"No fanboys are better. They tend to use lots of capital letters for no good reason"
Nice, and you just use blanket statements.
("For no good reason." That's funny. You're right I picked a few random words and made them capitalized for no good reason.)
I'm glad to see you're capable of pointing out something which has absolutely nothing to do with what we're talking about as if that some how makes you look smart.
Then you turn around and basically agree with what I just said. Nice.
Oh and I wouldn't blame Sony's success on marketing I'm sure Nintendo's stupidity around the time of the N64 had more to do with it than anything.
I agree with everything you said and I would like to add something
Playstation 2 being by far the least powerfull consol this generation is also by far the #1 consol this generation.
I'm not sure what makes people think it all comes down to hardware specs. They've never made a difference in the past on any console so why whould they make a difference now?
Just because somebody wants to keep something a secret doesn't mean they don't have something to show at all.
Sony isn't much further behind than Nintendo. They're not even sure which blu-ray drive they're going to use yet and last I heard their video card AND CPU were NOT ready yet.
In fact Nintendo fan boys have calmed down A LOT over the past few years. I remember when it use to be a lot worse.
I'm sick of people running around throwing these numbers around for next gen consoles as if these people actually know what these numbers mean and as if these numbers actually mean ANYTHING about REAL WORLD performance. Oh and completely forgetting that these numbers mean NOTHING about how well the console will do.
Tell me, if fast numbers mean so much why is the PS2 the #1 console by a LONG SHOT when it's what.. half the speed of the gamecube (comparing numbers) and MUCH slower than the XBox?
It's easily the worst console out right now as far as performance yet it's #1. Go figure.
So why do Sony fanboys think these numbers are so important this time around when they meant NOTHING last time around?
Sure but Nintendo isn't any worse off now than they were when Sony whooped them with the Playstation so I honestly don't think the XBox made any kind of real impact.
People in the states just prefer a different kind of game than what Nintendo has to offer and Sony happens to have all of the 3rd party developers Nintendo use to have.
I'm willing to bet most of the people who switched to XBoxes were previously Playstation fans, not Nintendo fans. I didn't like the N64 OR the PS1 (I was much more into computer games at that time). I got the PS2 for GT3 and loved it. I got the XBox next because it had more multiplayer stuff and finally I got a GameCube and haven't looked back.
Most of my friends who are XBox fans were Playstaiton fans and PS2 fans first. Me and my bro were always the only Nintendo fans out of all of our friends.
(I was a huge nes, snes and sega fan in the day but when Wolf3d, doom, warcraft2 came out I quickly got into computer games)
Also what goes around comes around. Sony will get it handed to them one day just like Nintendo did.
Bullshit. I'm a Nintendo supporter and I pay close attention to what other Nintendo supporters say and I've never seen a claim of the Revo having better graphics.
Those other quotes are things Nintendo said, not Nintendo fans.
Which makes it funny that you say...
"big N ain't said nothing"
Except for 90% of the crap you just quoted.
"Well, where are the facts?"
Yeah, no shit. Where are the facts dip shit? Where are the facts for any of the next Gen console. Raise your hand if you have facts people come on I dare you. At this point all we have to go on is what the companies are telling us.
What Nintendo has told us thus far is no more factual than what Sony has told us OR what Microsoft has told us.
And don't give me this crap about what Nintendo HASNT told us.
Does it really fucking matter? You're not going to buy a Revolution anyway so why the fuck do you care?
I can play battlefield 2 in high res on my 3ghz PC with 1gb ram and it looks GREAT I don't really except next gen consoles to get TOO much better then that. So tell me where having 3x 3.5ghz is really going to come into play?
If Nintendo has 1x 3.5ghz I'll be fucking happy and I'm sure us Nintendo fans could really give a shit what people like you think.
I'm pretty sure that comment wasn't for real. You can't believe everything you see online you know. I saw it posted one place and then it spread like wild fire. That doesn't make it a true quote.
And if the quote IS for real then perhaps Nintendo is quoting REAL WORLD NUMBERS and not the BS that MS and Sony are throwing around.
~3x is probably a realistic number for ALL of the next generation consoles.
Do you really honestly believe that just because the numbers are 30x faster that the console will be 30x faster? Is 3ghz REALLY 3x faster than 1ghz?
Are we no longer taking into account bottle necks?
What about the fact that most console programers probably don't have a whole ton of experience writing code for multiple cpus?
er sorry to go off like that because I know you're not trolling so none of this is really directed at you. I just hate it when people talk about these numbers as if it has any basis on reality.
What makes you think the PS3 hardware will be any faster? oh because it has bigger numbers? Use your brain much? So what's faster a 2ghz intel or a 2ghz AMD? What's faster 3 1ghz chips or 1 3ghz chip?
