FLAME ON: PS2 users explain the system, pls.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

This was a topic I was going to post before the site changed over. Some people(being nice) thought there was nothing else to debate about system wars cause the PS2 has more combined sales than X and GC. That is about as smart as saying GM is a better than BMW, or Nestle is better than Godiva chocolates. Sales don't mean poo poo when it comes to critical review. Of all the debates, no PS2 fanboy has ever given a reasonable account for how lousy the system is. Especially, over the course of this past year.
Specifically, where are all of these great exclusives that YOU claim over XBOX? In the last NPD top 20 rankings, the only PS2 exclusive that didn't begin with the letters GTA was TOMB RAIDER. A game so incredibly bad that the developers were recently terminated. If these exclusives aren't even good enough for PS2 users to buy en masse, how can you expect XBOX fans to care? The top games(new games) over the last few months for PS2 were EnterTheMatrix, The Hulk, MC2, NBA Street.
We don't even want to discuss graphics, some person(biting lip) had the nerve to say SilentHill3 was the best looking game ever! And asked why PS2 is able to put out games that look better than X or GC. ARE U SERIOUS. I never replied cause I had not seen SH3, but after seeing X-Play where they gave a lengthy review of the game, I was laughing my buttocks off. The game looks just like SH2!! It plays just like SH2. The monsters are just as lame as SH2. I guess some people get a thrill at looking at the naked lower torso of dead female shaking like a mexican jumping bean...oh so this is how you do survival horror. By praying on the hormones of adolescent 13 year olds. This game is just as stupid as SH2(which I completed all the way through). Wayyyy overrated and not even close to true fully rendered games like SC.
The PS2 is average, which is why it is popular. The average joe and jane who want to plop down on the sofa, bite on a twinkie, and play a game that requires little thought or effort feels right at home with the PS2. But anyone with half a brain, is economically as well as technically savvy, and enjoys state of the art videogames, will find it lacking as a sole console. XBOX was well designed and MS had a plan for it throughout its entire lifecycle, MS is now working the plan. Sony never had a plan for the PS2, are all over the map abusing customers with peripheral devices, crappy networks, barely supported harddrives, and minimally improved sequels to major franchises. The PS2 is just a bad product that Sony got by on because of blind consumer loyalty, expert marketing, and being average. All that may be good for the company and its shareholder's, but not for gamers and the gaming community.

[Fragmastar]

NEWSFLASH: Sales make a BIG FAT chunk of how important a system and its games are.

X-Box didn't sell much bascially because its games lacked quality on gameplay. I'm kinda being a stereotype here but X-Box cares about graphics more than gameplay. I'll give you an example.....Xbox released WWF Raw in 2002. The graphics were superb! I have never seen such great graphics from a system before! But where's the career mode? Why can't you go backstage? Where's the fun? And then PS2 released WWE Smackdown: Shut Your Mouth. I'll admit that the graphics weren't as good as WWF Raw's but they were still good. However, you could go backstage, play career mode, etc. The gameplay was A LOT better! PS2 puts gameplay before graphics and I admire their trend.

Nintendo gets supported by 8 - 10 year olds. A great majority of young children buy Nintendo games. Common, Pokemon, Mario, etc. Aren't these kids' games? Nintendo doesn't supply enough categories for people of all ages. It's no wonder that they failed to sell more than PS2.

[Glockstar]

And seeing as how Reloaded hasn't shown up here yet... I guess I will...
Great post, TMG!

<div class=\"smallfont\">
"... the PS2 has more combined sales than X and GC. That is about as smart as saying GM is a better than BMW, or Nestle is better than Godiva chocolates."
</div>
What a great analogy too, btw!

Hey, I'll admit that sometimes I don't think the P2 is all that bad. But I could never defend it against the claims that Sony gave no better than a half-azzed effort on the thing. Unlike what MS has done with their system! I have no idea how anybody who's bought and played both, could attest to the P2 being the better system - and actually be serious about it.

And don't even get me started on the games! You all should know what I think about each systems games by now - I've (already) declared 2003 the best year EVAR!! for videogames, and the XBox is almost single-handedly responsible for that declaration.

<div class=\"smallfont\">
"XBOX was well designed and MS had a plan for it throughout its entire lifecycle, MS is now working the plan."
</div>
You know it! Don't you? Of course you do. You know it. You know you know it! You KNOW it!

(If any of you don't, I'm betting that the only thing you do know is misery, frustration, jealousy, and dissemblement. Haw! Sucks to be you.)

