creative controller - Red Steel - The Zelda series - Wii sports (They actually look pretty good) - Metriod + Wiimote = awesome - A fair price tag Best fun to price ratio. 'Nuff said. The PS3 has: - Marginally better peak performance than the 360 - MGS4 (Eventually) - Square RPGs, even though they could all be confused for the same game - Warhawk - Ace Combat - Anime games. Lots of worthless anime games. - Hype. Lots and lots of hype - A price tag big enough to make me choke on the Pepsi I was drinking when it was announced. The PS3 is good, but not $600 good...
Dover wrote on Mon, 15 May 2006 14:09 The Wii has: - Smash Bros. Which has Snake in it. I was laughing my ass off when I saw him in that movie for it.
I love all the different varieties of fanboys in this topic.
I'm no fanboy. I just call it how I see it here, and I see Nintendo being a horrible company that destroys the very fanbase that was responsible for its success in the 1980s and 1990s. I hate Nintendo and there'd have to be some stellar game on one of their systems to make me buy it... I only use Sony consoles because Microsoft's Xbox doesn't have anywhere near the games available for it as the Playstation and Playstation 2 do. I'll definitely stick with Sony in the future, unless by some fluke Microsoft or Nintendo pull out of their slump and take over Sony's domination hold on the console market.
The PlayStation may have MORE games availible for it, but I doubt they're BETTER games, unless you like the same turn-based RPG over and over again, the same Dynesty Worriers hack-n-slash over and over again... The PS3 has the potential to be great, but I just can't see myself forking over $600 (+ eBay costs, because we all know that not enough are going to ship for the first 6 months or so) just to play the same games the PS2 had, only slightly prettier and three times as expensive. The Xbox 360, on the other hand, has been out for over a year. It has a couple decent games, will have more by the holiday season, and is (Gasp) affordable!! The Wii is a must-have, simply because it's differant, and is going to cost 1/3 of the PS3.
I guess you totally ignore the fact that the PS3 is a Blue-Ray\DVD player too, perhaps why it costs so much money? You pay for the game system, the Blue-Ray\DVD playing technology, and the lifetime of online service. Do you have any idea of how expensive Blue-Ray players are going to be? The PS3 is a steal compared to them.
That's IF Blu-Ray catches on. It probably will, but since it's so much more expensive to manufacture than the HD-DVD... Besides, when I buy a console, I look at games and fun first. I think that's the primary function of the PS3 and Xbox 360. I'm not going to get it simply for it's extras. Example: The movie Aeon Flux was recently released as a DVD. I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but the movie was god-aweful. However, the DVD comes with a whole bunch of extras, commentary, behind the scenes, really neat stuff. But the movie still sucks. Am I buying the DVD? No. It's a waste of my money. In the same way, the PS3 fails at what it's supposed to do best. I'm not getting a console soley for playing DVDs.
1. Blue-Ray is definitly going to catch on. 2. Your Aeon Flux comparison doesn't make any sense at all. A Blue-Ray player in itself is very useful to have, you don't even need to play games on it. DVD extras however are just minor additions to the movie and if the movie sucks, they won't be interesting either. 3. How do you know that the games are going to suck? I mainly play sports games and I'm very happy with my PS2. Go for the Nintendo if you want your kiddy games or go for the XBOX if you want to play shooters with a gamepad and I'll just go for the PS3.
Yeah, Nintendo only has kiddy games. Just like Resident Evil 4 and Metroid Prime... and we can't forget the ultrakiddy game Killer 7.
Phazon87 wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 08:49 Yeah, Nintendo only has kiddy games. Just like Resident Evil 4 and Metroid Prime... and we can't forget the ultrakiddy game Killer 7. Sorry but Mario games generally rock.
Phazon87 wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 07:49 Yeah, Nintendo only has kiddy games. Just like Resident Evil 4 and Metroid Prime... and we can't forget the ultrakiddy game Killer 7. If you had a brain you would realize that I just named the type of games each console is best known for...or do you think that the XBOX only has shooters?
