I'll just get branded fan-boy for this, but I don't think the PSP is any better looking than the SP or DS... Only difference is the PSP seems to have a slightly nicer screen and is black.
Actually, I agree. If the PSP is 'teh Sexy'... then apparently it just isn't my type. I like the sleek industrial design of the DS Lite over the PSP, and even taking the games out of consideration (which we know is the reason to buy one in the first place) I simply think the DS Lite is a much better design.
The GBA SP won me over for having (drumroll please) a clamshell design. Despite having an inferior D-Pad to the original GBA, My screen wouldn't get scratched up, and worn out (I replaced a few screen covers). So I went to an SP. Then upgraded to the DS (Phat), although like the PSP, or my original B&W Gameboy it was large, and didn't fit into many of my pockets. It was simply less portable. Now the DS Lite hits all points for me, with a clamshell design great D-Pad, and small enough to fit in (just about) all my pockets for travel.
By the same token, there are going to be some awesome games for the Wii that could never work on the 360 or PS3 by nature of design.
Unfortunately, that won't prevent developers from trying. Rayman Raving Rabbits is now multiplatform, and for the life of me I can't imagine how that would work with a "regular controler".
Almost everyone agrees that the controller for the Wii is a leap forward in terms of interacting with a game. Why has a similar product from MSFT or Sony not been released? Figure it would have been done by now. Are there patent issues? ~Matthew
Actually they both have respective patents for thier own Wiimote solution, the issue is now 'Default configuration' vs 'Mee-Too add on'. Developers can make games for the limited owners of that periferial (like making games for the Eye Toy) or they can make it compatible with the 'Default equiptment' that came with the system.
Sony and MS will likley go the Wiimote route with their next systems but at that point it's still too late. People are looking for the Wii, not a 'Motion controller' much in the same way that people shop for an 'iPod' not an 'MP3 player'. Conversely, Nintendo can carry over all their 'new casual customers' with a 'Wii HD' in the future.
Let me guess, you thought it was too easy right? I had the same feeling playing the first few games of Tennis (alone), then on a whim I picked it up again and played some more. The Computer AI does ramp up, so you will hit a level of competitiveness where spin, and ball control really matter a lot more.
Also WiiSports (Like Mario Kart) is fun single player, but gets exponentially more fun with every controler / person you add to the game. If you only put 20 minutes into say Wii tennis and single player I can understand your feelings. If you played longer, or with a few people then I think you would feel differently.
Uh what? You can download any of the games/demos/XBLA games without paying a cent to Microsoft for Live. What are you referring to?
Yeah, a lot of people keep forgetting about that. Gold supplies you with Online multiplayer, voice communication, and 'early access' to new content (like the C&C3 Demo. Gold members get first crack at it) People keep forgetting that 'Silver' even exists. MS made that level (if nothing else) so users would have access to their on-line store.
And games aren't inherintly 'gimped' without paying for Gold. Guitar Hero II, or Oblivion play just as well if you have Gold or Silver with all the features intact.
The virtual console is another big reason I bought a Wii.. I wanted to get all of the Zelda games playable on one system.
Currently that is only possible on the GameCube with the Gameboy player. The 'Zelda Collection' Disk for the GC has both NES games, and both N64 Games. Lttp, was released for GBA, There is another 'Celda' (Minish cap) for the GBA, as well as 3 Gameboy Color games, and obviously the 2 GC games. So in 1 hearty machine you can buy / play all zelda games available right now.
The VC is currently sporting (in America) the Original Zelda, lttp, and OoT. Of course you can still play all the GC ones natively (including the collection) so you would only be missing the portable ones.
Don't get me started on the CD-i Zeldas... They Never happened...
From a technical point of view, I figured with the power of the Wii they basically just wrote lean emulator for each system and would be selling the original roms + some kind of DRM. Is that the case, or are they literally taking the original games and recompiling with some kind of Wii wrapper?
My guess is they are tweaking the emulator on a game by game basis. They aren't recompiled, but there is an electronic manual included in each one, and various tweaks that may or may not be in the original (such as Mario 64 now running in progressive scan). It is more involved than dropping a ROM into a computer emulator, but a lot less involved than recompiling each game.