[Gadfly2317]

Anyone who's read more than 3 posts by me knows I'm a huge fan the unusual stuff on GC: Ikaruga, Monkey Ball, Pikmin, Cubivore, and Animal Crossing. I've played games for many many years, and more than anything I want new experiences. That's why I utter blashpemys like "Pikmin was way more fun than Windwaker."

I'm looking at picking up a PS2. . . with its huge userbase, I assume publishers can put out more experimental under the radar titles. All we ever talk about though is who has the biggest blockbuster with the AAA rating. KOTOR, GTA, Metroid, Zelda, Final Fantasy, Silent Hill, Halo.

But what about really cool innovative games? These are harder to find out about. I don't think there are any cool little fringe games on xbox because they are shooting for the SIZE MATTERS crowd, but I'm sure there must be many on PS2 besides the couple I've heard of like Ico, and The Rez. Is PS2 king of weird experimental titles? What are the best ones (whether they generated great reviews or not)?

High ratings scores don't necessarily mean the game isn't great. Take Cubivore. It generally got about a 60%; and every criticism was true. Crappy graphics, ackward camera, limited replay value, and limited appeal. Yet it had creative gameplay, it was fun, hypnotic atmosphere and music, interesting aesthetic style. There are great gems that lie hidden out there with pretty low scores. I want to hear about the ones on PS2.

[stevedperkins]

NEWSFLASH: Sales make a BIG FAT chunk of how important a system and its games are.

X-Box didn't sell much bascially because its games lacked quality on gameplay. I'm kinda being a stereotype here but X-Box cares about graphics more than gameplay. I'll give you an example.....Xbox released WWF Raw in 2002. The graphics were superb! I have never seen such great graphics from a system before! But where's the career mode? Why can't you go backstage? Where's the fun? And then PS2 released WWE Smackdown: Shut Your Mouth. I'll admit that the graphics weren't as good as WWF Raw's but they were still good. However, you could go backstage, play career mode, etc. The gameplay was A LOT better! PS2 puts gameplay before graphics and I admire their trend.

Nintendo gets supported by 8 - 10 year olds. A great majority of young children buy Nintendo games. Common, Pokemon, Mario, etc. Aren't these kids' games? Nintendo doesn't supply enough categories for people of all ages. It's no wonder that they failed to sell more than PS2.

The whole "kiddie" thing is still good for a quick-jab or one-liner, but it is <i>really</i> weak as a serious argument. Nintendo is the best pure <i>gaming</i> company on the planet, and will always have fans at all age levels. When I was in college, the guy in the room left of mine had an N64 with Mario Kart, and the guy in the room to the right had a PS1 with a stack of shooter games. The PS1 guy hardly ever played with anyone other than his roommates, whereas every night there were 4 to 6 people in the N64 guy's room waiting for a turn... and we didn't even like that guy!

Just because a game might be cartoonish doesn't mean that it isn't fun for college students. Also, I'm pushing 30 now, and the Cube is by far and away the most popular console in the office where I work. When you settle down and start a family, you don't have 12 hours a day to devote to Halo. Your play time is limited... so you need something that's as fun as possible, has a relatively short learning curve, and is well suited for play in short bursts. NOBODY nails that better than Nintendo.

Nintendo thrashed Atari on our own home turf, and then held on through a brief period of domination by Sega. The only reason they're behind Sony right now is because they've underestimated the importance of being first-to-market (both in terms of console sales and 3rd-party developer support), and the rumors indicate that they wont be making that mistake with the next console generation. They're actually AHEAD of Microsoft in worldwide sales, and probably will be so in North America as well... once the two fads helping the XBox have passed (those being: [1] seeing what extreme you can take video game bloodiness to before it just gets pointless, and [2] jerking-off to cartoon volleyball chicks despite the pervasive availability of internet porn).

Sony isn't really a long-term threat, because the first-to-market gimmick is the only thing propping up an otherwise mediocre system. If Nintendo or Microsoft releases their next-gen a Christmas season before Sony does, then Sony will bump down to 2nd or 3rd place. The XBox is a question mark because it has no foothold whatsoever outside of North America, and you have to wonder just how long Bill Gates is willing to lose money without the gamble paying off. Nintendo has this wacky little business strategy of <b><i>NOT losing tons of money on each unit sold</i></b>, they do this by selling game consoles that <b><i>only try to be game consoles</i></b>. My money is on that strategy over MS's strategy of "lose a hundred-and-fifty bucks on every sale but make up for it in volume"!*
<br/>

*<i>The only wildcard is online play. It doesn't look like that it turning out to be a big deal for this generation of consoles, but I'm thinking that it will be for the next generation. If MS continues to have the best online strategy in the next console generation, who knows what could happen? I'm hoping that all the "online play isn't a big" deal stuff is just a Nintendo bluff, and behind closed doors they're getting ready to rip-off XBox Live shamelessly in the next go-around!

