Hack it to put linux on it? That's exactly my point...the PS3 has first-party Linux support, no hacking neccessary. That, combined with the Blu-Ray player, the 1080p, the larger hard drive...are you honestly telling me that you think these things would NOT entice a techie to buy a PS3?
Beyond that, if all people wanted to do was play games on their consoles, console makers would not be putting in the kind of functionality that they are...TV shows available online, streaming capabilities, DVR capabilities...they would make something used strictly for gaming. Like an N64 or PS1 or Dreamcast...notice how the market changes.
See, consoles USED to be for nothing but games...then, Microsoft said "Hey, lets see what happens when we enable them to mess around with it and use it as a DVR and to stream shit" So, with the Xbox, they tried a little experiment...and guess what? A VERY VERY large number of people modified the Black and Green box to put linux on it (or a homebrew OS). MANY people. Granted, not nearly half of the owners did, but a large chunk did indeed do this.
So, Microsoft (and Sony) got smart...hey, why should these hackers get all the credit? Let's make it so that they can do all these things out of the box...that should help reduce piracy as well as fraudulent warranty requests due to people messing up their systems because they didn't know what to do...and while we are at it, let's create a market place where they can go to BUY stuff for their console.
Nintendo realized that not everyone would want or need this stuff, and so they said to themselves hey, let's do what we do best. Let's make a gaming system. Sure, just to keep up we will put in some stuff...but what? I GOT IT! Let's allow people to buy games from a long time ago! You know, things that will be really nostalgic for people...older games, back when fun was king!
See how much economic sense that makes? If all you want is to play games, buy a Wii. I mean after all, if you don't need all that extra functionality that you are paying for but will never use, what is the point of buying any other system this generation?
Unless of course you are sucked into the psuedo-political stance of being an *ahem* "fanboi"
To answer your question, if you can only afford one...buy the one that fits your needs or wants.
Do you want something that is simply a gaming system, something to just have fun with? Buy a Wii.
Do you want something that can play next-gen optical discs and has the capability of simple Linux operation without much trouble? Buy a PS3.
Do you want something that is a fantastic alternative to a Streaming PC Workhorse, while providing a rich online experience? Buy a 360.
Don't rely on someone elses assertion. My needs and wants are potentially VASTLY different from another person, just as yours are potentially vastly different from mine.
Let's face it folks. Call them what you want, someone who says "this console is better than another" this generation is a Grade A Nimrod (thank you calvin & hobbes)
Come on. This is like a movie critic trying to compare Dumb and Dumber with A Fistfull of Dollars...they are entirely different movies, just like each of the three new consoles have entirely different purposes.
The Wii is for those that want something new, something fresh. It is the perfect example that graphics don't always make the game...and frankly, while comparitavely the graphics are so-so, they are still quite nice. They have a deliberate 'Nintendo signature' feel to them, which personally I am very happy was not abandoned. If there is one thing to be said about any of Nintendo's previous consoles, it is that they were entirely unique on their own, and you KNOW when you are looking at something on a Nintendo System. Modern day technology meets retro gaming demand: fun above all else.
The PS3 is for those that want to be on the cutting edge. With it's ability to display 1080p, a next-gen optical disc format, and its configurability (read: simple Linux support), it just begs people to tinker with it. Sony's price is not just because the components are expensive, it is used as a method to bring in the drooling techies: if it is shiny, black, and expensive, it HAS to be cool. I for one am very excited to see certain next-gen entries in some series on the PS3...or have you all not thought about God of War 3?
The Xbox 360 is for those that want a sleek, integrated system. Because of Microsoft's hold on the general public in the form of operating systems, it makes it EXTREMELY easy for them to design the 360 in such a way that allows it to integrate seamlessly with your system. Streaming media, accessing files over the network without even needing to check out the instruction manual, slick shape, comfortable controller...the 360 screams 'chic geek'. While it lacks first-party supported Linux now, I can assure you with Microsoft's recent aquisition in the Linux market, it is only a matter of time before Linux on the 360 becomes a reality. And given the way the 360 can already integrate itself into your home network, imagine the fun that could be had...the infinite application availability for Windows with the customization capabilities and rock-solid operation of Linux. It will truly be a thing of beauty.