I will agree with one thing though that I forgot about. Sony has games like GTA, GT and FF. All of which I'm personally bored of (none of them have seen any significant new changes to keep me interested) but they're still huge and that's probably what will help sony win out.
Why are you posting anon? Seems to me you're the one trolling. Have a nice day
As much as I would like to see the PS3 do well over the 360 I just can't see it.
I honestly think the Revolution has an easier time in Japan than the PS3 because of the fact that the PS3 is bigger and heavier than the current XBox and to top it off it's going to be expensive. The Revolution is going to be cheaper, small as hell and light. That's perfect for the Japanese market.
In America the XBox will be coming out much earlier, provides plenty of power and will be much cheaper (if the $300 price tag is correct). Why wouldn't it do well other then the fact that the Playstation has the Sony name backing it?
Personally I'd like to see the PS3 be #1 and the Revolution to just keep doing what Nintendo does best. Keep their fans happy, and convert more non-gamers and casual gamers to Nintendo fans.
I just can't see my self spending over $350-$450 or whatever the PS3 is going to cost so even though I'm more of a PS fan I'll probably end up going with an XBox. (and of course a revo at its lower price theres no real reason not too plus i love nintendo)
er I mean you either like the game or you don't but I don't honestly think the way it plays is debatable I think they did it exactly how it should be done and if you don't like it then you don't like it end of story and for people who want to call prime an FPS well they obviously have never played metroid before because it's not a shooter and there for is not an FPS.
no matter how well done the first two were (which is debatable).
No. I don't think it is debatable. For being in a first person view they were absolutely perfect.
People who don't like them are either not real Metroid fans or are people who wanted the game to be something it's not. It isn't an FPS where you just run around and randomly destroy enemies. Metroid was never about that, and the prime games do an excelent job of putting the old metroid games into a first person view.
On the other hand I would love another super metroid like game. I do love the side scrolling versions (love the GBA ones too) but to completely dismiss Metroid Prime because it doesn't play like Halo is complete rubbish.
price per hour on Nintendo's multi-player games is excelent. I didn't pay much more than $30 bucks(used) for my copy of SSMB, Mario Golf etc etc and they've seen more playing hours than probably every game for every system in the house combined.
I can honestly say I'm sick of SSMB now.
I can't wait until the new mario baseball game comes out it looks sweet.
Online haters? Jesus christ get over your self. Please do us a favor and point out all of these online haters? Just because somebody is a Nintendo fan or sympathizes with Nintendo's decision not to support online play on the GameCube does NOT make them an online hater.
Also, online gaming is not unique to the xbox OR the ps2 and you are not special because you have xbox live.
I personally think Nintendo did the right thing as far as business decisions go.
It looks to me like Nintendo picked the perfect time to launch an online gaming service.
The fact that it's free is a plus too. That means casual gamers who might not want to pay for online gaming won't be left out.
I'm still confused about the online hater thing though. I read quite a few forums and gaming related sites and I can't honestly say I've seen many people who hate online gaming at least not for any Nintendo related reasons.
Uhm they're one of the only game companies who made a profit this quarter. Sony, EA, Microsoft... All lost money.. Lots of money.
Nintendo didn't much for games this quarter and they STILL made a profit.
During the next few months they'll have a TON of hit games coming out.. Zelda anybody? Jump Super Stars already has over 200,000 pre-orders in Japan for the DS.
I want to mod this up because you're right on, but for some reason my mod points aren't working on anything except the parent posts.. Freakin slashdot.
Not only that can anybody name ONE profitable division in Sony? Movies maybe? I thought it was the game division that was keeping them alive in the first place. Aren't they billions in debt?
Instead of buying a memory stick you'd rather pay $100-$150 more for the console(depending on when you got it)?
I do agree with your point about the xbox, that's the same reason I got it too.
In fact I didn't buy a gamecube for my self until after my PS2 and XBox were stolen. I haven't had any desire to re-buy them (especially the PS2 which I've already had to buy 3+ of because they keep fucking breaking)
Slashdot Mirror
"No fanboys are better. They tend to use lots of capital letters for no good reason"
Nice, and you just use blanket statements.
("For no good reason." That's funny. You're right I picked a few random words and made them capitalized for no good reason.)
I'm glad to see you're capable of pointing out something which has absolutely nothing to do with what we're talking about as if that some how makes you look smart.
Then you turn around and basically agree with what I just said. Nice.
Oh and I wouldn't blame Sony's success on marketing I'm sure Nintendo's stupidity around the time of the N64 had more to do with it than anything.
I agree with everything you said and I would like to add something
Playstation 2 being by far the least powerfull consol this generation is also by far the #1 consol this generation.