[ThaMaskedGamer]

<div class=\"smallfont\">[QUOTE=Fragmastar]NEWSFLASH: Sales make a BIG FAT chunk of how important a system and its games are.

X-Box didn't sell much bascially because its games lacked quality on gameplay. I'm kinda being a stereotype here but X-Box cares about graphics more than gameplay. I'll give you an example.....Xbox released WWF Raw in 2002. QUOTE]</div>

Are you kidding, you want to talk about quality gameplay? How about Onimusha, a game with 2D pre-rendered art as background. Everytime your character moves, the game has to reload. The character is polygonal object, moved around in a 2D game environment. There is no action for things like going upstairs, there are no stairs. The guy couldn't even jump. And where is the great gameplay? You go through solving trivial puzzles and fighting waves of the same enemies who all fight the same way. I think the AI in LEMMINGS was better. But, to PS2 users this is great gameplay cause it is simple and easy. I've now come to understand, when a ps2 user talks about XBOX gameplay being bad, they mean the game is to complex for them. Like I said, you guys like easy games like Onimusha, SH, FF where u barely have to do anything except guide your character through crappy looking worlds and watch beautiful cutscenes.

[ThaMaskedGamer]

Well, PS2 may put out some obscure titles, but I don't know if they are any good. It is not something the machine is known for, "PS2 puts out very good, odd quirky titles." That is not a compliment often heard about the PS2. The only quirky titles they seem to put out are Japanese rpg's, that all basically play the same, have art and characters that all look the same(typical japanese anime), and have dialogue enticing to those who appreciated the movies TombRaider and FinalFantasy. I mean TombRaider, only a PS2 adolescent boy could fall for a character like Lara Croft, skinny as an ant, torpedo boobs, hair down to her feet, all the skills of BruceLee and Bond combined, and you guys have the nerve to talk about DOA series(which started by Sega in the arcades, not on XBOX).
There are quirky titles on XBOX, you guys just don't want to give them the benefit of the doubt. Somehow, with XBOX unless a game gets mass sales, it is not good. But with GC or PS2, its okay to have a good game that doesn't sell well. How about KungFuFighters, Gunvalkyrie, Crimson Skies, ODDWorld(right up your alley, but panned by GCers). Don't forget about JSRF and FuzionFrenzy(the only launch game I am still playing).

<div class=\"smallfont\">
I'm looking at picking up a PS2. . . with its huge userbase, I assume publishers can put out more experimental under the radar titles. </div>

Please, I can go on and on, how about SteelBattalion, DeathRow, Whacked!

[Gadfly2317]

>>Like I said, you guys like easy games like Onimusha, SH, FF where u barely have to do anything except guide your character through crappy looking worlds and watch beautiful cutscenes.<<--The Masked Gamer

I think you've hit the nail on the head about what makes a boring game. The more that a game is like a movie, the less it is like a game. Repetitively hacking away and shooting an enemy in order to get to the next pretty--but boring and cliched movie clip--is not even a game.

Yet, in regard to PS2, surely the system offers more than these kind of games. There are so many games developed by independent publishers, and such a large user base that ever type of gamer is represented, that surely there are innovative unique titles in the library.

When I talk about xbox having a weak library or boring games, its that it's library lacks real diversity, is reliant on ports of PS2 (many of hte same ones you mocked) and PC games; also that the xbox library goes for the safe formulas, the racers, and the twitchy shooters packed with eye candy and nice sounding explosions.

Come on PS2 players, step up and tell us about the good games on your system, not the formula blockbusters and sequels.

[Grognard]

<div class=\"smallfont\">>>Come on PS2 players, step up and tell us about the good games on your system, not the formula blockbusters and sequels.</div>

Don't think you'll get much of a response to this one Gadfly as PS2 and innovative titles are a dichotomy. The only thing I can think of which is even close to being unique is ICO on the PS2. Let's face it, PS2 is the mass-market platform of the gaming industry and most developers for this system are appealing to the mass market with movie tie-ins and sequels. That also means easy controls, interface and difficulty.