So this generation, I think all consoles win. They each are attempting to break into a different part of the market, and they all have succeeded tremendously.
All I ask of my fellow gamers is that they stop comparing Dumb and Dumber with A Fistfull of Dollars.
I know there are many good games for the dreamcast, and I know Time Stalkers comparitavely is not that great, but for some reason I just love it...I really cannot explain why...just something about it...
If it wasn't time stalkers, I would easily say Shenmue...graphics, story, etc. Reminds me of the early-mid 90's adventure games
again, it's not an FPS, it's a third person shooter. Secondly, quake didn't use sprites because it was not 2D based (i.e. it wasen't using the BUILD engine) and third, for the same reason that people will watch a horror movie after seeing the original phantom of the opera from waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back when...different experiences.
as a side note, for every major system I have one game that I tell people they MUST buy.
SNES - Secret of Mana Genesis - Kid Chameleon N64 - Goldeneye Dreamcast - Time Stalkers Saturn - Die Hard Arcade Xbox - Scrapland PS2 - God of War Gamecube - Metroid Prime Xbox 360 - Gears of War
Re:Don't feel like wading through reviews
on
Gears Sells a Million
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
well to start, it isn't an FPS. It's a third person shooter.
I can't tell you why OTHERS find it so fun, so I will relay my own personal experiences with it.
To start, the way that the cover system is implemented gives it a greateer sense of realism...after all, you wouldn't just go standing behind a wall in a warzone...you would have your back to it and pop out...you would transfer from one cover to another, not just simply jog over to the next one...I suppose what I am trying to say is the strategies required to play the game succesfully are very different from your typical shooter in that if you do not utilize cover correctly, you WILL die.
Generally, I find graphics take a seat to gameplay and story, but in this case they help a LOT. They are done in such a grity, grimey way that when you finish playing you feel the need to wash your hands. It is a dirty, dirty game.
The reloading system adds alot too. When you mess up a reload and you see your char on screen cussing and getting slightly frantic...you start getting the same way. In the middle of a firefight when you are flanked/pinned down, being stuck with a jammed weapon (just like in real life) is one of the most heart-attack inducing moments you can imagine. There is a great sense of satisfaction and accomplishment with each enemy you take down. While some may cry foul about the AI, on the harder difficulties (not unlike Halo) things start getting really tough.
The char's are developed JUST ENOUGH for you to care about them, which is perfect considering it is supposed to be a trilogy. The first one sets it up, the second gives the backstory, the third concludes everything.
All things combined, it is plain fun. It isn't particularly revolutionary, it won't change HOW games are played or anything...but it will most likely change how much effort people put into games. I lack the vocabulary to describe to you how excited I am for the second and third installments.
...on the situation. In keeping on topic with the article, in regards to software the same answer stands.
I LOVE having my choice of operating system. Do I want a fully customizable experience? Linux. Do I want something that looks slick and polished and runs smoothly? OSX. Do I want something that has out of the box functionality and a large amount of commercial software available for it? Windows.
The above applies to office software, database software, games, everything. By having more choices, I can get not only what I want, but what I NEED. The only time more choices become a BAD thing is when the uninformed/technophobe/technomoron makes a decision in what to go with..."I'm going to buy a mac because it looks slick!" Now he can't get the software or games that he wants. "I'm going to get Linux because it's free! Crap, why won't my wireless thingy work?" Now he doesn't know about Linux-specific drivers or even how to access his old data. "I'll get windows because it is readily available! Wait...whats this spyware thing..." Now he loses his bank account.
The problem isn't so much that there are too many choices, it's that people don't know what they are choosing, why they are choosing it, and what to do after they have chosen.
I do (comparitively) mild body building, and I did a little experiment.
