i respect ppls opponions.. xbox 360 is good, dont get me wrong.. but comparing against the other consoles, xbox didnt do anything new to impress me, just a way of gaining more cash by creating a new system with better graphics and what not. the games for wii arent complicated from what i hear (many users), but will prolly take abit for learning ie. 10-20 minutes. atleast they're introducing a new type of gaming into the world, ps3 has slightly added motion sensors for a couple of games i think, xbox 360 has done absolutely nothing. i just think the xbox 360 was a waste of cash, but they've got to stay in this "war".
Erm i think the 360 is doing more than just graphics, they are taking the online service to the next level which the ps3 and wii is not
360 also got the advantage by releasing their console early...but same I dont see what stepped up from the XBOX2 ... Wii - Wow what a step from GC - I respect that PS3 - Game format have changed [blu-ray] , motion sensors [not a great fan of these] but ye they introduced a whole new format to play games on [Resistance Fall of Man] Everyone just bashes the PS3 games with GoW as it basically dominated the first 2 generations between GC and XBOX - Thats what i am seeing atm - And also BASH the PS3 a year later because there is absolutely no point atm same goes for the Wii comments DarkStar
Just so you know, the PS3 is more of a 2.5 than an Xbox 360 being 1.5. Why? The 360 has more custom hardware for what's it supposed to do, gaming. Look at the CPU's. The 360 has a CUSTOM CPU (Xenon) made just for gaming. The CPU was designed to give game developers the power that they actually need, in an easy to use form. That's why you always hear devs and people saying the 360 is easier and more relaxing to code for. What does the PS3 have? It's Cell processesor (not new, not custom). You hear Sony boasting about it saying it has the best specs and whatnot (even in commercials) but guess what, it wasn't made for games. The Cell's seven DSPs (what Sony calls their SPEs) have no cache, no direct access to memory, no branch predictor, and a different instruction set from the PS3's main CPU. They are not designed for or efficient at general purpose computing. DSPs are not appropriate for game programming. ***Sony's CPU is ideal for an environment where 12.5% of the work is general-purpose computing and 87.5% of the work is DSP calculations. It makes sense for video playback or networked waveform analysis, but not for games. And GPU: 360>PS3 easily. When you break down the numbers, Xbox 360 has provably more performance than PS3 with its gaming hardware. That's what makes a next-gen console (although PC will always be ahead ). Sony saying it has Blu-ray (which is just a higher storage format), so much power it'll be a computer, and Linux does not make it a next-gen console because the PS2 has already done that (besides diff format that 360 and Wii don't use). Before PS2's release, Sony was saying the the PS2 WAS a computer as well and offered Linux (sperately though). By doing this, Sony hoped to get overseas shipping costs down by claiming the PS2 was a computer just by saying and adding those simple things. Turns out last year Sony wasn't eligible for a tax refund for overseas shipping because feds deemed the PS2 not a computer, even if it had Linux. So in conclusion, don't belittle a console when you don't even know what you're talking about.
sorry, i cant be bothered to read it all, but gameplay > hardware in a console especially. i have my computer for that kind of stuff, running fast, internet, etc. im not saying it isnt good to have a console with such excellent stuff in it, like the xbox you're saying it has gaming hardware or some ----, but you're getting more into whats inside the xbox, rather then what you actualy play. once you figure out the difference, you'll realise. and assuming you do know it, well, there was no reason to write up all that which i wouldn't read all of anyway. just a future note.
WTF are you talking about? I've been gaming since the Atari 5200 and with every generation, the main thing upgraded in every generation is hardware. Gameplay = Hardware. For example, NES had 2D games and was limited even though many great games came out. SNES came out and was a big hit and what was the only thing upgraded? Hardware. N64 came out, again only hardware, but this time it had 3D which changed gameplay thanks to hardware. Gamecube, hardware. Now with Wii, you have motion sensing as their main thing. Since it's the main thing and totally changed the way games are played, then hardware is something on the side that doesn't need to be dealt with. Saying gameplay > hardware is extremely ignorant.
LOL? ofcourse the better the hardware, the better the gfx and performance etc.. but im not talking about hardware, im talking about gameplay. you're telling me that i dont know what i'm talking about, when i'm not even talking about hardware. i know the other systems have better hardware than the wii, hell, i know the wii's gfx are actualy quite ----ty compared to the others, infact, some games that ive seen even compare to what looks like to be playstation graphics. get the point in your head.. game play > graphics (happy now?) and what i meant with game play > hardware, was cuz you were saying how good the hardware was.. xbox hardware was specifically for gaming, where as the ps3 was just expensive hardware or some ----, but my point was why buy a system due to its expensive hardware? the wii was made for game play and family fun. also games which can be played single player and in the future online.
I disagree. Although hardware does enable more gameplay features, I think the Wii is fine, and it's got the worst graphics of all, some even calling it a gamecube 1.5 it's that bad. You were making an invalid comparison trying to compare the Snes - n64 days to the era we are in now. That was when 3d gaming was just being unleashed, as of now it's been out for a while, and the wii's power is about all you need to get the most out of any new gameplay features (at least for now).
meh, the wii isnt popular here.. but all over the world it is! couple more days it'll be out in europe, australia and new zealand.. i honestly havent heard ONE complaint.. none. some people got some broken ones, meh happens anywhere (and i am reffering more to the gameplay).. TV's broken is all accidental and not a guarantee'd to happen situation.. but some people are that silly. heard quite a few complaints on the ps3, none really on the xbox.. but its nothing special to me. wii r0x0red you guys.
I hope to be getting a Wii for christmas this year. Really, gameplay is more important than graphics. I heard somewhere, don't remember where, and interesting quote. Went something like this \/ If all you're looking for in a console is pretty pictures, then what about putting in a picture of the mona lisa every once in a while? Now there's a pretty picture. But would it make the game be any better?
seriously all the people who keep on sayin that gameplay is well more important than graphics well let me just say this: in year or two when the ideas on how to use the wii remote starts to run dry the gameplay will be the same over and over again just like the ps3 and the 360 but the difference is that the ps3 or 360 can go beyonder with both the physics and graphics.
The ps3 has a tilt function plus the advanced hardware and Blu ray technology will allow developers alot more freedom to do what they want. Yea whats the wii gonna do. Try to implement the motion sensing into everything.
i own the wii and the ps3, and i must say.. the ps3 graphics blow away the wii, but the ps3 will get boring while the wii will not.