Xbox and GC have far more innovative titles (or at least innovative within their genres). The problem with the GC is that the quality releases are few and far between. Xbox has been on a roll all year with quality titles and the pace is only going to increase over the next 6 months with the strongest line-up available.

Of course, this could easily break down into an argument on semantics. Personally, I consider RTCW innovative because of the online implementation which is relatively unique to the console world (and even pc when you consider voice-chat). Splinter Cell and other Xbox games with downloadable levels/content are innovative because they make effective use of the HD which is an innovation in itself for the console industry. 480/720 support, 5.1 Dolby Digital are also innovations and almost every Xbox release supports 5.1 DD which significantly improves the players immersion into the gameworld (as does the better graphics on the Xbox). Live! is probably the most unique aspect of recent console gaming for which all gamers have MS to thank for.

[folken001]

Why bother asking? No matter how many times people exlain to you, you will never get it and keep asking for the same old question over and over.

M$ was counting on Xbox's superiority in hardware to outsell PS2 from the beginning. Xbox was designed to make PS2 look like something half assed...(PS2 games dont look all that bad) That is why it came a year later. How exactly could Sony match Xbox which was completely unknown to them at the time? By reading the bible? Or by asking a fortunate teller? Lets not overlook the fact MS used the PC structure and was losing 150 bucks for each Xbox sold and is still losing money on Xbox. That should tell you something. If GC came out the same time PS2 did, it would look half ass compare to Xbox too.

[folken001]

<div class=\"smallfont\"><div class=\"smallfont\"></div>

Xbox and GC have far more innovative titles (or at least innovative within their genres). The problem with the GC is that the quality releases are few and far between. Xbox has been on a roll all year with quality titles and the pace is only going to increase over the next 6 months with the strongest line-up available.
</div>

I would only agree with you on GC. What is so innovative on Xbox really? There are some, not too many.

Try Cream and Cookie on PS2, it is innovative and fun.

[folken001]

<div class=\"smallfont\">>>
I think you've hit the nail on the head about what makes a boring game. The more that a game is like a movie, the less it is like a game. Repetitively hacking away and shooting an enemy in order to get to the next pretty--but boring and cliched movie clip--is not even a game.</div>

That depends how you see it. Most of the RPGs are over 40 hours long. Watching 5 hours of cinema hardly takes any gameplay away from the game. Tell me, which RPG have you seen more than 5 hours of cinema? People sure like to exaggerate.

<div class=\"smallfont\">>> Come on PS2 players, step up and tell us about the good games on your system, not the formula blockbusters and sequels. </div>

Why should I waste my time?

[Gadfly2317]

<div class=\"smallfont\"><div class=\"smallfont\"></div>

That depends how you see it. Most of the RPGs are over 40 hours long. Watching 5 hours of cinema hardly takes any gameplay away from the game. Tell me, which RPG have you seen more than 5 hours of cinema? People sure like to exaggerate.

<div class=\"smallfont\"></div>

Why should I waste my time?</div>


Why is it a waste of time? I'm curious. I was being serious--I'm not looking to flame PS2 games; I assumed with as many titles that it has that there must be some cool, weird experimental titles out there like Cubivore, Pikmin, Ikaruga, etc. Everyone just brags about their big hits at systems wars, but its the little gems that round out a system, at least for me.

I mean, if there aren't any cool little games on PS2 worth playing, I guess I can stick to my current thing, which is just to play the PS2 and xbox monster hits on PC (I mean, isn't Silent Hill III even coming to PC?)

[folken001]

<div class=\"smallfont\"><div class=\"smallfont\"></div>


Why is it a waste of time? I'm curious. I was being serious--I'm not looking to flame PS2 games; I assumed with as many titles that it has that there must be some cool, weird experimental titles out there like Cubivore, Pikmin, Ikaruga, etc. Everyone just brags about their big hits at systems wars, but its the little gems that round out a system, at least for me.

I mean, if there aren't any cool little games on PS2 worth playing, I guess I can stick to my current thing, which is just to play the PS2 and xbox monster hits on PC (I mean, isn't Silent Hill III even coming to PC?)</div>

I just think every once a while, people would come and ask what is so good about PS2, GC or XBox. Then people would give the same typical answer to this typical question. I really don't see the meaning of this. Then, what is going to happen next, people provide as why they think their systems are great, the others will give the same typical rebuttal.

Not to mention this thread is started by ThaMaskedGamer A.K.A Daman, the PS2 trash talker. That gives me even more reasons to ignore. It is nice to use this new forum for something. But lets try to be original, shall we?

[Glockstar]

When I think of the PS2 AND it's games, I DO NOT think of innovation!

And I'm sorry, Gadfly, but when you say what you've said about the XBox library... you either haven't been paying attention very well, or you've been misled. But that's what you get when have MS/XBox haters running off at the mouth unchecked.

Hey, every system has got their share of titles that you're going to like -even the PS2 has some innovative, experimental, and wierd titles for you. Yeah you prolly would like Ico (and I even think you'd like Ratchet & Clank), but I know, and you know, that you'd really like Panzer Dragoon Orta and (especially) Munch's Oddyssee (I know you, maaan).

What's ironic here is that you've been a party to the poo-pooing of so many of these (types of) titles on the XBox - as many of the PS2 parasites here, as well as many of your fellow Cube owners, have bashed the type of games that you would prolly like.

Why just look at the recent first-party offerings of Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft, and tell me... who you think is making the real effort here in trying to bring you something different and something new?!? Let's see...
- Sony = Primal, Amplitude, My Street, Arc The Lad, Downhill Domination
- Nintendo = Metroid Prime, Zelda, Wario World, Mario Golf, F-Zero
- Microsoft = Blinx, Whacked, Kung-Fu Chaos, Tao-Feng, Brute Force

One thing about that SCEA though, they are a busy lot - they 've released more games, over the same period, than Nintendo and Microsoft combined. (And please notice that there was no bias there - I just listed the last 5 games (to the best of my ability) by each co., and that's it. You decide what's what.)

TMG did a good job in remembering quite a few of these innovative type of titles for you in his post. Though he forgot a few, I don't think you'd really like them anyways (Shenmue II and DOA-XBV).

I just hope that you can find a way to use the site and these boards constructively - and hope that you can recognize the truth when you see it. I do think there's quite a few of us here that are straight shooters and who are more than ready, willing, and able to get past the fanboyism (and stupid hating) and can give you some sound reccomendations.

Btw, have you tried that Dr. Muto, or Wario Ware Inc. yet?

[Gadfly2317]

<div class=\"smallfont\">When I think of the PS2 AND it's games, I DO NOT think of innovation!

And I'm sorry, Gadfly, but when you say what you've said about the XBox library... you either haven't been paying attention very well, or you've been misled. But that's what you get when have MS/XBox haters running off at the mouth unchecked.

Hey, every system has got their share of titles that you're going to like -even the PS2 has some innovative, experimental, and wierd titles for you. Yeah you prolly would like Ico (and I even think you'd like Ratchet & Clank), but I know, and you know, that you'd really like Panzer Dragoon Orta and (especially) Munch's Oddyssee (I know you, maaan).

What's ironic here is that you've been a party to the poo-pooing of so many of these (types of) titles on the XBox - as many of the PS2 parasites here, as well as many of your fellow Cube owners, have bashed the type of games that you would prolly like.

Why just look at the recent first-party offerings of Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft, and tell me... who you think is making the real effort here in trying to bring you something different and something new?!? Let's see...
- Sony = Primal, Amplitude, My Street, Arc The Lad, Downhill Domination
- Nintendo = Metroid Prime, Zelda, Wario World, Mario Golf, F-Zero
- Microsoft = Blinx, Whacked, Kung-Fu Chaos, Tao-Feng, Brute Force

One thing about that SCEA though, they are a busy lot - they 've released more games, over the same period, than Nintendo and Microsoft combined. (And please notice that there was no bias there - I just listed the last 5 games (to the best of my ability) by each co., and that's it. You decide what's what.)

TMG did a good job in remembering quite a few of these innovative type of titles for you in his post. Though he forgot a few, I don't think you'd really like them anyways (Shenmue II and DOA-XBV).



Btw, have you tried that Dr. Muto, or Wario Ware Inc. yet?</div>

No. . .I haven't gotten around to Dr. Muto yet, or Wario Ware. And you're right, both Oddworld and Panzer Dragoon are on my "plus" list on xbox. At the moment, I'm actually not dissing either xbox or PS2, I was just interested in generating a discussion about quirky titles off the beaten path. The reason I did it in this thread is because it was a challenge for PS2 players to defend their system, and I kinda thought if any library would have some quirky stuff in it, it would be the PS2 library. (I seem to remember some monkey game from Lucas Arts getting good reviews and commendations for innovation, but alas I've forgotten the title.)