Goztow wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 09:12 Phazon87 wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 08:49 Yeah, Nintendo only has kiddy games. Just like Resident Evil 4 and Metroid Prime... and we can't forget the ultrakiddy game Killer 7. Sorry but Mario games generally rock. I agree with this statement. If I want to play a shooter, I play Ren or BF2 or CS or something like that, because playing shooters with gamepads is very painful to me. And I generally enjoyed the 2-D Metroid games better than the 3-d ones. Note: Please realize that this is a statement of my opinion, and I'm not trying to force how I think onto anyone else... I don't really like playing on consoles actually.
JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 01:57 1. Blue-Ray is definitly going to catch on. Blu-Ray is expensive, non-rewrittable, and has shit movies for it. Why bother? JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 01:57 2. Your Aeon Flux comparison doesn't make any sense at all. A Blue-Ray player in itself is very useful to have, you don't even need to play games on it. DVD extras however are just minor additions to the movie and if the movie sucks, they won't be interesting either. It makes perfect sense. If I want a Blu-Ray player, I'll buy a Blu-Ray player, as opposed to buying a PS3. All the PrevGen Consoles played DVDs in theory, but they didn't play CDs, MP3 CDs, Music DVDs, or even my ultimate Queen collection I got off eBay. I ended up getting a plain old DVD player and all of the above worked fine. JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 01:57 3. How do you know that the games are going to suck? I mainly play sports games and I'm very happy with my PS2. Go for the Nintendo if you want your kiddy games or go for the XBOX if you want to play shooters with a gamepad and I'll just go for the PS3. I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but E3 recently passed, which means I can be reasonably sure of all the games coming out for the PS3 for the next...oh...6 months or so? They showed Hack-N-Slashes, two Final Fantasys, Warhawk, and a trailer MSG4. Yawn. <Opinion> Oh, and sports games are terrible. The exception is the Blitz series, which is actually fun. </Opinion>
JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 08:40 Phazon87 wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 07:49 Yeah, Nintendo only has kiddy games. Just like Resident Evil 4 and Metroid Prime... and we can't forget the ultrakiddy game Killer 7. If you had a brain you would realize that I just named the type of games each console is best known for...or do you think that the XBOX only has shooters? Metriod Prime is one of the games that Nintendo is known best for, after the Mario and Zelda series.
Both of which have chopped up storylines because Nintendo doesn't care about consistency or integrity in their games.
Phazon87 wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 08:49 Yeah, Nintendo only has kiddy games. Just like Resident Evil 4 Resident Evil is a kiddy game? What does kiddy mean anyway? Does it mean that the game is for small kids? If yes, then RE4 is not a kiddy game. It is rated M.
Doesn't care? Doubtful. I've played most Mario games and all the Zelda games. Although there are some plot inconsistancys in the Zelda games (How many times does Link rescue Zelda?), they don't impair the FUN at all. My guess is Nintendo tried to make a good game, as opposed to a good story. Although I'm not positive, I'm decently sure mario games (At least the early ones) are a continuation of the same storyline.
Terminator 101 wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 12:11 Phazon87 wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 08:49 Yeah, Nintendo only has kiddy games. Just like Resident Evil 4 Resident Evil is a kiddy game? What does kiddy mean anyway? Does it mean that the game is for small kids? If yes, then RE4 is not a kiddy game. It is rated M. Sarcasm.
It's a choice between Wii and PS3 for me and, honestly, I think PS3 will turn out to be the winner. Sony can thank the Final Fantasy-series for that, they definetly won't be available on Nintendo's system. I'm a hardcore FF fan. If they release FF XIII for PC I might have to rethink, but as of now, that's my case. The only "catch" Nintendo has to draw me with is the price and the controller (I'm not even sure about the latter), while PS3 has good graphics and many known good games.