Nintendo has tapped a broader demographic of casual gamers, but what can they buy? Most of the games out now (at retail, and VC) are still catering to the hardcore...
Are you kidding? Wii Sports, Wii Play, Wario Ware, Sonic, etc.
Perhaps we have a differnent definition of 'Casual', so let me clarify mine. Think AARP . Sonic, doesn't come under the radar at all. Wario Ware may get played, but would have to be introduced. It's nothing that they would pick up on their own (Same with Rayman). Here's my real life example. I'm a gamer, and I love the Wii (got one at launch). My (retired) parents saw a commercial for it and my mom (who loved tennis, but now has bad knees) said 'I'd like to try tennis' and I brought it over to their house for Thanksgiving. They loved it. They are as non-gamer as can be, (the hardly even play solitaire, or anything on the computer) but they really enjoyed Tennis, Bowling and Golf. They enjoyed it so much that I got them one for Christmas.
So far they have 3 games WiiSports, WiiPlay, and of all the games that have been released in the last 6 months, the only one that really interested either one of them was Tiger Woods. My dad golfs, so he picked that up. It's a game he knows, with a Brand he's familiar with. What's next? Dunno. WiiMusic?, WiiFitness? Both Q4. Big Brain Academy MAY work, but Brain Age (IMHO) would be better. Ironically, the VC's selection is worse.
A quick glace at all the VC games available , The most 'Casual friendly' game on the list (Pacman) isn't even out in the US yet. Where is SuDoKu? or Crossword Puzzle games? Of the Afore mentioned VC list, what games would you recommend? Keep in mind they don't have (and likely will never have) Gamecube, or 'Classic' controllers.
its the games thats the money maker, not the console itself...
At this point in time BC is a bone they throw to early adopters. If someone wanted to buy a PS2 game (and don't own a PS2 or PS3), the PS3 is hardly a consideration due to the massive price differential. $130 new vs. $600 new? That's a no brainer. BC only helps drive sales of the new platform (to play old games) when the prices are closer. Say if you wanted to play a PS1 game right now (and don't own a PS1 or PS2), you could buy a $50 PS1 or a $130 PS2 either might be considered.
I hope you don't mind me re-arranging your thoughts so it flows better with my rebuttal.
If they did a game like Thief for the Wii I might sign up. I don't know if ports of "mature" aka lots of blood and killing will help the Wii.
I disagree with the use of the term 'Mature' myself, but the common use of a 'Mature game' in video games implies something along the lines of Grand Theft Auto which is rated 'Mature'; rather than a game like 'Hotel Dusk' which is targeting a demographic that I would deam 'Mature'. To clarify for the sake of this discussion 'Mature' is in reference to games that include excessive violence, explosions, blood, gore and tits (not the birds).
Need what people like to call mature games. We need fun games and yes maybe some very different games.
Vice City, no thanks.
Honestly, I would like a GTA on Wii. Not for me personally, but there is a long list of games I don't play (Final Fantasy, Pokemon, Metal Gear Solid) that have huge followings and if they are on a platform it can only help promote it. If there is a Manhunt, or Bully, on the platform (that I won't buy), then maybe someday there will be a game like Max Payne 3 (that I will buy), because the developer has brought their audiance over to that platform.
There is very little that the Wii can bring to one of those games that you can not get with a 360 or PS3.
Of that I can only disagree. Play the Godfather on the PS2 or PS3, then play it on the Wii. You can physically grab someone, and slam them to a wall, punch them, or smash them with a baseball bat all with motion controls, as well as aiming your gun with the remote's IR function. These aren't just afterthoughts tacked on. These elements pull you into the game and involve you in a new way. The Wii offers an 'experiance' you cannot duplicate on any other system.
I for one have 4 controllers, and 2 nunchucks. It's a little hard to dodge others playing tennis in 4 player mode, but great fun:) My wife and I have been renting some Wii games to see what we like, and so far we're going to buy Raving Rabbids for sure, and probably godfather.
If you Golf, try Tiger Woods. It isn't perfect, nor does it offer 1:1 mapped controls like WiiSports Golf, but it is very good, and really addictive.
Do any of those non-gamers buy VC games, though? I know if I had a Wii, that's where most of my game dollars would go until I could get the real Wii games for a little cheaper. $50/game might look good next to the other consoles, but "non-gamers" probably still see it as steep - $5-10 for a VC game, though, is just what they're looking for, with nostalgia to boot.
Actually, Gamers tend to complain about the price of VC games, where non-gamers don't.
"Why pay $8 for this game I beat 10 years ago?" vs. "Wow. This game is REALLY good, and it's only $8?"
It's kind of funny...if you listen to Major Nelson's podcasts, he often talks about the Wii and DS games he's playing along with his 360 games. He never really mentions his PS3 playing habits, though...
It's true, though. There's only a finite amount of money that can/will be spent on games, and if people are buying DS games, they can't use that money on Wii games. If people aren't buying Wii games, publishers are less likely to invest in producing new Wii games.
Nintendo still gets paid, but it's harder to establish a new line if sales are being lost to another platform (even your own).
Welcome to Sony's dilema. The PS2 needs to stick around because it's the only thing making them money right now, but its' longevity doesn't help the PS3 get adopted as a platform.
So you compare the MSRP, the price at retail, to a scalper's price. Now that's solid evidence. Try comparing apples to apples. 400 to 250, 62.5% of the price, or half the price of the PS3.
Actually it would be 'Less than half' the price of a PS3. Since Sony discontinued the 20 gig model, the Wii is now ~42% of the PS3's price (and it comes with a game).
We also play casual games on both platforms, but we both prefer the new games (like Boom Boom Rocket, Cloning Clyde, Zuma, etc) on XBLA much more than the old stuff on VC.
Which has me baffled. The 360 is much LESS 'casual player' friendly than the Wii, Yet XBLA has much more Casual friendly titles than the VC. I have a Wii60 myself, and While the 360 has networked Hearts, Uno, Poker... Even Pac Man!... come on Nintendo where is the Sudoku game, or Dr. Mario, or Poker, or a 'Crossword Puzzle game' something, anything even universal staples like pacman / frogger would be great.
Personally, I love the classics on the VC, and I'm one of the few people I know who thinks they are fairly priced (IF you don't think Zelda: lttp, Donkey Kong Country or Gunstar heroes are worth $8 each you're crazy.), but what about say, my retired parents?
Nintendo has tapped a broader demographic of casual gamers, but what can they buy? Most of the games out now (at retail, and VC) are still catering to the hardcore...
There's also a complete other segment that the game developers missed, and that's the rail shooter. Rayman had a small sample of it, and that was arguably the best part of the game.
Agreed. As far as the games themselves, I enjoyed the on-rails shooting the best in Rayman. The game was fun, and funny, but I kept going back to that part. I honestly think Red Steel would have worked better as an Arcade Style on rails shooter than a FPS. Had they gone that route instead I'm sure it would have played alot better.
On a side note... Where are the gun games for the VC? Duck Hunt, and Hogan's Alley were rated by the ESRB since January... Where are they at?
I didn't think though that God of War 2 was going to be such a blockbuster... I guess that's a testament to how popular the PS2 and God of War
What was it's competition though? No denying it would have sold plenty anyway, but even if you owned every console what games were competing with it? If they were released against a top tier title then you would have seen a very different picture.
Anyone who has had a Wii since launch, like I have, is now probably feeling that there's a bit of a "drought" of new games. The most noteworthy release has been "Cooking Mama", which no manly man would admit to owning.
But now it's up to third parties to exploit the console. I personally feel very bored of Zelda and Mario, and I really hope that third parties see the huge potential in this thing and adjust their platform objectives accordingly.
Meaning - bring on the "adult" games, people! It's ridiculous that so far, only EA has released a decent port of an old game (The Godfather).
The issue is timing. Publishers want to get out to market fast, with a sizeable 'Mature game' but that takes time.
That's why for now we have to be content with: Godfather, Scarface, & RE4 for now, and RE:UC, No more heroes and Manhunt for later.
Say what you will about the Godfather, but I like it. The motion controls make it better, and it's a good looking game (real good by say X-box standards) and it is a very big game. Vice City wasn't created in a day, and it will take some time for these new original properties to get made for the Wii.
Again, you are ignoring what I'm saying. If you add components to the XBox 360 to make the feature sets equivalent then the PS3 is the cheaper solution and more elegant since it is a bundled into a single package
I'm not ignoring what you are saying, I'm just disagreeing with your assuptions. If you are buying a Video game console you are generally buying it for the purpose of playing video games (PS3 being a potential exception since Blu-Ray players are inflated in price currently). So if you want to buy a 'current console' your cheapest options are $250 for a Wii, $325 for a 360 Core + memory card, or $600 for a PS3. If you DO want all those extra features that the PS3 tout then it is cheaper than buying them peice meal, but for the core feature of playing video games, you don't NEED them so they shouldn't be added into the equation. Nobody says the PS3 is cheaper than the Wii because you would need to buy a stand alone HD movie player to match it's feature set (the Wii already has internal storage, a card reader and Wifi), so why add that cost to the 360?
Let's try a different example. Someone (who doesn't play video games) wants to buy either a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player for their TV. They are older, and look at video game controllers with indifference. They have zero interest in playing video games.
They are looking at the Samsungs, Toshiba (HD-DVD), and the PS3. They only consider the PS3 since it is comparable in price (or cheaper) than other Blu-Ray players on the market. They wouldn't be looking at the 360 + HD-DVD player combo because there are dedicated players that meet all their needs for less money. The 'Video game playing' Feature doesn't have any value to them, so they could get away with an HD-DVD player for about $300-$350 or a PS3 simply because it is one of the lowest cost Blu-Ray players now. Depending on their movie / studio preferences.
I'll agree that if you want every single feature on offer than the PS3 is cheaper than buying them ala carte for the 360, but if you don't care for even one or 2 of those features then you are still cheaper with the 360, and it looks like for the core function of 'playing video games' the 360 will always be cheaper than the PS3.
It would make it comparable because it syncs up their feature sets. Comparing the core XBox 360 with the PS3 is like comparing a Honda Accord with a lamborghini. You have to compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges.
Ok, I need a mode of transportation to work. I need to use it to transport groceries. I live in America where the maximum posted speed limit is 75 mph. Which is a better solution?
You're right, someone who wants just the base features has the right to choose that. And it is a nice feature of the XBox 360. But having the two consoles be comparable requires adding the additional components to the 360. So, if you want a system that isn't gimped and has all of the features, the PS3 is the cheaper and more elegant solution.
What if you place no value in some of those 'features'? You can only make that comparison if all those features are wanted, or needed in a video game system. Do you want/need Wi-Fi? HD Movies? A card reader? Some want all, some want none. If the you buy a video game system for the puropse of playing Video games, then the $300 CORE 360 is just as viable a solution as the $600 PS3. Both (for example) will play Grand Theft Auto IV, and each version will look & play comparably.
If I want to play Guitar Hero II on the 360. It would cost me (minimum) $325 for the system + the cost of the game.
If I want to play MotorStorm on the PS3 it now costs (minimum) of $600 for the system + the cost of the game.
So for $275 dollars I will be getting extra features that may or may not be of value to me. That's why many gamers want a PS3 with a DVD drive. They don't value Blu-Ray, and don't want to buy it.
I'd personally be happy if EA had nothing to do with Nintendo consoles. They just shovel out shitty sports games, rehashes, and half-assed ports.
Saddly then you would be missing some great Wii games. Madden 07 (for the Wii) is exceptional, and both the Godfather and Tiger Woods are eating up lots of my free time. In fact, I suggest getting Tiger and the Godfather at the same time. I'm stuck on Jim Furyk in the Tiger Challenge, and each time I lose to him I throw in the Godfather so I can throttle someone with Full Motion controls.
If only I could import him into the Godfather game directly... It would be much more satisfying, and I wouldn't mind losing as much.
You know, Jack Thompson is probably the best thing for the Video Game industry right now; and I'm not convinced he's not on Take Two's payroll already. Can you imagine what a competant lawyer could do? They could take the rampant paranoia of lawmakers who are uneducated (about video games) and get video games regulated in a manner that wouldn't be turned over by the courts.
Jack is actually our best friend because he's such a wack job that these things get overturned and set a precident for future legislation.
The PS3 is $600 and includes a 60GB HDD, wireless and wired networking, and a blue-ray HD player... The XBox 360 is $400 with only a 20GB HDD and to make it comparable to the PS3 you must buy a wireless adapter ($90.00), and an HD-DVD player. This brings the XBox 360 price up to $680. In addition the online play is not free ($40 for a year subscription), it is prone to overheating so an intercooler is almost a must (NYKO Intercooler $15)...
That wouldn't make it comparable, it only serves to make the PS3 look cheaper. It's like comparing a base $500 PS3 to a Wii and saying the Wii is more expensive because 'To really use it you have to buy 3 remotes, 3 nunchucks, 4 Classic controllers, a 2 Gig SD card, The Lan adapter, Component cables and 4 Wavebirds...'
Not everyone who buys a 360 wants all the accessories you mentioned, nor are they required. An X-Box 360 Core system is $299 and comes with composite cables (just like the $600 PS3) and you can buy a 64 meg memory card for $25 if you want to play games in SD. $325 + tax and you are done*.
Since Sony announced they are discontinuing the $500 version there IS no cheaper version of the PS3 anymore. If you want to play a PS3 game you MUST pay $600 and have all those things included because there is no other option.
If you want every other accessory then yes it is more expensive than buying it bundled, but then you have the choice of whether to buy it or not. Think of it this way, not everyone bought the network jack for the PS2 for Free online gaming, nor did they all buy the Multi-tap. Not everyone needed, or wanted them.
* Yes, the HDD is nice, but since it was optional VERY few games require it. It is still feasable for someone to live without it. The largest single save file I have on my 360 is 4 megs (DeadRising), the smallest is 60k (Gears of War) Most games I found were 400k or less per save so you can fit ALOT of game saves on the smallest/cheapest card.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I agree. If the PSP is 'teh Sexy'... then apparently it just isn't my type. I like the sleek industrial design of the DS Lite over the PSP, and even taking the games out of consideration (which we know is the reason to buy one in the first place) I simply think the DS Lite is a much better design.
The GBA SP won me over for having (drumroll please) a clamshell design. Despite having an inferior D-Pad to the original GBA, My screen wouldn't get scratched up, and worn out (I replaced a few screen covers). So I went to an SP. Then upgraded to the DS (Phat), although like the PSP, or my original B&W Gameboy it was large, and didn't fit into many of my pockets. It was simply less portable. Now the DS Lite hits all points for me, with a clamshell design great D-Pad, and small enough to fit in (just about) all my pockets for travel.
Unfortunately, that won't prevent developers from trying. Rayman Raving Rabbits is now multiplatform, and for the life of me I can't imagine how that would work with a "regular controler".
Actually they both have respective patents for thier own Wiimote solution, the issue is now 'Default configuration' vs 'Mee-Too add on'. Developers can make games for the limited owners of that periferial (like making games for the Eye Toy) or they can make it compatible with the 'Default equiptment' that came with the system.
Sony and MS will likley go the Wiimote route with their next systems but at that point it's still too late. People are looking for the Wii, not a 'Motion controller' much in the same way that people shop for an 'iPod' not an 'MP3 player'. Conversely, Nintendo can carry over all their 'new casual customers' with a 'Wii HD' in the future.
Let me guess, you thought it was too easy right? I had the same feeling playing the first few games of Tennis (alone), then on a whim I picked it up again and played some more. The Computer AI does ramp up, so you will hit a level of competitiveness where spin, and ball control really matter a lot more.
Also WiiSports (Like Mario Kart) is fun single player, but gets exponentially more fun with every controler / person you add to the game. If you only put 20 minutes into say Wii tennis and single player I can understand your feelings. If you played longer, or with a few people then I think you would feel differently.
Yeah, a lot of people keep forgetting about that. Gold supplies you with Online multiplayer, voice communication, and 'early access' to new content (like the C&C3 Demo. Gold members get first crack at it) People keep forgetting that 'Silver' even exists. MS made that level (if nothing else) so users would have access to their on-line store.
And games aren't inherintly 'gimped' without paying for Gold. Guitar Hero II, or Oblivion play just as well if you have Gold or Silver with all the features intact.
Currently that is only possible on the GameCube with the Gameboy player. The 'Zelda Collection' Disk for the GC has both NES games, and both N64 Games. Lttp, was released for GBA, There is another 'Celda' (Minish cap) for the GBA, as well as 3 Gameboy Color games, and obviously the 2 GC games. So in 1 hearty machine you can buy / play all zelda games available right now.
The VC is currently sporting (in America) the Original Zelda, lttp, and OoT. Of course you can still play all the GC ones natively (including the collection) so you would only be missing the portable ones.
Don't get me started on the CD-i Zeldas... They Never happened...
My guess is they are tweaking the emulator on a game by game basis. They aren't recompiled, but there is an electronic manual included in each one, and various tweaks that may or may not be in the original (such as Mario 64 now running in progressive scan). It is more involved than dropping a ROM into a computer emulator, but a lot less involved than recompiling each game.
Thanks! How do I respond but keep the brackets in my text?
Perhaps we have a differnent definition of 'Casual', so let me clarify mine. Think AARP . Sonic, doesn't come under the radar at all. Wario Ware may get played, but would have to be introduced. It's nothing that they would pick up on their own (Same with Rayman). Here's my real life example. I'm a gamer, and I love the Wii (got one at launch). My (retired) parents saw a commercial for it and my mom (who loved tennis, but now has bad knees) said 'I'd like to try tennis' and I brought it over to their house for Thanksgiving. They loved it. They are as non-gamer as can be, (the hardly even play solitaire, or anything on the computer) but they really enjoyed Tennis, Bowling and Golf. They enjoyed it so much that I got them one for Christmas.
So far they have 3 games WiiSports, WiiPlay, and of all the games that have been released in the last 6 months, the only one that really interested either one of them was Tiger Woods. My dad golfs, so he picked that up. It's a game he knows, with a Brand he's familiar with. What's next? Dunno. WiiMusic?, WiiFitness? Both Q4. Big Brain Academy MAY work, but Brain Age (IMHO) would be better. Ironically, the VC's selection is worse.
A quick glace at all the VC games available , The most 'Casual friendly' game on the list (Pacman) isn't even out in the US yet. Where is SuDoKu? or Crossword Puzzle games? Of the Afore mentioned VC list, what games would you recommend? Keep in mind they don't have (and likely will never have) Gamecube, or 'Classic' controllers.
At this point in time BC is a bone they throw to early adopters. If someone wanted to buy a PS2 game (and don't own a PS2 or PS3), the PS3 is hardly a consideration due to the massive price differential. $130 new vs. $600 new? That's a no brainer. BC only helps drive sales of the new platform (to play old games) when the prices are closer. Say if you wanted to play a PS1 game right now (and don't own a PS1 or PS2), you could buy a $50 PS1 or a $130 PS2 either might be considered.
If they did a game like Thief for the Wii I might sign up. I don't know if ports of "mature" aka lots of blood and killing will help the Wii.
I disagree with the use of the term 'Mature' myself, but the common use of a 'Mature game' in video games implies something along the lines of Grand Theft Auto which is rated 'Mature'; rather than a game like 'Hotel Dusk' which is targeting a demographic that I would deam 'Mature'. To clarify for the sake of this discussion 'Mature' is in reference to games that include excessive violence, explosions, blood, gore and tits (not the birds).
Need what people like to call mature games. We need fun games and yes maybe some very different games. Vice City, no thanks.
Honestly, I would like a GTA on Wii. Not for me personally, but there is a long list of games I don't play (Final Fantasy, Pokemon, Metal Gear Solid) that have huge followings and if they are on a platform it can only help promote it. If there is a Manhunt, or Bully, on the platform (that I won't buy), then maybe someday there will be a game like Max Payne 3 (that I will buy), because the developer has brought their audiance over to that platform.
There is very little that the Wii can bring to one of those games that you can not get with a 360 or PS3.
Of that I can only disagree. Play the Godfather on the PS2 or PS3, then play it on the Wii. You can physically grab someone, and slam them to a wall, punch them, or smash them with a baseball bat all with motion controls, as well as aiming your gun with the remote's IR function. These aren't just afterthoughts tacked on. These elements pull you into the game and involve you in a new way. The Wii offers an 'experiance' you cannot duplicate on any other system.
If you Golf, try Tiger Woods. It isn't perfect, nor does it offer 1:1 mapped controls like WiiSports Golf, but it is very good, and really addictive.
Actually, Gamers tend to complain about the price of VC games, where non-gamers don't.
"Why pay $8 for this game I beat 10 years ago?" vs. "Wow. This game is REALLY good, and it's only $8?"
Has he ever mentioned having a PS3?
Nintendo still gets paid, but it's harder to establish a new line if sales are being lost to another platform (even your own).
Welcome to Sony's dilema. The PS2 needs to stick around because it's the only thing making them money right now, but its' longevity doesn't help the PS3 get adopted as a platform.
Actually it would be 'Less than half' the price of a PS3. Since Sony discontinued the 20 gig model, the Wii is now ~42% of the PS3's price (and it comes with a game).
Which has me baffled. The 360 is much LESS 'casual player' friendly than the Wii, Yet XBLA has much more Casual friendly titles than the VC. I have a Wii60 myself, and While the 360 has networked Hearts, Uno, Poker... Even Pac Man!... come on Nintendo where is the Sudoku game, or Dr. Mario, or Poker, or a 'Crossword Puzzle game' something, anything even universal staples like pacman / frogger would be great.
Personally, I love the classics on the VC, and I'm one of the few people I know who thinks they are fairly priced (IF you don't think Zelda: lttp, Donkey Kong Country or Gunstar heroes are worth $8 each you're crazy.), but what about say, my retired parents?
Nintendo has tapped a broader demographic of casual gamers, but what can they buy? Most of the games out now (at retail, and VC) are still catering to the hardcore...
Agreed. As far as the games themselves, I enjoyed the on-rails shooting the best in Rayman. The game was fun, and funny, but I kept going back to that part. I honestly think Red Steel would have worked better as an Arcade Style on rails shooter than a FPS. Had they gone that route instead I'm sure it would have played alot better.
On a side note... Where are the gun games for the VC? Duck Hunt, and Hogan's Alley were rated by the ESRB since January... Where are they at?
What was it's competition though? No denying it would have sold plenty anyway, but even if you owned every console what games were competing with it? If they were released against a top tier title then you would have seen a very different picture.
But now it's up to third parties to exploit the console. I personally feel very bored of Zelda and Mario, and I really hope that third parties see the huge potential in this thing and adjust their platform objectives accordingly.
Meaning - bring on the "adult" games, people! It's ridiculous that so far, only EA has released a decent port of an old game (The Godfather).
The issue is timing. Publishers want to get out to market fast, with a sizeable 'Mature game' but that takes time.
That's why for now we have to be content with: Godfather, Scarface, & RE4 for now, and RE:UC, No more heroes and Manhunt for later.
Say what you will about the Godfather, but I like it. The motion controls make it better, and it's a good looking game (real good by say X-box standards) and it is a very big game. Vice City wasn't created in a day, and it will take some time for these new original properties to get made for the Wii.
I'm not ignoring what you are saying, I'm just disagreeing with your assuptions. If you are buying a Video game console you are generally buying it for the purpose of playing video games (PS3 being a potential exception since Blu-Ray players are inflated in price currently). So if you want to buy a 'current console' your cheapest options are $250 for a Wii, $325 for a 360 Core + memory card, or $600 for a PS3. If you DO want all those extra features that the PS3 tout then it is cheaper than buying them peice meal, but for the core feature of playing video games, you don't NEED them so they shouldn't be added into the equation. Nobody says the PS3 is cheaper than the Wii because you would need to buy a stand alone HD movie player to match it's feature set (the Wii already has internal storage, a card reader and Wifi), so why add that cost to the 360?
Let's try a different example. Someone (who doesn't play video games) wants to buy either a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player for their TV. They are older, and look at video game controllers with indifference. They have zero interest in playing video games.
They are looking at the Samsungs, Toshiba (HD-DVD), and the PS3. They only consider the PS3 since it is comparable in price (or cheaper) than other Blu-Ray players on the market. They wouldn't be looking at the 360 + HD-DVD player combo because there are dedicated players that meet all their needs for less money. The 'Video game playing' Feature doesn't have any value to them, so they could get away with an HD-DVD player for about $300-$350 or a PS3 simply because it is one of the lowest cost Blu-Ray players now. Depending on their movie / studio preferences.
I'll agree that if you want every single feature on offer than the PS3 is cheaper than buying them ala carte for the 360, but if you don't care for even one or 2 of those features then you are still cheaper with the 360, and it looks like for the core function of 'playing video games' the 360 will always be cheaper than the PS3.
Ok, I need a mode of transportation to work. I need to use it to transport groceries. I live in America where the maximum posted speed limit is 75 mph. Which is a better solution?
You're right, someone who wants just the base features has the right to choose that. And it is a nice feature of the XBox 360. But having the two consoles be comparable requires adding the additional components to the 360. So, if you want a system that isn't gimped and has all of the features, the PS3 is the cheaper and more elegant solution.
What if you place no value in some of those 'features'? You can only make that comparison if all those features are wanted, or needed in a video game system. Do you want/need Wi-Fi? HD Movies? A card reader? Some want all, some want none. If the you buy a video game system for the puropse of playing Video games, then the $300 CORE 360 is just as viable a solution as the $600 PS3. Both (for example) will play Grand Theft Auto IV, and each version will look & play comparably.
If I want to play Guitar Hero II on the 360. It would cost me (minimum) $325 for the system + the cost of the game.
If I want to play MotorStorm on the PS3 it now costs (minimum) of $600 for the system + the cost of the game.
So for $275 dollars I will be getting extra features that may or may not be of value to me. That's why many gamers want a PS3 with a DVD drive. They don't value Blu-Ray, and don't want to buy it.
Saddly then you would be missing some great Wii games. Madden 07 (for the Wii) is exceptional, and both the Godfather and Tiger Woods are eating up lots of my free time. In fact, I suggest getting Tiger and the Godfather at the same time. I'm stuck on Jim Furyk in the Tiger Challenge, and each time I lose to him I throw in the Godfather so I can throttle someone with Full Motion controls.
If only I could import him into the Godfather game directly... It would be much more satisfying, and I wouldn't mind losing as much.
Jack is actually our best friend because he's such a wack job that these things get overturned and set a precident for future legislation.
Thank you Jack. Don't ever change...
---S.
Yeah, it's like Sega had the ability to look into the past...
That wouldn't make it comparable, it only serves to make the PS3 look cheaper. It's like comparing a base $500 PS3 to a Wii and saying the Wii is more expensive because 'To really use it you have to buy 3 remotes, 3 nunchucks, 4 Classic controllers, a 2 Gig SD card, The Lan adapter, Component cables and 4 Wavebirds...'
Not everyone who buys a 360 wants all the accessories you mentioned, nor are they required. An X-Box 360 Core system is $299 and comes with composite cables (just like the $600 PS3) and you can buy a 64 meg memory card for $25 if you want to play games in SD. $325 + tax and you are done*.
Since Sony announced they are discontinuing the $500 version there IS no cheaper version of the PS3 anymore. If you want to play a PS3 game you MUST pay $600 and have all those things included because there is no other option.
If you want every other accessory then yes it is more expensive than buying it bundled, but then you have the choice of whether to buy it or not. Think of it this way, not everyone bought the network jack for the PS2 for Free online gaming, nor did they all buy the Multi-tap. Not everyone needed, or wanted them.
* Yes, the HDD is nice, but since it was optional VERY few games require it. It is still feasable for someone to live without it. The largest single save file I have on my 360 is 4 megs (DeadRising), the smallest is 60k (Gears of War) Most games I found were 400k or less per save so you can fit ALOT of game saves on the smallest/cheapest card.