PullusPardus said:
wasnt Ps2 cheaper than xbox and GC when they came out? |
Nope, it was $100 more than GC and the same price as Xbox.
That said, I think 3DS and PSP2 may actually end up the same ballpark price wise ($250-300).
jarrod said:
Nope, it was $100 more than GC and the same price as Xbox. That said, I think 3DS and PSP2 may actually end up the same ballpark price wise ($250-300). |
The PS2 also launched at the same price as the Playstation ($300 US), and (when you adjust for inflation) was similar in price to most dominant consoles.
On the topic of 3DS pricing, I think a lot of people are over estimating the price of the 3DS. I see very little reason to believe that the 3DS is dramatically more expensive to manufacture than the DS was at launch; and the current pricing of the Nintendo DS will likely change around launch, and the 3DS being (somewhat) close in price to the Nintendo DS makes the 3DS look like a better value.
| PullusPardus said: no, Expensive = defeat. |
In addition to the PS2 being more expensive than the Gamecube, I believe the PS1 was more expensive than the N64 (I might be wrong on this one).
And the PS2 and Xbox were both more expensive than the Dreamcast.
The rEVOLution is not being televised
| Lucas-Rio said: Gamegear more powerful but defeated by Gameboy Nintendo 64 more powerful but defeated by the Playstation Gamecube and Xbox more powerful but defeated by the Playstation 2 PSP more powerful but defeated by the Nintendo DS PS3 and XBOX 360 more powerful but defeated by the Wii |
| Lucas-Rio said: Gamegear more powerful but defeated by Gameboy Nintendo 64 more powerful but defeated by the Playstation Gamecube and Xbox more powerful but defeated by the Playstation 2 PSP more powerful but defeated by the Nintendo DS PS3 and XBOX 360 more powerful but defeated by the Wii
With the talk of the PSP2 trying to be as poweful as the PS3 , I think that we are here for another victory for the less powerful console, the Nintendo 3DS. |
You're looking at it wrong, PS3 and 360 are essentially the same console, minus a few exclusive games. I and others sometimes refer to them as the "HD twins".
The HD twins are beating the Wii, worldwide, handily, and that trend has accelerated a lot recentely. So the most powerful console(s) did win.
If there were two motion console, the Wii and the Apple iWaggle, hypothetically, and they split the motion/casual market in half, and 360 sold the exact same (which would put it higher than Wii and iWaggle seperately), would people say the 360 was crushing the opposition?
Also handhelds are a different beast. If you value graphics you will play a console anyway. So all the handhelds dont count.
The most powerful console, or at least close, has always won. Playstation was more powerful than N64 despite what people claim, or close enough. Xbox would have beaten PS2 if given enough time, and really did great only because it was more powerful, and also beat the vastly more entrenched Gamecube simply because it was more powerful. I remember back in that day the Nintendo fans constantly talked about how GC would crush Xbox once game X came out (zelda, mario, etc), but this never happened. Nintendo had one billion times more powerful software library than Xbox that gen (MS has no software at all, zero, to start, versus countless huge Nintendo franchises), but still lost to it simply because Xbox was more powerful.
Also Dreamcast lost to PS2. Saturn lost to Ps1, Jaguar lost to PS1/N64/Saturn, 3DO lost to PS1/N64/Saturn, all these were directly because they were less powerful.
| fallen said: The most powerful console, or at least close, has always won. Playstation was more powerful than N64 despite what people claim, or close enough. Xbox would have beaten PS2 if given enough time. |
Face the future.. Gamecenter ID: nikkom_nl (oh no he didn't!!)
fallen said:
The HD twins are beating the Wii, worldwide, handily, and that trend has accelerated a lot recentely. So the most powerful console(s) did win.
If there were two motion console, the Wii and the Apple iWaggle, hypothetically, and they split the motion/casual market in half, and 360 sold the exact same (which would put it higher than Wii and iWaggle seperately), would people say the 360 was crushing the opposition?
Also handhelds are a different beast. If you value graphics you will play a console anyway. So all the handhelds dont count.
The most powerful console, or at least close, has always won. Playstation was more powerful than N64 despite what people claim, or close enough. Xbox would have beaten PS2 if given enough time, and really did great only because it was more powerful, and also beat the vastly more entrenched Gamecube simply because it was more powerful. I remember back in that day the Nintendo fans constantly talked about how GC would crush Xbox once game X came out (zelda, mario, etc), but this never happened. Nintendo had one billion times more powerful software library than Xbox that gen (MS has no software at all, zero, to start, versus countless huge Nintendo franchises), but still lost to it simply because Xbox was more powerful.
Also Dreamcast lost to PS2. Saturn lost to Ps1, Jaguar lost to PS1/N64/Saturn, 3DO lost to PS1/N64/Saturn, all these were directly because they were less powerful. |
PS3 and 360 are essentially the same, therefore they should be added? Nope, I disagree. Even if you add them together, you have to take in account the people that bought the 360 and the ps3, making it even harder to gauge. What if we just added the ps2 with the wii, since they are similarily powered? Then it would be a massacre. The wii has won, and I still do not see how anyone can disagree (unless, of course, the ps3 or 360 defy all odds and overtake it). Also on another note, was the GCN actually stronger than the ps2?
"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." -My good friend Mark Aurelius
| fallen said:
3DO lost to PS1/N64/Saturn... directly because ...were less powerful. |
You don't think the $700 price tag had anything to do with that instead? Or the distribution model employed (Panasonic, Goldstar and Sanyo all made 3DO's)? Or was it the atrocious 3rd party support? Or the fact it came out a whole year before the generation cycle was ready to move on?
Nah...couldn't have been any of those valid reasons. It must have been because it was less powerful.
The rEVOLution is not being televised
homer said:
|
I believe it had a faster processor, but the big drawback to the GC was it's small disc capacity.
fallen said:
The HD twins are beating the Wii, worldwide, handily, and that trend has accelerated a lot recentely. So the most powerful console(s) did win.
If there were two motion console, the Wii and the Apple iWaggle, hypothetically, and they split the motion/casual market in half, and 360 sold the exact same (which would put it higher than Wii and iWaggle seperately), would people say the 360 was crushing the opposition?
Also handhelds are a different beast. If you value graphics you will play a console anyway. So all the handhelds dont count.
The most powerful console, or at least close, has always won. Playstation was more powerful than N64 despite what people claim, or close enough. Xbox would have beaten PS2 if given enough time, and really did great only because it was more powerful, and also beat the vastly more entrenched Gamecube simply because it was more powerful. I remember back in that day the Nintendo fans constantly talked about how GC would crush Xbox once game X came out (zelda, mario, etc), but this never happened. Nintendo had one billion times more powerful software library than Xbox that gen (MS has no software at all, zero, to start, versus countless huge Nintendo franchises), but still lost to it simply because Xbox was more powerful.
Also Dreamcast lost to PS2. Saturn lost to Ps1, Jaguar lost to PS1/N64/Saturn, 3DO lost to PS1/N64/Saturn, all these were directly because they were less powerful. |
That's wrong. You are quite deluded.
XBOX360 and PS3 are not the same. They are both HD consoles but they are not twins and should be counted together.The fact is that the Wii beat the 360 easily which beat the PS3. The power = defeat trends has been working at the full effect.
Nintendo 64 was more poweful than the Playstation, there is absolutely no debate here? It's a fact.
Gamecube and Xbox had around the same power and sold the same. Neither of them had any chance to beat the less powerful PS2.
You need to check your facts before contradicting me.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