I would buy a Wii just to play the new Zelda games. I'm a little pissed that they only released one for Gamecube.
Dover wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 13:11 JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 01:57 1. Blue-Ray is definitly going to catch on. Blu-Ray is expensive, non-rewrittable, and has shit movies for it. Why bother? JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 01:57 2. Your Aeon Flux comparison doesn't make any sense at all. A Blue-Ray player in itself is very useful to have, you don't even need to play games on it. DVD extras however are just minor additions to the movie and if the movie sucks, they won't be interesting either. It makes perfect sense. If I want a Blu-Ray player, I'll buy a Blu-Ray player, as opposed to buying a PS3. All the PrevGen Consoles played DVDs in theory, but they didn't play CDs, MP3 CDs, Music DVDs, or even my ultimate Queen collection I got off eBay. I ended up getting a plain old DVD player and all of the above worked fine. JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 01:57 3. How do you know that the games are going to suck? I mainly play sports games and I'm very happy with my PS2. Go for the Nintendo if you want your kiddy games or go for the XBOX if you want to play shooters with a gamepad and I'll just go for the PS3. I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but E3 recently passed, which means I can be reasonably sure of all the games coming out for the PS3 for the next...oh...6 months or so? They showed Hack-N-Slashes, two Final Fantasys, Warhawk, and a trailer MSG4. Yawn. <Opinion> Oh, and sports games are terrible. The exception is the Blitz series, which is actually fun. </Opinion> 1. Blue-Ray hasen't even started yet. You could have said the same things about DVDs, CDs, etc...it's plain idiocy. 2. If you don't want a PS3, then don't buy it. That doesn't change that fact that you get a gaming console AND a Blue-Ray player for a fair price if you buy one. Since when are DVD extras without a movie attractive? Both PS3 and a Blue-Ray player are, so I still don't see any logic behind that comparison. 3. All of that is your opinion. Like I've said, if you're into kiddy games, get the Nintendo, if you want shooters, get the XBOX, if you're into the Playstation stuff, then get that.
Dover wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 13:13 JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 08:40 Phazon87 wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 07:49 Yeah, Nintendo only has kiddy games. Just like Resident Evil 4 and Metroid Prime... and we can't forget the ultrakiddy game Killer 7. If you had a brain you would realize that I just named the type of games each console is best known for...or do you think that the XBOX only has shooters? Metriod Prime is one of the games that Nintendo is known best for, after the Mario and Zelda series. Yeah 1 Metriod game in 10 years or so...that's definitly the franchise that powers nintendo!!!
In the interests of fairness, there have been several Metroid games in the past five years. Metroid Prime Metrioid Zero Mission (GBA only) Metroid Fusion (GBA only) And probably a few others that I haven't listed yet.
Ugh. PS3 graphics are good, but not $600 good, especially when the Xbox 360 comes close enough. No Blu-Ray player add-on is going to make it worth it. The 360 is solid, the Wii is unique, but the PS3 is just a PS2 with a face lift. If that's what you're into, then fine, buy it. I sure as hell won't.
Do you even research what you're arguing about? http://www.blu-ray.com/players/ Blu-Ray players *start off* at ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS. A PS3 at 600 dollars is a fucking steal! The PS3 being nothing more than a face lift? The fact that it's a DVD\Blu-Ray player, a third generation gaming console with incredible graphics, and its large HD? That's nothing more than a facelift to you? All I can say is that you're an idiot.
Dover wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 11:11 All the PrevGen Consoles played DVDs in theory, but they didn't play CDs, MP3 CDs, Music DVDs, or even my ultimate Queen collection I got off eBay. I ended up getting a plain old DVD player and all of the above worked fine. I smell a repeat.