For one month, I worked out at LEAST 6 hours prior to going to sleep. For the next month, I worked out no MORE than 1 hour prior to going to sleep. I showed a VERY noticable improvement when I worked out shortly before going to sleep as opposed to working out long before going to sleep.
It makes sense, if you think about it. Sleeping is like running your body on reduced (and in some people minimal) power...so instead of doing things like interpreting sight and sounds and tastes and touch and smells, you can spend those extra brain cycles repairing, regrowing, reorganizing, etc...
A good friend of mine who went on to be a neurosurgeon once said "sleeping is to your brain as defragmentation is to your hard drive"
so because a game ASKED you which way you would like to aim, it earns points? It's in the option menu...big deal.
Have to change weapons to throw a grenade? Really? Cause for PC shooters I usually just hit the "g" key (or g or h, if it is TFC)...oh and in case you missed it, in halo 2, if you are dual wielding you cannot throw a grenade...
I never said halo wasn't FUN, it was...it just wasn't anything new or revolutionary. You are of course entitled to your own opinion, but considering you started your LAN parties beginning with quake II...well, it's just showing your age, that's all (or lack thereof)
I would say that religion limits you further...with atheism, there is no limit to what you can discover...with religion, you discover as much as what is written in a book. A book which was written by men who thought the world was flat.
One of my favorite quotes of all time:
"God must be greater than the greatest of human weaknesses and, indeed, the greatest of human skill. God must even transcend our most remarkable-to emulate nature in its absolute splendor. How can any man or woman sin against such greatness of mind? How can one little carbon unit on Earth-in the backwaters of the Milky Way, the boondocks-betray God, ALMIGHTY? That is impossible. The height of arrogance is the height of control of those who create God in their own image."
Anyway, in addition to what I said, the first entry in a trilogy is hardly the most interesting in terms of story...that is what the SECOND entry is for.
As for GoW having repetitive gameplay...fine I'll give you that. But at least it required some bit of tact...not to mention a bit more realism in a war-like situation (i.e. the whole cover system) Considering halo was supposed to be a trilogy, the first and second did VERY VERY little to make me look forward to the third game...I am, however, anticipating the second and third installment of gears of war with great fervor
Or maybe the people doing the reviews didn't buy into the halo hype...as in, maybe they were one of the people with a head on their shoulders.
Don't get me wrong, halo 1 and 2 were quite fun and all, but they were hardly revolutionary...compare them to PC shooters, and suddenly their graphics resemble games that came out 5 years prior to them...their stories horrible and canned and typical...their voice acting spotty...and quite frankly, their gameplay repetitive. Personally, I think the best thing halo had going for it was it's sound effects.
Still, in comparison to other shooters that were around at the same time, halo 1 and 2 did NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING that other games hadn't done ten times over. The CONSOLE fanbois (notice I didn't say microsoft) for some reason thought that they were a gift from god, when in fact they belonged in the bargain bin from the get-go
I wouldn't consider myself a fanboy of any company...sure I have preferences, but when all is said and done whatever in my mind works best is what I will use, regardless of who makes it or distributes it.
Now, normally I would be one of the first people to defend microsoft, but in this instance...well...a big ol' loogie that has yet to be formed will have their company logo on it.
Insofar as what this article refers to and about what has been publically said, I don't believe Microsoft has ever made a bigger mistake in their entire history
Maybe I was a little misleading...I meant not nearly what they used to be. Yes, Konami and Capcom are still around, and yes they still have a couple tricks up their sleeves, but there is no way you can sit there and tell me with a straight face they have nearly as deep of a market penetration or string of instant classics like they did in the mid 80's-90's
You forgot Alpha and Cray:-)
Man...remember the fight between the Rendition and 3dfx? LMFAO I remember getting into a fistfight with my friends when the monster 3d and the rendition verite first came out (I was younger and stupider then lol)
Hell, I remember when the top of the line falcon mach V 200 MHz pentium was going for like 4,000 bucks...
You also forgot to mention Tandy, that was another big one...Also TI, I know texas instruments is still around, but not NEARLY in the same capacity that they used to be
how all the old huge developers of yesteryear are dissapearing or becoming steaming piles of shit?
Old sierra, activision, electronic arts, midway, konami, capcom...the list goes on.
These people used to be at the very pinnacle of gaming in any form...now they are either dissapeared or corrupted into crap.
I wonder where gaming will be and what companies will be carrying it in 20 years...
Point taken, past tense...I should have been more specific. Recent-gen consoles tend to have more problems (like you mentioned) 360 had/has it's overheating and red light issues, ps3 has some small scaling issues and some seemingly heating issues (which we will see if those remain in retail units)...my prediction is that if the wii has any problems, it will be with the remote connecting to that bar you put on top of the tv (or wherever)
Personally, I hope all three consoles do very very well. 360 seems geared towards a more tech-savvy crowd (what with it's networking integration with XP media edition), the ps3 sort of a central entertainment hub for content, games, and movies, and the wii with innovation andsomething to make you scratch your head. Each console has it's own purpose and demographic, and with any luck they will do well for all of them.
For the record, next to the NES and SNES, the Dreamcast was the best system EVER.
I didn't mean this specific problem, I meant no matter what console it is, ALL consoles have at least some kind of issue or bug when they are launched...it's to be expected, really. It works just like how it works with a car:
No amount of testing will equal the same as real world use, if for no other reason other than because people use and abuse things differently than others. I'm sure the Wii's problems will have to do with connectivity between the controller and the box. You heard it here first.
...the problems that plauge all consoles at launch. I really hope the PS3 makes it...While I preferred Xbox over the PS2, there were some PS2 games that were AMAZING (Ico, Katamari Damacy, God of War, FF series, etc.)
I hope all three consoles do fantastic, and I plan on eventually owning all three.
Slashdot Mirror
Hack it to put linux on it? That's exactly my point...the PS3 has first-party Linux support, no hacking neccessary. That, combined with the Blu-Ray player, the 1080p, the larger hard drive...are you honestly telling me that you think these things would NOT entice a techie to buy a PS3?
Beyond that, if all people wanted to do was play games on their consoles, console makers would not be putting in the kind of functionality that they are...TV shows available online, streaming capabilities, DVR capabilities...they would make something used strictly for gaming. Like an N64 or PS1 or Dreamcast...notice how the market changes.
See, consoles USED to be for nothing but games...then, Microsoft said "Hey, lets see what happens when we enable them to mess around with it and use it as a DVR and to stream shit" So, with the Xbox, they tried a little experiment...and guess what? A VERY VERY large number of people modified the Black and Green box to put linux on it (or a homebrew OS). MANY people. Granted, not nearly half of the owners did, but a large chunk did indeed do this.
So, Microsoft (and Sony) got smart...hey, why should these hackers get all the credit? Let's make it so that they can do all these things out of the box...that should help reduce piracy as well as fraudulent warranty requests due to people messing up their systems because they didn't know what to do...and while we are at it, let's create a market place where they can go to BUY stuff for their console.
Nintendo realized that not everyone would want or need this stuff, and so they said to themselves hey, let's do what we do best. Let's make a gaming system. Sure, just to keep up we will put in some stuff...but what? I GOT IT! Let's allow people to buy games from a long time ago! You know, things that will be really nostalgic for people...older games, back when fun was king!
See how much economic sense that makes? If all you want is to play games, buy a Wii. I mean after all, if you don't need all that extra functionality that you are paying for but will never use, what is the point of buying any other system this generation?
Unless of course you are sucked into the psuedo-political stance of being an *ahem* "fanboi"
I appreciate the phantom mod points;-)
To answer your question, if you can only afford one...buy the one that fits your needs or wants.
Do you want something that is simply a gaming system, something to just have fun with? Buy a Wii.
Do you want something that can play next-gen optical discs and has the capability of simple Linux operation without much trouble? Buy a PS3.
Do you want something that is a fantastic alternative to a Streaming PC Workhorse, while providing a rich online experience? Buy a 360.
Don't rely on someone elses assertion. My needs and wants are potentially VASTLY different from another person, just as yours are potentially vastly different from mine.
Let's face it folks. Call them what you want, someone who says "this console is better than another" this generation is a Grade A Nimrod (thank you calvin & hobbes)
Come on. This is like a movie critic trying to compare Dumb and Dumber with A Fistfull of Dollars...they are entirely different movies, just like each of the three new consoles have entirely different purposes.
The Wii is for those that want something new, something fresh. It is the perfect example that graphics don't always make the game...and frankly, while comparitavely the graphics are so-so, they are still quite nice. They have a deliberate 'Nintendo signature' feel to them, which personally I am very happy was not abandoned. If there is one thing to be said about any of Nintendo's previous consoles, it is that they were entirely unique on their own, and you KNOW when you are looking at something on a Nintendo System. Modern day technology meets retro gaming demand: fun above all else.
The PS3 is for those that want to be on the cutting edge. With it's ability to display 1080p, a next-gen optical disc format, and its configurability (read: simple Linux support), it just begs people to tinker with it. Sony's price is not just because the components are expensive, it is used as a method to bring in the drooling techies: if it is shiny, black, and expensive, it HAS to be cool. I for one am very excited to see certain next-gen entries in some series on the PS3...or have you all not thought about God of War 3?
The Xbox 360 is for those that want a sleek, integrated system. Because of Microsoft's hold on the general public in the form of operating systems, it makes it EXTREMELY easy for them to design the 360 in such a way that allows it to integrate seamlessly with your system. Streaming media, accessing files over the network without even needing to check out the instruction manual, slick shape, comfortable controller...the 360 screams 'chic geek'. While it lacks first-party supported Linux now, I can assure you with Microsoft's recent aquisition in the Linux market, it is only a matter of time before Linux on the 360 becomes a reality. And given the way the 360 can already integrate itself into your home network, imagine the fun that could be had...the infinite application availability for Windows with the customization capabilities and rock-solid operation of Linux. It will truly be a thing of beauty.
So this generation, I think all consoles win. They each are attempting to break into a different part of the market, and they all have succeeded tremendously.
All I ask of my fellow gamers is that they stop comparing Dumb and Dumber with A Fistfull of Dollars.
I remember I got in trouble for my 8th grade science project...it was a red box and a black box in one unit...I was damn proud of it too...
I know there are many good games for the dreamcast, and I know Time Stalkers comparitavely is not that great, but for some reason I just love it...I really cannot explain why...just something about it...
If it wasn't time stalkers, I would easily say Shenmue...graphics, story, etc. Reminds me of the early-mid 90's adventure games
Also, quake was HARDLY the first FPS. That would be Catacomb released back in 1989...look up Catacomb 3D on Wikipedia, that was released in '91
again, it's not an FPS, it's a third person shooter. Secondly, quake didn't use sprites because it was not 2D based (i.e. it wasen't using the BUILD engine) and third, for the same reason that people will watch a horror movie after seeing the original phantom of the opera from waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back when...different experiences.
as a side note, for every major system I have one game that I tell people they MUST buy.
SNES - Secret of Mana
Genesis - Kid Chameleon
N64 - Goldeneye
Dreamcast - Time Stalkers
Saturn - Die Hard Arcade
Xbox - Scrapland
PS2 - God of War
Gamecube - Metroid Prime
Xbox 360 - Gears of War
well to start, it isn't an FPS. It's a third person shooter.
I can't tell you why OTHERS find it so fun, so I will relay my own personal experiences with it.
To start, the way that the cover system is implemented gives it a greateer sense of realism...after all, you wouldn't just go standing behind a wall in a warzone...you would have your back to it and pop out...you would transfer from one cover to another, not just simply jog over to the next one...I suppose what I am trying to say is the strategies required to play the game succesfully are very different from your typical shooter in that if you do not utilize cover correctly, you WILL die.
Generally, I find graphics take a seat to gameplay and story, but in this case they help a LOT. They are done in such a grity, grimey way that when you finish playing you feel the need to wash your hands. It is a dirty, dirty game.
