Slashdot Mirror
2005's Console Hardware In Review
Next Generation is running an examination of the 2005 hardware announcements from the big three console companies. They look at details and benchmarks released so far for the next-gen consoles. From the article: "The wraps were taken off the PlayStation 3 at Sony's pre-E3 press conference. Non-playable demos and canned footage games in development (over which arguments still rage over what was 'real' and what were renders made to be 'representative') wowed the media and stole a good bit of thunder from the somewhat underwhelming Microsoft presentation that followed."
OK, I'll feed the troll...
And what exactly are you doing by buying an Xbox? Oh, that's right, Microsoft is the 'happiest place on earth' and doesn't do anything evil...
For the most part, big corporations are evil. You can't get that big, and stay that big, without doing something wrong once in a while.
So, I pick my evil. And that evil is Sony. They were here before Microsoft, and they were my first gaming system I owned. So I'll stick with them.
And, I just don't like Microsoft as a gaming console. They have enough already with basically running 90% of the PC's out there (mine included). They don't deserve to get my living room too.
Check out the best P2P sharing website: MEDIACHEST.COM
You know there is an alternative to both evil corperations: NINTENDO!
" Non-playable demos and canned footage games in development (over which arguments still rage over what was 'real' and what were renders made to be 'representative') wowed the media and stole a good bit of thunder from the somewhat underwhelming Microsoft presentation that followed."
1) The Playstation3 footage was not created by PS3 hardware. This has been confirmed dozens of times, there is no 'argument'. 2) The Microsoft presentation had actual playable software. I was there, and people cared about the Microsoft presentation a ton more.
No sony is just still a padawan, MS is the true dark lord of the sith.
What would be real scary if the two join up.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Hell, even if they put a game system out there that has a decent supply of must-play games. Or one history-setting game. I got a PSX for FF7. (I ended up with a lot more titles of course, but that was the seller for me.) I got a Cube, not because it had better graphics, or had a funky controller... it had Mario, Zelda, Metroid, and some others. Enough to make it worth owning.
Microsoft doesn't get a place in my livingroom because, their being Microsoft aside, they don't have any games. That's all it's about. Halo was---maybe---an A title, maybe a B+ title. It's a FPS, and it didn't do anything special, other than being the only top exclusive title on its system. You don't buy a system for a single A/B+ title. You may buy it for a AAA title, or if it has a lot of B-A titles. But the XBOX had neither. Nor, as of yet, does the 360.
This is, perhaps---probably---why people give Sony the benefit of the doubt and bank on their systems. The PS1 had tons of good games. The PS2 had tons of good games. The PS3 already has a ton of good games. (And contrary to popular slashdot opinion, the PSP also has tons of good games.) So they're safe to bank on.
This is also why people give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt: there's always going to be Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Pokemon, Kart, and a legion of other Nintendo franchises. And even if there aren't a ton of them, they'll all be AAA titles.
So in the end, if your definition of "the best" means "the best library of games," then I think you're spot on.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage