ZOMG XBOX360 VS. PS3 VS. WII ZOMG

Single player =/= Multiplayer with bots.

I was expecting more with UT3, but it's multiplayer with bots, tacked on with a story.

 

more games mean more choices and more choices means more buyers. look at ps1 and ps2. the ps1 and ps2 sold very well because of the amount of software that were available for those who purchased the system. this is why when people on the internet go and say the ps1 casualized video games, they are dead wrong because people didn't buy the ps1 because it was a simple machine to operate. people bought the ps1 because of the amount of software available to them when they buy the system, this is applied to the ps2 as well.

ps1 and ps2 had games that were bad and games that were good. but the amount of software available is the cause on why people are willing to part with other games on other systems because there are possible substitutes [or even better] for those games on which they left behind for the new system.

when i bought the ps3 from another guy, he told me he's selling it because he has an xbox 360 and is keeping instead of the ps3. what this means is that people are willing to part with ps3 exclusives because of the amount of games that are available to them on the 360. the amout of games on the 360 will have alternatives to those on the ps3 or they will find alternative substitues.

ps1 had so much software that many n64 gamers moved to the ps1. the same can be said again with the ps2, that many of the xbox and gamecube owners simply migrated over due to the amount of software available and it's the reason why the ps2 had so much users.

this is why when i said ps3 metal gear 4, on 360 someone could substitute that with gears of war or whatever is there on the 360.

again, the 360 is better in software when compared to the ps3. this is why people ditch the ps3 over the 360 because of the amount of software that are available to their target audiences.

 

By your same logic, that must mean the Wii is the best console as it has more games than both the 360 and PS3. Because it has the most amount of software.

Again, it's subjective, I prefer the PS3's exclusives compared to the 360, because the 360 is mostly Shooters and RPGs. The 360 has no alternative to MGS or Uncharted or Infamous. Now the PS3 is about equal to the 360 in terms of quality.

Quality > Quantity. And people's opinions will differ as to which games have more quality than the other.

I wouldn't know that much of the PSX, and PS2 as at the time I only had a Gamecube and I liked it a lot. My husband at the time only had an Xbox and Gamecube because he didn't like the games for the PS2, which were mainly RPGs.

 

the wii is the superior system compared to the 360/ps3 because it has the most software out off all the three. there are games on the wii that satisfy both the old and new gamers as well as games that accommodate the needs of everyone else. i won't go into further details on the wii because people wouldn't believe in what i'll have to say and the details are long.

by alternatives it doesn't literally mean something in the same field. a substitue for metal gear 4 on 360 would be something like splinter cell conviction or somewhere along those lines. but people can find other genres that they can get into while ditching a previous genre they were in. at that same moment, that is creating an alteration to what one liked previously to something new.

 

This paragraph explains why liking any of the three consoles over the other is entirely subjective and so is liking the software over the competitor's. I know a lot of people (including me) who don't like the Wii because of it's software. If you think it's large amount of shovelware is equal the to amount of good games on the PS3 and 360. You're very wrong.

 

Entertainting
And I also won't go into further details.

 

The wii's graphics don't nearly compare to those os the PS3 and the 360.
Also the 360 owns.
Totally. 8)

 

the great thing that the wii has proven is that graphics has become a thing of the past.
the wii shows that we have reached a point where graphics has become a non issue. look at the sound feature of a console. back then sound was the graphics on video games but sound has improved over time and it has become the non issue now. graphics replaced the sound problem. but now, sound and graphics has both become a non issue.

back then, you had sound with only simple bleebs here and there to something more mild like the 8bit and 16bit days to something more complex as in the 32bit and 64bit days. if we look at today, we're at cd quality and cd quality is a point where it is more then good enough for the majority of the population.

now if we apply the same idea of sound to graphics, graphics has reached a saturation point.

though the 360/ps3 have great graphical power, it isn't a selling point to the general public any more. what sells to the general public is what the software has to offer. you have anime that have great visual effects, anime like ghost in the shell 2 or appleseed exmachina, but those don't sell to the general public because it isn't the visuals that sell but the story or whatever the anime is trying to show.

so again, the 360/ps3 have great graphics, but who cares.

 

[me=mds64]likes this[/me]

So true-everyone goes "GRAPHIC ARE EVERYTHING" but it's gameplay that counts...

As long as the game doesn't look like my brother played it ie 8 bit pretending to be 128bit I'm fine with it...

Example-Resident evil 5...ALL SPECS LOW!

My pc can barely keep up...turned everything off just to get some speed out of it...


Or...

House of the dead return (wii).

It's dated-but the gameplay is still as I remember it

 

it's not only gameplay. gameplay is a gimmick if it wasn't for the other important aspects to the game. there are rpgs with a really great story line, but get's totally ruined because of the way the game is designed [gameplay]. sometimes you find a game with new features [which can relate to new gameplay] and it feels unsatisfactory because other elements are missing or lacking. a good example of the latter would be a game like zelda. as the zelda series move along, all we get is new gameplay elements while certain aspects of the game remain constant. for some it's great but others would say that it's all a gimmick.

super mario and all the old retro games are crap in terms of graphics but they are superior then the newer games because there are elements in these old games that makes them good. what makes them great is that it attracts the imagination of the gamer. guitar hero and rock band, for instance, captures the players imagination that they are pretending to be one of their favorite guitarist or rock group. this is why guitar hero and rock band are able to become great hits. but the way the third party are managing the game is simply milking the consumers and it's quickly dying out. now, no one or very little people care about the game.

with this in mind, if you look at the 360/ps3 games, majority of them follow the new gameplay gimmick idea. the reason why is because the third party developers are simply lazy [they follow a formula, think john romero]. this is why there were so many waggle in the wii games for the hardcore consumer as third party developers were simply adding new gameplay gimmick ideas into the game. why do you think there are so many remakes of old classics all of a sudden. of course they do also exists on the wii and nintendo themselves are guilty of doing it [the zelda example] but at least nintendo is trying to stop it by introducing new elements into the console.

 

I'd have to agree with that myself...

Now, while I'm netural about the wii's gameplay mechanics-many feel it's just tacked on at times...

That's why the hardcore user's of the other consoles think the wii is utter "garbage".

And before I found games that only used it in the right way (no more heros, metroid prime 3, dead rising chop til you drop, etc...) I also thought it was nothing but a gimmick.

That and the games from nintendo are lacking the shine they once had years ago...

That is just as I see it though.

 

All fps borrow elements from each other these days.

Halo is a tad slow and clunky-I just liked the story.

And yet people rave on about it...bleh.


I'm still trying to work out why I bougt both pc versions still ???

But...as for the origins of fps...

It doesn't matter-even doom 3 felt a little...copied, even if it's a sequel of one of the best fps series ever made...

But then again...the first I ever played was goldeneye on the n64...now THAT was quality

 

Ultra you just fail'd with your both comments.
Its not just graphics.
Okay I am not going into Ps360 war becouse they are similar-just need to choose exclusives- but Wii is nothing like them. Lemme count Wii's disabilites and facts.

Lets list some subjective facts:
-Nintendo's hardcore gaming thoughts have changed. %95 of the games are 3+
-Wii Mote is not a new device. EyeToy rip off.
-Nintendo is not introducing new elements at their games. They are trying to use Wii Mote. Mario Kart and SMB are the exact same as n64 versions (in general)
-Most of the genres are awful at Wii. xxShooter, sports, fighting (I played some Naruto games and my arm got hurt >:l)
-Again, no starfox, no Luigi's Mansion, No kid Icarus, no Zelda! Its all about money. Wii Fit Plus? Yeah right....
-Wii is getting hella exclusives becouse if you make a game for Ps360, you cant do that for Wii. Think Overlord II. A total new game for Wii... And developing is so cheap there are tons of awful games for Wii that you never heard of, which counts as Wii's Game Library.
-Nintendo also fail'd with real exclusives. Its not like Metroid SNES or so...
-"If you are not gonna play first party games, dont buy the console" applies only for Wii.

Now facts:
-Batteries dont last long
-Wii cant turn off I think. I couldn't. Wastes some electricity. (I know its not a big deal but hey- Its a fact XD)
-A system with a DvD drive that doesn’t play DvD movies.
-Graphics actually do matter but thats not a biggy if a game is good such as Mario Kart. But some games need graphics...
-Online gaming, online everything sucks.
-No hard drive.

And I can count more...
and more...
and more...

 

when loony says this stuff because he's right! during the time, the pc had better shooters then what the xbox had to offer [halo as compared to system shock]. heck, even after halo 3 was released, there are better shooters on pc then on consoles. this is why loony says halo is utter garbage because he's right.

the reason why others say halo is pure brilliant is because they were casuals who got accustomed to the new dual analog controller of playing an fps. fps on the consoles aren't controlled that well. but when bungie created halo and modified the playing mechanics as well as the controls, it became more easily to play an fps on consoles then on the pc. this means fps games on console has become casualized, or in other terms, dumbed down from pc to the consoles. the ps3/360 gamers don't even realize this and they constantly bash the wii.

this is where the wii comes in. the wii's motion controller has made it even more simple then the dual analog controller by using a controller interface according to the relation of what the player sees on screen to the movement they should do. this means something on the right then you move the motion controller to the right. but for some reason, the third party developers have neglected this idea from the wii and the only developers to actually make a good game is high voltage. it is very surprising that no third party developer has cannibalize the fps genre on the wii yet.

the reason why you have more people going to consoles as opposed to pc has to do with not the hardware requirements that many people seem to find a reason but because the pc sector has become industrialized. that is to say developers are simply making games not simply to sell and make players happy but simply to make money. when you do something, you do it because you want it [passion]. well these developers are doing it not for passion, but for money. this is why there is this constant talk about digital distribution and drm on the pc and now the consoles. developers abandoned the pc gamers and went straight to the consoles because the consoles are pure drm. look at everything on xbox and the 360, it is pure pc [casualized of course] and it is pure drm. this is why pc gamers moved to consoles because developers started making pc based games into the consoles and pc gamers don't have any where to go except the consoles.

the reason why the wii uses batteries is for a good reason and i'm sort of glad they did it that way. if you look at the car industry, there are car companies who are trying to introduce hyrogen and all other various sources of gas. though they are great, it won't work because it's not convenient. this is why the hybrid is very good because it uses the most convenient form of fuel and while offering a new technology that can offer longer mileage. this is why the wii uses the batteries because batteries are very convenient to the general public. cell phones, sometimes you just wish they would use batteries because sometimes they die unexpectedly and if you don't have an outlet or a charger, then you're screwed.

the wii system doesn't close. when one closes it, it would go into some sort of hibernation mode. in this mode, it only uses the wii 24 hour connection thing to stay connected to the internet. but when compared to the 360/ps3, the wii on this mode uses less electricity then both the 360/ps3.

nintendo is a hardware and software company, that is they make hardware and software. for nintendo, it makes sense for them to make the best games then the third party companies. the reason why is because nintendo has to make software to sell hardware. if nintendo makes software that is bad and it doesn't sell hardware, then they fail. this is why the wii hasn't been selling so hot this year because nintendo hasn't made good motion control games except wii sports resort for this year. it is very distraut that third parties are simply upset that they can't compete with nintendo. nintendo's success is not measured by the amount of software they sell, but nintendo's success is based on the number of hardware they sell. third party companies are based on the number of software they sell.

third party companies are stupid. all third party companies do is clone the ideas from the first party company but there are exceptions where you do find a third party company that isn't stupid. the wii is still in mini games, sports games and fitness game mode. the reason why, nintendo made wii sports, wii sports resort, wii fit and wii play, which sold plenty. what do third party companies do, they copy what nintendo did and extend it. nintendo hasn't made any other motion controller games this year and this is why we're still in the modes mentioned above. it's upto nintendo to make the other games because the third party companies are too stupid. new super mario brothers wii is being released later this year, if that sells, then we'll start seeing clones of new super mario brothers wii. this is why third parties don't like nintendo because they actually have to think for once to make quality games. on the 360/ps3, you just copy and paste, copy and paste.

hard drives are great! we can now clearly see third party companies are clearly milking their customers. how do you know?! street fighter 4 dilemma. capcom has two choices, to make super street fighter 4 as a downloadable add-on or release a new title for which the game was released on [360/ps3/pc]. well, capcom has no plans for the add-on service, so they are releasing super street fighter 4 as a stand alone title. clearly we can see how having a hard drive is really a positive thing.

 

More console FPS' copy from Halo than any other FPS, starting from the control scheme. Halo put sci-fi FPS on the map for the mainstream (as good SS2 is, it's definitely not popular). It also introduced vehicles, being needed in the single player and flowed nicely into the multiplayer. Several games followed suit, Battlefield only has a multiplayer component so that doesn't count in the single player department. Games copy Halo, look at Area 51, and The Conduit. Of course Halo copies a bunch of stuff from earlier games, what game doesn't now?

Halo is a real FPS. I for one hate Quake for it's twitch combat and I only liked Doom 1 and 2. FPS games evolved past fast paced twitch combat.

The Halo series should be commended on it's good story, simple gameplay mechanics, vehicle sections, popularizing the FPS genre, it's party system and video capturing thing, and Forge in Halo 3.

Again this whole entire argument is subjective. The Wii may be better for somebody doesn't mean it's the best, same for the Xbox 360 and the PS3. Software is also subjective, if talking about software, the Wii has the most lackluster and the least amount of great quality software compared to both the 360 and PS3. Also the PS3 has been gaining TON of ground with exclusives as the only exclusive I can think of for the 360 this month and next is Forza, last month was Halo but that's about it. PS3 has Demon Souls, and Uncharted 2, and Uncharted 2 apparently has been said to be GotY, although Modern Warfare 2 is probably going to beat it.

The Wii's motion control has run out of ways to play games. There's only so much you can do with the waggle and wiggle. The Conduit and Metroid had capitalized on the Wi''s control but even for me, someone who plays a bit of shooters, I find any Wii shooter to be motion sickness inducing, I can't play it all at once because the screen has a tendency to move, all the time. Wii FPS' are hard to control because compared to the mouse and keyboard option, the mouse you can pickup and move back in it's previous position so you have complete freedom. While for the Wii, there is no alternative. The control scheme they opt it for is you move the reticule to the edge of the screen to move whatever degree.

Third party games are partly what drive software sales. Third party companies make party games for the Wii because of the Motion Controller, there isn't much alternative to waggle, unless you get a hard on with quick time events. If gaming companies want to make a primarily controller based game, they'd make it on the 360/PS3, unlike the Wii, they have less hardware limitations, which makes the devs happier, and it's simpler as they don't have to think of a way to include motion control. I definitely do not think motion control is the way to go for games, and if it does go towards JUST that, I'm giving up games. Unless they have VR, I won't play. I haven't touched my Wii since the Conduit (which is average at best) and I won't until Mario comes out. I don't buy into the Wii Resort stuff as I see it's fun for 5 minutes, then it's boring.

EA makes Madden for the Wii, since it's geared towards somewhat the casual market, you'd think it'd sell. NOPE, Madden sells more on the PS3/Xbox 360.

This is exactly where the Wii faults at, most of the people who buy the console are casual gamers. They probably don't play a lot of games, that's including the Wii. I know a lot of people in my family that have a Wii, but they haven't played it since Wii Fit came out or whatever, this is the problem. The software doesn't sell because it's core base is casual, casual gamers would not go to a store and buy games like any other gamer. A gamer would buy a game a month or whatever and the casual will not. It isn't so much because of crap software, it's the base it's built upon.

It's also probably extremely hard for a casual to find an actual GOOD game in the sea of crap games, it's gotten to the point where it's so saturated in games that it's probably confusing for casuals what to buy. There's too many choices.

Also the only reason to buy a Wii is for the exclusives, Nintendo has been like this since the N64 and it's still true. But what's the point of owning it if Nintendo is replacing making a Mario/Zelda/Pikmen whatever game for Wii Fit or Wii ____? And every established Nintendo franchise is formulaic, Zelda and Mario follows the same formula as it's predecessor. These exclusives are getting tiring, and I don't expect Nintendo to start making a NEW IP as they're making tons of money from these already established ones and they're making stupid sums of money from the Wii. What's the point of owning the hardware if there isn't the software?

Don't act as if third party companies are the only ones to do this. Look at Wii Fit Plus. Also Capcom has done this since forever, they're still stuck on the way arcade games were, where they would make buffed up versions of past games. For what you or anyone knows the game can either be 30 dollars or 60, we don't know the pricing and Capcom hasn't said much in the way of how they're delivering it, so don't hate until you actually know about it, because no one really knows about it.

Well, your same argument can be against the Wii. While FPS' have been streamlined compared to the ever complicated SS2 (to be honest there isn't that much complicated FPS' that you guys are talking about) the Wii streamlined gaming to the point where buttons have been replaced with movement. This is dumbing down. Motion control game play will continue to do so until VR (you know, including actual game feedback to your senses).

As I said in my previous paragraph or couple sentences, the FPS' you guys are talking about aren't as complex as any other shooter that's on the market today. System Shock is a lot different and more complex than anything today but there aren't that many games like it, like at all. Lets look at the more 'complicated' more popular FPS' on the PC. Half Life, Quake, Unreal Tournament, Team Fortress, Doom, Deus Ex, Thief, mm can't think of much else. These games aren't much complicated besides Deus Ex and a bit of Thief. Half Life is primarily single player based and it quite simple even compared to the likes of Halo, Half Life (the first one) is mostly run and gun, but driven with a great story line, and yes I've played it.

The thing that kept Half Life going was it's modding community, so you'd see stuff like Counter Strike and Team Fortress Classic, that I admit hasn't carried on to console gaming. But stuff like Forge, map making and stuff is being more prominent. Player created content is what drives games like Little Big Planet, hopefully this player created thing continues so we can see stuff like what UT3 for the PS3 is doing.

Unreal Tournament is twitch based, although the game become a lot larger in 2k4 due to it's bigger levels and it's vehicles. However, minus the twitch most games offer similar game types and large maps and vehicles have since become a norm. Even it's Assault game type got ditched in UT3. (or was it Onslaught?) But even that game type wasn't that complex, it was most often attack here, or take over this.

Quake is a mindless twitched and skill based, FPS that has been popularized due to it's competitive nature and online game component. This is as simple as it gets next to Doom and Serious Sam.

Console shooters have not done much besides make shooters popular. It isn't the console tag that makes them "dumbed down" as you said, it's the developers, SS2 can easily be ported and not have that much problems making the transition, along with Deus Ex. It's the developers choice to make it more simple. The only game I can think of that dumbed down was Bioshock (spiritual sequel to SS2), it's not so much the console it was on but the developer's choice to make it like it was.

Something like Mass Effect or Fallout 3 (although Fallout 3 is simpler than it's previous iterations, it's near SS2's level of complexity), is examples of console shooters not 'dumbing it down'.

Also, the video game market is a lot different then the past years. OF COURSE IT'S ABOUT THE MONEY. If you don't get any money or make a profit, your company WILL GO BANKRUPT. Look at the many companies that went under. Make one bad game, and you're done. Games don't cost a couple thousand to make anymore, it's grown into a million dollar industry. I like how you're talking about Nintendo at the same time as they're the company that mainly does whatever it pleases and all they do is get money.

Again, this whole stupid argument boils down to if you like the Xbox, Wii or PS3 more than the other. It's all subjective, even the software.

inb4 tl;dr.

 

Oh my god...
My fingers cant stand a reply like that.
But you are saying subjective to everything.
I dont think "softwares" can be subjective.
For example "Ps3 has better graphics then Wii"
I can prove that with 3 sentences and two pictures.

And I still insist that Nintendo fail'd at wii and forgot its roots.
I dont want my grandma to play Wii Sports!
I want to play Luigi's Mansion!

 

Software means games, it doesn't mean graphics or hardware. If talking about hardware specs, then yes the PS3>Xbox360>>>Wii.

Each system offers something fun. Fun or enjoyment is subjective. What's fun for me, may not be fun for someone else. This is why software is subjective, even if whatever system has more games or has more great games, I may find one game offers more fun than two other games.

 

I agree with nats-Halo is a real FPS

 

What I really meant to say is there's no such thing as a 'real' FPS. There's only FPS' along with their several hybrid genres.