By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
NYANKS on 01 August 2009
Edit Thread
Procrastinato said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


PS1 & PS2 games do not belong to the PS3 era. You're still only praising the PS3 for its power, rather than the overall package. The SNES offered way more than the PS3 to gamers. When someone says king of the consoles, it means they are really talking about a top system of a generation that surpasses all. In that respect, the PS3 is no comparison.

The SNES didn't have even remotely as large of a software library as the PS3.

The thread asked which console was the King.  I took that to mean "in reality, without any silly 'only consider this subset of entertainment, from this generation'" restrictions.

A BC PS3, easily.  As I stated.

In your restricted world, where you bend the rules to your own whims, I'm sure there are a lot of interesting outcomes.  In my restriction-free world (I like to call it "real life"), where I see a console capable of playing thousands upon thousands of games, and far more than any of its competitors, the BC PS3 is quite clearly the King.

If you hate all things PlayStation, Stage, then I can totally understand why the PS3's titanic library has no appeal for you.  Your choice totally makes sense, from that perspective.


This. 60gb PS3 is the king for me, it can play any Playstation game ever made. That's alot of games, and many of the best ever made. Sales, quality, the games lack nothing. The King is all about the software after all.  And that isn't a criticism of the PS3 library, its great to me.  But PS1 +PS2 +PS3 cannot be beaten imo.  You'd have to have an unusually high allegiance to certain games to think otherwise, but I dont see anything wrong with that either.  If I had to be objective though, gotta go with the 60 gig.