My god, windbane, if you had that Sixaxis shoved any further up your ass you could taste plastic and trigger buttons.

Whew. Now that I got that out of my system...

A PS2 Waggle would be corporate suicide, on multiple fronts. First off, it would prove that Sony does not have enough faith in its PS3 system. Developers would be turned off immediately and start moving toward companies that actually have a vested interest in their consoles. It would also seem to imply Sony wants developers to return to making PS2 games, on a console that is on its way out (after a record-breaking and industry-leading run), instead of making games for the current generation. Finally it would confuse the hell out of Joe Schmoe Consumer. Do you buy the PlayStation 3, or do you buy the brand-new PlayStation 2 Waggle Pack?

It would scatter sales and destroy what little momentum they've built up. It's extremely good for them that this is false, else they would be in pretty deep shit.

DonWii is posting stuff like this because this thread is a joke, if you have read the last 100 post on here, most of them are humor.

I can't believe fanboys from any "camp" are still arguing over Wii's graphics.

Should we report people when they triple post?

Sony is the best first party developer right now and I believe they are releasing 18 games this year for the PS3 (correct me if I'm wrong, but it's by far the most...I believe more than MS and Nintendo combined).  Their support for the PS3 is very strong.

I wish you'd read this entire thread before arguing the same thing others have.  I think it would be a smart move, and I don't think it would take away from PS3 sales.  If you want the new games you'll get a PS3.  If you want the new waggle games from third parties you'll get the cheaper alternative of the PS2 or waggle controller.  You don't get Nintendo's great first party games, but it would be $40 or so for the controller or $99 for the whole system.  Included would be the best library of games in console history, even without waggle for those.

I think it would be a smart move and it would nearly convince me to not get a Wii. 

I made a general comment then responded to people specifically.  I could have gone with 2 posts, but saying I triple posted is implying I said the exact same thing 3 times.

Your post is also useless. 

If a random developer said that then it is true. Some developers also confirmed that Xbo360 is more powerfull than PS3 so it is true.

Leaving sarcasm aside that was said by Robbie Bach and he is not a developer.

 “The challenge they have is that third parties aren’t going to make much money on this platform because Nintendo is going to make all that money, and their ability to compete with something like a Halo or produce an experience like Madden on their system is going to be tough. They don’t have the graphics Horsepower that even Xbox 1 had. So it makes sort of the comparison set a little bit difficult.”

Xbox was not even called Xbox 1, that shows you have not done your homework. 

@Windbane: This whole thread had gotten almost completely off topic 2 pages ago. This isn't a Wii v. Xbox thread, or a Wii graphics thread, the rumor was debunked weeks ago, and it has basically degenerated in to two things, a console war thread or a community thread.

You are using it as a place to talk about console wars and DonWii was using it as a community thread. Niether of you are abusing it though, I think you are just having some fun as was I.

The whole "who has better graphics" argument has gotten so much worse this gen. It never mattered before and it won't ever matter as far as sales or game quality. The "Wii is X.X times as powerful" is rediculous(ly funny but getting old) and I hope it will stop. You could run bench marks and say it does this many more floating point operations so it is 2x as powerful, but someone else will say "no, no, no it does this many polygons and is only 1.5x as powerful". Amusing, but ultimately only in a Tom Green kind of way.

@itsaMii: Xbox1 is what people refer to the Xbox just to clarify that they aren't talking about the 360. Windbane knows alot about gaming.

I know that. I just wanted to show that he was talking about Robbie Bach who used the same words. Most gamers do not say Xbox1. I was just trying to prove that the source was not from developer analysis, it was just some PR BS.

It is kinda like saying "PS trizzle". You know that the source is Chad Warden there is no way to deny it. 

I just feel like this is the first generation where the difference in graphics is actually deciding what types of games get produced for the system.  I think it's already making a difference.  If the Wii was halfway inbetween xbox and PS3 I think it would be perfect.  Third parties would likely make the game for the Wii and port it to the other 2 systems rather than deciding to skip it altogether for most of their highprofile titles.  The games wouldn't look much different, the Wii would get all the games like the PS2 did, and the graphics wouldn't be attacked nearly as much.

I don't believe most of what Sony says lately, for good or bad, so I don't know if this rumor is true or not, but I still think it would be a good idea. 

So you find 1 source and assume that's the only guy who has said it?  I'm pretty sure we had a multi-page thread on this forum about an actual developer stating that the Wii is as powerful as an xbox 1.

*sigh*  Was the Playstation called the Playstion 1 before the PS2 came about?  No.  Is it reffered to as PS1 or PSone every time now?  Yes. 

Windbane you make a really good point. This gen is affecting which games are made on PS3/360 or Wii. I wasn't considering that. Touche`.

(Damn US keyboards not having any easy way to put on an accent.)