And I didn't even really mean it is a slam on xbox that it doesn't seem to push small, specialized titles. It doesn't seem to be xbox's focus--they seem determined to Shock and Awe. The TV program I watched last night that focused solely on Xbox and their development teams was really cool. I'm not pleased in general at the focus in the industry on Story and Graphics over the game structure itself, but none-the less, you would have freaking loved this show. There was so much Halo II footage, and even more Footage and story boards of the new Oddworld. Of all games they focused on, the new Oddworld had me absolutely drooling--it was beautiful, bizarre--it looks like what I'd really love to see, which is a monster-sized budget spent in a bizarre and unique game. I hope it is a success.

[The Prince of Darkness]

<div class=\"smallfont\">The whole "kiddie" thing is still good for a quick-jab or one-liner, but it is <i>really</i> weak as a serious argument. Nintendo is the best pure <i>gaming</i> company on the planet, and will always have fans at all age levels. When I was in college, the guy in the room left of mine had an N64 with Mario Kart, and the guy in the room to the right had a PS1 with a stack of shooter games. The PS1 guy hardly ever played with anyone other than his roommates, whereas every night there were 4 to 6 people in the N64 guy's room waiting for a turn... and we didn't even like that guy!

Just because a game might be cartoonish doesn't mean that it isn't fun for college students. Also, I'm pushing 30 now, and the Cube is by far and away the most popular console in the office where I work. When you settle down and start a family, you don't have 12 hours a day to devote to Halo. Your play time is limited... so you need something that's as fun as possible, has a relatively short learning curve, and is well suited for play in short bursts. NOBODY nails that better than Nintendo.

Nintendo thrashed Atari on our own home turf, and then held on through a brief period of domination by Sega. The only reason they're behind Sony right now is because they've underestimated the importance of being first-to-market (both in terms of console sales and 3rd-party developer support), and the rumors indicate that they wont be making that mistake with the next console generation. They're actually AHEAD of Microsoft in worldwide sales, and probably will be so in North America as well... once the two fads helping the XBox have passed (those being: [1] seeing what extreme you can take video game bloodiness to before it just gets pointless, and [2] jerking-off to cartoon volleyball chicks despite the pervasive availability of internet porn).

Sony isn't really a long-term threat, because the first-to-market gimmick is the only thing propping up an otherwise mediocre system. If Nintendo or Microsoft releases their next-gen a Christmas season before Sony does, then Sony will bump down to 2nd or 3rd place. The XBox is a question mark because it has no foothold whatsoever outside of North America, and you have to wonder just how long Bill Gates is willing to lose money without the gamble paying off. Nintendo has this wacky little business strategy of <b><i>NOT losing tons of money on each unit sold</i></b>, they do this by selling game consoles that <b><i>only try to be game consoles</i></b>. My money is on that strategy over MS's strategy of "lose a hundred-and-fifty bucks on every sale but make up for it in volume"!*
<br/>

*<i>The only wildcard is online play. It doesn't look like that it turning out to be a big deal for this generation of consoles, but I'm thinking that it will be for the next generation. If MS continues to have the best online strategy in the next console generation, who knows what could happen? I'm hoping that all the "online play isn't a big" deal stuff is just a Nintendo bluff, and behind closed doors they're getting ready to rip-off XBox Live shamelessly in the next go-around!</div>


First off---you are right about the whole Nintendo kiddy argument. It is not really that serious. In fact, it is about as serious an argument as the whole Xbox/pc argument. Unfortunately for you this is system wars and people like to beat the same arguments to death so get used to it.

Now to those ridiculous comments about Sony not being a long term threat. I think that Sony has proven that they are a threat in the videogame industry, not because of the fact that they released their console first, but rather because of name recognition. I think that it is fairly safe to assume that Sony will kick ass in the next system war. Again the only real questions will be who will be number two, and will it even be close. You seem to me to be yet another one of these delusional Nintendo gamers that is stuck in the past. I think that it is just as easy for me to argue that Nintendo will finally lose its steam completely when people finally tire of Mario as it is for you to argue that the Xbox will falter when people get tired of t&a. Give me a break dude. At least there is one true statement in there. Yes Nintendo is ahead in worldwide sales---barely. But the fact is that the Xbox is ahead in the other major markets, and it is kicking Nintendo's ass in NA last time I checked. The only place Nintendo is winning is in Japan where people still have their heads up the big N's ass, and refuse to buy American made video games.

[stevedperkins]

Yes Nintendo is ahead in worldwide sales---barely. But the fact is that the Xbox is ahead in the other major marketsMars? Uranus?

[The Prince of Darkness]

<div class=\"smallfont\">Mars? Uranus?</div

No, North America and Europe

[Glockstar]

Ahh, forget the auto-formatting... I'm going old-school with this post!
All this in response to the boob... I mean newb... stevedperkins

>> "Nintendo is the best pure company on the planet, and will always have fans at all age levels."

You've got blinders on, pal. That, or your head's in a place where it shouldn't be. SCEA not only comes out with more, they come out with better... for all ages and for all gamers (console, PC, and soon for gamers-on-the-go).

>> "Also, I'm pushing 30 now, and the Cube is by far and away the most popular console in the office where I work. When you settle down and start a family, you don't have 12 hours a day to devote to Halo. Your play time is limited... so you need something that's as fun as possible, has a relatively short learning curve, and is well suited for play in short bursts. NOBODY nails that better than Nintendo."

Nice story. Now I've got one for you: Out of all the people I know, I'm the only one with a Cube. And in all honesty, I think most of my peeps don't even know the Cube exists!

As far as the best at nailing "fun as possible, but in short bursts gaming", nothing's better than XBox Live!

Now here's where it really gets "good":
>> "Nintendo thrashed Atari on our own home turf, and then held on through a brief period of domination by Sega."

Say what?!? What the frag are you smoking?!?

>> "The only reason they're behind Sony right now is because they've underestimated the importance of being first-to-market (both in terms of console sales and 3rd-party developer support), and the rumors indicate that they wont be making that mistake with the next console generation."

Haw! Wake up and smell the napalm! They've underestimated more than that, buddy boy. And that's just the lamest excuse I've ever heard, btw. No... scratch that... the one by the Nintendo bigwig, where he said that 'gamers were growing weary of the effort required to play sophisticated games.'... that one tops the cake.

http://www.gamemarketwatch.com/news/item.asp?nid=2742

Nintendo, and you fanboys, are so full of it - coming up with this science fiction crap. Excuses, excuses... pseudo-science is what it is!

Now where this absurd little comment fits in, I do not know. But since you brought it up...

>> "They're actually AHEAD of Microsoft in worldwide sales, and probably will be so in North America as well... once the two fads helping the XBox have passed (those being: [1] seeing what extreme you can take video game bloodiness to before it just gets pointless, and [2] jerking-off to cartoon volleyball chicks despite the pervasive availability of internet porn)."

Is that a fact now? Who says? Nintendo?
Hmmm, well Microsoft says they're in second place. Now, what do you make of that?

So if you're thru...

>> "Sony isn't really a long-term threat, because the first-to-market gimmick is the only thing propping up an otherwise mediocre system."

Guess not.
Not a long-term threat, eh? Got news for you junior, they've been in dominance longer now than Nintendo ever was! And a lot of Nintendo's time at the top came when they were the only one's there!

You kitties are such crack historians, I tell ya. Crack-heads is more like it.

[mass]

Hey, glocky, that link cracked me up, especially the last line in the article.

"Iwata cited the potential for growth in areas like China where games have yet to achieve widespread popularity. He also said Nintendo plans to increasingly target new population segments like women and the elderly. "

I can see it now, Animal Crossing, the Depends edition.

[Worldclassgamer]

I think it's just a case of console envy! Sony fans sit there defending there out of date crap when the superiority of the Xbox just sits there. So they have to come up with all kinds of dumbs shiz to justify the jagged hell of PS2!

[thug]

I think it's just a case of console envy! Sony fans sit there defending there out of date crap when the superiority of the Xbox just sits there. So they have to come up with all kinds of dumbs shiz to justify the jagged hell of PS2!

Yeah, but a circle makes a much better wheel than a square. WTF!!

Welcome to the System Wars forum. Any reason you dug up a 3 year old thread to give you first reply?

[Gadfly2317]

Yeah, but a circle makes a much better wheel than a square. WTF!!

Welcome to the System Wars forum. Any reason you dug up a 3 year old thread to give you first reply?

It takes time to craft a finely honed response.

[VGV]

WCG was here a loooooong time ago. I think it's his ghost replying.

[trebor]

Great... now I'm reminded of how much I miss PoD and Folken.

[VGV]

Seeing we've summoned the ghost of Worldclassgamer ...

Let me take a trip down memory lane ...

R. Moody - Compadre of the ole wise one
Louddog - Our bodyguard
GrlGmr - Funny, sarcastic ... VGR's sweetheart
Spastic Colon Powell - One of my all-time favorite posters
Jammin_Jen - Wild gamer woman !!!
gogeta - slade's first best buddy evar
meef - VGR's funniest poster EVAR !!! The gamer from Hawaii
massimodo - DARTH VADER ... the dark side !!!
EccoStorm - Cool, intelligent ... great gaming taste
Gandalf - VGR's most promising newbie
RipDC - Great first post
TheeTriforceGameMaster - the name says it all
OLdSKooL - Bows to GameMaster's gaming skills
CanadianCrippler - RPG connoisseur supreme
PlanB - everybody loves Raymo ... um everybody loves PlanB

Here's to y'all, wherever you're at ... take care
and in gogeta's unforgettable words :

keePONGaming !!!

[Mochan]

LOL


BTW I'd like to point out that repetitive hacking/shooting was the nature of most games back in the 8-bit era, the only difference is that there was no movie clip. Take that as you will.

[Superior Beatslayer]

I can't believe I read that entire first post, then after scrolling down to see 'Fragmaster', I was like wtf is this?

[VGV]

LOL


BTW I'd like to point out that repetitive hacking/shooting was the nature of most games back in the 8-bit era, the only difference is that there was no movie clip. Take that as you will.



My Take

Coming from you,
I'll take that as thought provoking.
Very wise words indeed.

Nowadays we have genres.
RPG, Adventure, Racing
Sports, Puzzle, FPS
Horror Survival, Fighting, Rhythm

We've evolved from turn-based battle
to real time battle
but underneath it all
it's still a roll of the dice

We've evolved from a few rooms
to a whole continent of cities
but underneath it all
it's still finding keys

We've evolved from pixelated 2D racing
to nearly photo realistic 3D racing
but underneath it all
it's still reaching the finish line first

We've evolved from 3 man baseball
to real major league roster baseball
but underneath it all
it's still scoring the most runs

Puzzling isn't it ?

We've evolved from DOOM 1
to the graphically impressive DOOM 3
but underneath it all
it's still DOOM 1

We've evolved from Haunted Mansion
to the sleepy town of Silent Hill
but underneath it all
it still gives us a scare

We've evolved from 2 character karate
to elegant, beautiful ampified roster fighting
but underneath it all
we still have a health bar

We've evolved from Simon
to air guitar heroes
but underneath it all
we still have to memorize


I ask myself this
Is there much innovation left for basic gameplay
Will there ever be a new genre

Or the only room left for improvement
is in presentation, realism and story telling

You tell me
In the meanwhile
I shall ponder upon this puzzle

P.S. This is no POEM ... it's centered text

[Cuddly Knife]

We've evolved from DOOM 1
to the graphically impressive DOOM 3
but underneath it all
it's still DOOM 1I thought in the original Doom that you couldn't aim up? Or am I tripping? I might be tripping, or that might not be enough of a change for most people.

We've evolved from Haunted Mansion
to the sleepy town of Silent Hill
but underneath it all
it still gives us a scareBut it's a different kind of scare. That's the evolution.

We've evolved from 2 character karate
to elegant, beautiful ampified roster fighting
but underneath it all
we still have a health barNot Fight Night Round 3. You have to judge your characters physical appearance and listen to his labored breathing and small shtuffs like that..

I ask myself this
Is there much innovation left for basic gameplay
Will there ever be a new genreProbably not, but the next challenge is evolving those genres. Hmmm, maybe the Wii can change that. Maybe.

Or the only room left for improvement
is in presentation, realism and story telling

You tell me
In the meanwhile
I shall ponder upon this puzzle
The only thing I can see is the evolution up to gaming without the need of buttons, and possibly controlling devices in general. Or is that too science fiction?

[Tappy_Tibbons]

I was a longtime Xbot...I'll tell ya, I think that PS2 is better for 1 reason only...exclusives...no, I don't mean crap Japanese RPGs or stupid platformers (as most fanboys seem to believe here), no, it's a matter of MUSIC games. Guitar Hero, Rez, Frequency, Amplitude...need I go on?

That is really the only genre that I care about on consoles that Ps2 is the clear victor. Action games...debatable...Ninja Gaiden vs God of War...tough competition, but the way I see it is that there are more on PS2, but most of them are horrible. Racing and FPS are Xbox all the way. RPG...meh, who plays RPGs?

I like quirky games, PS2 has those, like Mr Mosquito, for instance. Katamari Damacy...etc. Plenty of games like this.

I like PS2 for reasons OTHER than the majority and I accept that, regardless of the blind, idiotic fanboyism over PS2...the GTA series was the PS2's saving grace, not "quirky Japanese turn based RPG with anime art and stupid story #11hfbn5id84). Eat it.