The reloading system adds alot too. When you mess up a reload and you see your char on screen cussing and getting slightly frantic...you start getting the same way. In the middle of a firefight when you are flanked/pinned down, being stuck with a jammed weapon (just like in real life) is one of the most heart-attack inducing moments you can imagine. There is a great sense of satisfaction and accomplishment with each enemy you take down. While some may cry foul about the AI, on the harder difficulties (not unlike Halo) things start getting really tough.
The char's are developed JUST ENOUGH for you to care about them, which is perfect considering it is supposed to be a trilogy. The first one sets it up, the second gives the backstory, the third concludes everything.
All things combined, it is plain fun. It isn't particularly revolutionary, it won't change HOW games are played or anything...but it will most likely change how much effort people put into games. I lack the vocabulary to describe to you how excited I am for the second and third installments.
Mad World, from Gary Jules
It ain't easy...that's why I DESPISE working out in the morning;-)
Frankly, I feel a bit stronger in the evening anyway, have the whole day to loosen up.
...on the situation. In keeping on topic with the article, in regards to software the same answer stands.
I LOVE having my choice of operating system. Do I want a fully customizable experience? Linux. Do I want something that looks slick and polished and runs smoothly? OSX. Do I want something that has out of the box functionality and a large amount of commercial software available for it? Windows.
The above applies to office software, database software, games, everything. By having more choices, I can get not only what I want, but what I NEED. The only time more choices become a BAD thing is when the uninformed/technophobe/technomoron makes a decision in what to go with..."I'm going to buy a mac because it looks slick!" Now he can't get the software or games that he wants. "I'm going to get Linux because it's free! Crap, why won't my wireless thingy work?" Now he doesn't know about Linux-specific drivers or even how to access his old data. "I'll get windows because it is readily available! Wait...whats this spyware thing..." Now he loses his bank account.
The problem isn't so much that there are too many choices, it's that people don't know what they are choosing, why they are choosing it, and what to do after they have chosen.
I do (comparitively) mild body building, and I did a little experiment.
For one month, I worked out at LEAST 6 hours prior to going to sleep. For the next month, I worked out no MORE than 1 hour prior to going to sleep. I showed a VERY noticable improvement when I worked out shortly before going to sleep as opposed to working out long before going to sleep.
It makes sense, if you think about it. Sleeping is like running your body on reduced (and in some people minimal) power...so instead of doing things like interpreting sight and sounds and tastes and touch and smells, you can spend those extra brain cycles repairing, regrowing, reorganizing, etc...
A good friend of mine who went on to be a neurosurgeon once said "sleeping is to your brain as defragmentation is to your hard drive"
so because a game ASKED you which way you would like to aim, it earns points? It's in the option menu...big deal.
Have to change weapons to throw a grenade? Really? Cause for PC shooters I usually just hit the "g" key (or g or h, if it is TFC)...oh and in case you missed it, in halo 2, if you are dual wielding you cannot throw a grenade...
I never said halo wasn't FUN, it was...it just wasn't anything new or revolutionary. You are of course entitled to your own opinion, but considering you started your LAN parties beginning with quake II...well, it's just showing your age, that's all (or lack thereof)
I would say that religion limits you further...with atheism, there is no limit to what you can discover...with religion, you discover as much as what is written in a book. A book which was written by men who thought the world was flat.
One of my favorite quotes of all time:
"God must be greater than the greatest of human weaknesses and, indeed, the greatest of human skill. God must even transcend our most remarkable-to emulate nature in its absolute splendor. How can any man or woman sin against such greatness of mind? How can one little carbon unit on Earth-in the backwaters of the Milky Way, the boondocks-betray God, ALMIGHTY? That is impossible. The height of arrogance is the height of control of those who create God in their own image."
beh, can't edit.
Anyway, in addition to what I said, the first entry in a trilogy is hardly the most interesting in terms of story...that is what the SECOND entry is for.
As for GoW having repetitive gameplay...fine I'll give you that. But at least it required some bit of tact...not to mention a bit more realism in a war-like situation (i.e. the whole cover system) Considering halo was supposed to be a trilogy, the first and second did VERY VERY little to make me look forward to the third game...I am, however, anticipating the second and third installment of gears of war with great fervor
Or maybe the people doing the reviews didn't buy into the halo hype...as in, maybe they were one of the people with a head on their shoulders.
Don't get me wrong, halo 1 and 2 were quite fun and all, but they were hardly revolutionary...compare them to PC shooters, and suddenly their graphics resemble games that came out 5 years prior to them...their stories horrible and canned and typical...their voice acting spotty...and quite frankly, their gameplay repetitive. Personally, I think the best thing halo had going for it was it's sound effects.
Still, in comparison to other shooters that were around at the same time, halo 1 and 2 did NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING that other games hadn't done ten times over. The CONSOLE fanbois (notice I didn't say microsoft) for some reason thought that they were a gift from god, when in fact they belonged in the bargain bin from the get-go
I wouldn't consider myself a fanboy of any company...sure I have preferences, but when all is said and done whatever in my mind works best is what I will use, regardless of who makes it or distributes it. Now, normally I would be one of the first people to defend microsoft, but in this instance...well...a big ol' loogie that has yet to be formed will have their company logo on it. Insofar as what this article refers to and about what has been publically said, I don't believe Microsoft has ever made a bigger mistake in their entire history
Maybe I was a little misleading...I meant not nearly what they used to be. Yes, Konami and Capcom are still around, and yes they still have a couple tricks up their sleeves, but there is no way you can sit there and tell me with a straight face they have nearly as deep of a market penetration or string of instant classics like they did in the mid 80's-90's
You forgot Alpha and Cray:-) Man...remember the fight between the Rendition and 3dfx? LMFAO I remember getting into a fistfight with my friends when the monster 3d and the rendition verite first came out (I was younger and stupider then lol) Hell, I remember when the top of the line falcon mach V 200 MHz pentium was going for like 4,000 bucks... You also forgot to mention Tandy, that was another big one...Also TI, I know texas instruments is still around, but not NEARLY in the same capacity that they used to be
how all the old huge developers of yesteryear are dissapearing or becoming steaming piles of shit? Old sierra, activision, electronic arts, midway, konami, capcom...the list goes on. These people used to be at the very pinnacle of gaming in any form...now they are either dissapeared or corrupted into crap. I wonder where gaming will be and what companies will be carrying it in 20 years...
I think george carlin originally said that way back when...I could be mistaken, but I think it was on the "Class Clown" album
Point taken, past tense...I should have been more specific. Recent-gen consoles tend to have more problems (like you mentioned) 360 had/has it's overheating and red light issues, ps3 has some small scaling issues and some seemingly heating issues (which we will see if those remain in retail units)...my prediction is that if the wii has any problems, it will be with the remote connecting to that bar you put on top of the tv (or wherever) Personally, I hope all three consoles do very very well. 360 seems geared towards a more tech-savvy crowd (what with it's networking integration with XP media edition), the ps3 sort of a central entertainment hub for content, games, and movies, and the wii with innovation andsomething to make you scratch your head. Each console has it's own purpose and demographic, and with any luck they will do well for all of them. For the record, next to the NES and SNES, the Dreamcast was the best system EVER.
I didn't mean this specific problem, I meant no matter what console it is, ALL consoles have at least some kind of issue or bug when they are launched...it's to be expected, really. It works just like how it works with a car: No amount of testing will equal the same as real world use, if for no other reason other than because people use and abuse things differently than others. I'm sure the Wii's problems will have to do with connectivity between the controller and the box. You heard it here first.
...the problems that plauge all consoles at launch. I really hope the PS3 makes it...While I preferred Xbox over the PS2, there were some PS2 games that were AMAZING (Ico, Katamari Damacy, God of War, FF series, etc.) I hope all three consoles do fantastic, and I plan on eventually owning all three.