<Assumption> A PS3 at $600 is a steal, because of it's Blu-Ray player. You have something that plays Blu-Ray. </Assumption> Now what? http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/ It seems they assembled the finest P.O.S. movies and stuck them on a better format to pray for incresed sales. Seriously, how many of those movies have you seen, and how many of those were good? I went through the list and found a grand total of four movies that didn't suck giant elephant testicles.
And I smell bacon Anyway, Dover, you are right, My PS2 does not play Music CDs. I don't understand why. If something can read DVD, I think it MUST also abe able to read all kinds of CDs.
So you're nitpicking the PS2, which has nothing to do with the PS3, over its inability (I have yet to test this since I don't play music through my television set) to play music CDs. <Assumption> A PS3 at $600 is a steal, because of it's Blu-Ray player. You have something that plays Blu-Ray. </Assumption> How is that an assumption you dumb mother fucker? It's a *fact*, a PS3 (even the $499 version) plays Blu-Ray discs. Quote: Disc Media: CD PlayStation CD-ROM, PlayStation 2 CD-ROM, CD-DA, CD-DA (ROM), CD-R, CD-RW, SACD, SACD Hybrid (CD layer), SACD HD, DualDisc, DualDisc (audio side), DualDisc (DVD side) DVD: PlayStation 2 DVD-ROM, PlayStation 3 DVD-ROM, DVD-Video, DVD-ROM, DVD-R, DVD-RW, DVD+R, DVD+RW Blu-ray Disc: PlayStation 3 BD-ROM, BD-Video, BD-ROM, BD-R, BD-RE http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614682p1.html As for totally unrelated good movies in that pre-release announcement? Black Hawk Down Dune Full Metal Jacket Fifth Element The Incredibles The Manchurian Candidate The Matrix The Matrix: Reloaded Kill Bill Volume 1 Reservoir Dogs The Terminator Terminator 2: Judgement Day and probably more since I gave up. You have some bad taste in movies if you only found four in that list worth watching.
Aircraftkiller wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 18:59 In the interests of fairness, there have been several Metroid games in the past five years. Metroid Prime Metrioid Zero Mission (GBA only) Metroid Fusion (GBA only) And probably a few others that I haven't listed yet. Yea well I'm not talking about the handheld stuff...
Dover wrote on Sat, 20 May 2006 00:25 <Assumption> A PS3 at $600 is a steal, because of it's Blu-Ray player. You have something that plays Blu-Ray. </Assumption> Now what? http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/ It seems they assembled the finest P.O.S. movies and stuck them on a better format to pray for incresed sales. Seriously, how many of those movies have you seen, and how many of those were good? I went through the list and found a grand total of four movies that didn't suck giant elephant testicles. So you think that those are the only movies that will come out on Blue-Ray? That's just...wow. I personally will buy the Blu-Ray versions of TV shows like 24 or Shield, since I don't have a HD television and I don't need a better version of my DVD movies. On a side note that list is actually not bad at all...movies I would or have payed money for to own: Black Hawk Down Crash Full Metal Jacket Goodfellas Green Mile Hero Ice Age Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back Kill Bill Vol. 1 Last Samurai Lord of War Matrix Pirates of the Caribbean Reservoir Dogs Sleepy Hollow Syriana Training Day Troy We Were Soldiers That's almost 20, so good enough for me.
Scythar wrote on Fri, 19 May 2006 14:40 It's a choice between Wii and PS3 for me and, honestly, I think PS3 will turn out to be the winner. Sony can thank the Final Fantasy-series for that, they definetly won't be available on Nintendo's system. I'm a hardcore FF fan. If they release FF XIII for PC I might have to rethink, but as of now, that's my case. The only "catch" Nintendo has to draw me with is the price and the controller (I'm not even sure about the latter), while PS3 has good graphics and many known good games. I have seen a final fantasy:cc trailer for the wii on e3. So its available for the wii. Anyway, many people are really positive who actually played with the controller. I want smash bros brawl now!!
If only all those movies and more wern't also going to be released on the much less expensive HD-DVD format, which is also rewritable.