I'm not sure what makes people think it all comes down to hardware specs. They've never made a difference in the past on any console so why whould they make a difference now?
Just because somebody wants to keep something a secret doesn't mean they don't have something to show at all.
Sony isn't much further behind than Nintendo. They're not even sure which blu-ray drive they're going to use yet and last I heard their video card AND CPU were NOT ready yet.
Sony fanboys are so much better....NOT
In fact Nintendo fan boys have calmed down A LOT over the past few years. I remember when it use to be a lot worse.
I'm sick of people running around throwing these numbers around for next gen consoles as if these people actually know what these numbers mean and as if these numbers actually mean ANYTHING about REAL WORLD performance. Oh and completely forgetting that these numbers mean NOTHING about how well the console will do.
Tell me, if fast numbers mean so much why is the PS2 the #1 console by a LONG SHOT when it's what.. half the speed of the gamecube (comparing numbers) and MUCH slower than the XBox?
It's easily the worst console out right now as far as performance yet it's #1. Go figure.
So why do Sony fanboys think these numbers are so important this time around when they meant NOTHING last time around?
Sure but Nintendo isn't any worse off now than they were when Sony whooped them with the Playstation so I honestly don't think the XBox made any kind of real impact.
People in the states just prefer a different kind of game than what Nintendo has to offer and Sony happens to have all of the 3rd party developers Nintendo use to have.
I'm willing to bet most of the people who switched to XBoxes were previously Playstation fans, not Nintendo fans. I didn't like the N64 OR the PS1 (I was much more into computer games at that time). I got the PS2 for GT3 and loved it. I got the XBox next because it had more multiplayer stuff and finally I got a GameCube and haven't looked back.
Most of my friends who are XBox fans were Playstaiton fans and PS2 fans first. Me and my bro were always the only Nintendo fans out of all of our friends.
(I was a huge nes, snes and sega fan in the day but when Wolf3d, doom, warcraft2 came out I quickly got into computer games)
Also what goes around comes around. Sony will get it handed to them one day just like Nintendo did.
Bullshit. I'm a Nintendo supporter and I pay close attention to what other Nintendo supporters say and I've never seen a claim of the Revo having better graphics.
Those other quotes are things Nintendo said, not Nintendo fans.
Which makes it funny that you say...
"big N ain't said nothing"
Except for 90% of the crap you just quoted.
"Well, where are the facts?"
Yeah, no shit. Where are the facts dip shit? Where are the facts for any of the next Gen console. Raise your hand if you have facts people come on I dare you. At this point all we have to go on is what the companies are telling us.
What Nintendo has told us thus far is no more factual than what Sony has told us OR what Microsoft has told us.
And don't give me this crap about what Nintendo HASNT told us.
Does it really fucking matter? You're not going to buy a Revolution anyway so why the fuck do you care?
I can play battlefield 2 in high res on my 3ghz PC with 1gb ram and it looks GREAT I don't really except next gen consoles to get TOO much better then that. So tell me where having 3x 3.5ghz is really going to come into play?
If Nintendo has 1x 3.5ghz I'll be fucking happy and I'm sure us Nintendo fans could really give a shit what people like you think.
I'm pretty sure that comment wasn't for real. You can't believe everything you see online you know. I saw it posted one place and then it spread like wild fire. That doesn't make it a true quote.
And if the quote IS for real then perhaps Nintendo is quoting REAL WORLD NUMBERS and not the BS that MS and Sony are throwing around.
~3x is probably a realistic number for ALL of the next generation consoles.
Do you really honestly believe that just because the numbers are 30x faster that the console will be 30x faster? Is 3ghz REALLY 3x faster than 1ghz?
Are we no longer taking into account bottle necks?
What about the fact that most console programers probably don't have a whole ton of experience writing code for multiple cpus?
er sorry to go off like that because I know you're not trolling so none of this is really directed at you. I just hate it when people talk about these
numbers as if it has any basis on reality.
"Wait and see is the only option."
Totally.
That sounds about right, but I just want to point out that the XBox had nothing to do with Nintendo loseing market share. It was all PS and PS2.
"As much as I would like to see the PS3 do well"
"Personally I'd like to see the PS3 be #1"
"I'm more of a PS fan"
Oh yeah, I'm such a fucking anti-playstation troll.
You're a genius.
I'm not trolling OR trying to be funny.
What makes you think the PS3 hardware will be any faster? oh because it has bigger numbers? Use your brain much? So what's faster a 2ghz intel or a 2ghz AMD? What's faster 3 1ghz chips or 1 3ghz chip?
I will agree with one thing though that I forgot about. Sony has games like GTA, GT and FF. All of which I'm personally bored of (none of them have seen any significant new changes to keep me interested) but they're still huge and that's probably what will help sony win out.
Why are you posting anon? Seems to me you're the one trolling. Have a nice day
As much as I would like to see the PS3 do well over the 360 I just can't see it.
I honestly think the Revolution has an easier time in Japan than the PS3 because of the fact that the PS3 is bigger and heavier than the current XBox and to top it off it's going to be expensive. The Revolution is going to be cheaper, small as hell and light. That's perfect for the Japanese market.
In America the XBox will be coming out much earlier, provides plenty of power and will be much cheaper (if the $300 price tag is correct). Why wouldn't it do well other then the fact that the Playstation has the Sony name backing it?
Personally I'd like to see the PS3 be #1 and the Revolution to just keep doing what Nintendo does best. Keep their fans happy, and convert more non-gamers and casual gamers to Nintendo fans.
I just can't see my self spending over $350-$450 or whatever the PS3 is going to cost so even though I'm more of a PS fan I'll probably end up going with an XBox. (and of course a revo at its lower price theres no real reason not too plus i love nintendo)
Mario baseball looks pretty sweet as does Geist. I'm sure there are more but i dont feel like looking.
I suppose 11 days is too long to wait for geist? It's gone gold and comes out the 15th.
Luigi's mansion is HARDLY a typical mario game, and by hardly I mean in no way at all period end of story get a clue.
can't say much for the other games.
er I mean you either like the game or you don't but I don't honestly think the way it plays is debatable I think they did it exactly how it should be done and if you don't like it then you don't like it end of story and for people who want to call prime an FPS well they obviously have never played metroid before because it's not a shooter and there for is not an FPS.
no matter how well done the first two were (which is debatable).
No. I don't think it is debatable. For being in a first person view they were absolutely perfect.
People who don't like them are either not real Metroid fans or are people who wanted the game to be something it's not. It isn't an FPS where you just run around and randomly destroy enemies. Metroid was never about that, and the prime games do an excelent job of putting the old metroid games into a first person view.
On the other hand I would love another super metroid like game. I do love the side scrolling versions (love the GBA ones too) but to completely dismiss Metroid Prime because it doesn't play like Halo is complete rubbish.
That's my opinion like it or not.
price per hour on Nintendo's multi-player games is excelent. I didn't pay much more than $30 bucks(used) for my copy of SSMB, Mario Golf etc etc and they've seen more playing hours than probably every game for every system in the house combined.
I can honestly say I'm sick of SSMB now.
I can't wait until the new mario baseball game comes out it looks sweet.
Perhaps, but at the same time my paycheck has gotten a lot smaller and everything else has gotten a lot more expensive.
Tony Hawk and a new Bomberman to name two more. Not sure when the new bomberman comes out though.
Online haters? Jesus christ get over your self. Please do us a favor and point out all of these online haters? Just because somebody is a Nintendo fan or sympathizes with Nintendo's decision not to support online play on the GameCube does NOT make them an online hater.
9 518.html)
Also, online gaming is not unique to the xbox OR the ps2 and you are not special because you have xbox live.
I personally think Nintendo did the right thing as far as business decisions go.
Sony's online gaming isn't exactly taking over the world or anything and XBox live only just recently hit the 2 million mark which is DOUBLE what it had a year ago. (http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/07/20/news_612
It looks to me like Nintendo picked the perfect time to launch an online gaming service.
The fact that it's free is a plus too. That means casual gamers who might not want to pay for online gaming won't be left out.
I'm still confused about the online hater thing though. I read quite a few forums and gaming related sites and I can't honestly say I've seen many people who hate online gaming at least not for any Nintendo related reasons.
it's all in your head. there's always a lot of commercials.
Yeah I can't stand stuff that requires even the smallest amounts of brain power to understand either.
Uhm they're one of the only game companies who made a profit this quarter. Sony, EA, Microsoft... All lost money.. Lots of money.
Nintendo didn't much for games this quarter and they STILL made a profit.
During the next few months they'll have a TON of hit games coming out.. Zelda anybody? Jump Super Stars already has over 200,000 pre-orders in Japan for the DS.
How is nintendo NOT doing fine, fucktard?
I want to mod this up because you're right on, but for some reason my mod points aren't working on anything except the parent posts.. Freakin slashdot.
Not only that can anybody name ONE profitable division in Sony? Movies maybe? I thought it was the game division that was keeping them alive in the first place. Aren't they billions in debt?
Instead of buying a memory stick you'd rather pay $100-$150 more for the console(depending on when you got it)?
I do agree with your point about the xbox, that's the same reason I got it too.
In fact I didn't buy a gamecube for my self until after my PS2 and XBox were stolen. I haven't had any desire to re-buy them (especially the PS2 which I've already had to buy 3+ of because they keep fucking breaking)