The lessons this thread has taught me:

Sony wants to light me on fire

Nintendo loves me for me

Microsoft will win the robot wars

 

rocketpig said: Microsoft isn't in it for image, they're in it for control of the living room... And future profits. Just like any other company, particularly your beloved Nintendo. After all, they are charging $250 for a slightly higher-specced GC. Is it worth it? That's up to you but stop pretending like they're looking out for your greater good. They just want your cold, hard cash just like any other company. That's great you don't like shooters. Many don't and that's fine. But if you think Bungie walked into Halo with the idea "we're going to make a generic shooter funded by Microsoft", you should just shut the hell up right now because it's blatantly obvious that you know very little about the history of gaming. /end rant I swear to God, I don't know which group of fanboys is most annoying around here. I think it's a toss-up.

Oh, I know a lot about the history of gaming, as I am 27 now and have played video games for 20 years. I just happen to disapprove of war games. But I won't start arguing about that, I've long given up on that. Especially if my "opponent" is from the US, then it's completely futile.

Well, I know Nintendo is in it for the money as well... as is any manufacturer of anything, so that's a useless comment. After all, this is capitalism we're livin in, right?

As for the Wii: As I stated before, I didn't buy one so far, cause I'm still waiting for some games (Mario Galaxy, Super Paper Mario PAL, Mario Kart, Sam & Max). I don't mind if it's just a "higher-specced GC" - it's about the games. I'd have been happy with 5 more years of GameCube + some new games. No need for new specs for me, thanks; I'm too old for that. What if you'd been born 10 years earlier? Jeez, you'd be drooling about PS1 graphics right now. It doesn't matter. Great games don't depend on technology.

Quickdraw McGraw said: ElRhodeo said: Why not hate Sony? They're not in it for the games. They are a billion dollar heavy electronics giant that found another playground. Did they move gaming forward? Not a bit. They gave to the masses what they want: Sports, violence, fast cars. Sony consoles are what tabloids are to literature. Cheap thrill, no new ideas. I don't feel that the "Sony decade" has added anything to gaming that I was missing. So I'm assuming Nintendo is in it "for the games", not the money, right? Every successful business, in the gaming industry or not, is out for your money, how they do it is the only differential. No new ideas? Games like Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Okami, these aren't new ideas? I won't even mention how far they've progressed the market in a hardware aspect. EDIT: Thanks RocketPig, you put that (and my) point across quite nicely.

Ico: Don't know it, I probably should, sorry. Shadow of the colossus: Played it, it's nice. I liked the melancholic atmosphere, too. But after 2 bosses you'll know what the rest of the game will be like... Do you really think it rivals, say, Zelda? Not every game has to be Zelda-esque, let me point out that. But SOTC is not one of the big games, to me. Okami was developed by Capcom, wasn't it? They just jumped aboard the most successful system, it could have been an XBox or GC game as well.

ElRhodeo said: EDIT: Hardware: Did they progress the market? I tell you what I think: Video game consoles are low tech. Any system. No need to brag about "the great Kutaragi" or "the great N64". The trick is keeping it cheap. Now, I'm not a tech-head, but from what I've heard, PS1 and N64 were pretty much a draw. And PS2 is said to be the weakest of all last gen systems. Correct me if I'm wrong. Still, I'd like to stress that it doesn't matter. It's about the games.

When I mentioned Sony progressing the hardware market, I didn't necessarily mean with the best technology or features (Although that is the route the PS3 is taking). I agree with you 100% in that it's always about the games.

But by saying Sony has contributed nothing to the video game industry in it's ten-year run is way off. Whether it be popularizing disk-based gaming, multi-media features, or opening up the casual and European markets, there is a lot Sony has to be given credit for, no matter your opinion on their new system. Note that I'm not discounting Nintendo or Microsoft (Ok, maybe Microsoft, ; ) ), just trying to convey my point.

Quickdraw McGraw said: ElRhodeo said: EDIT: Hardware: Did they progress the market? I tell you what I think: Video game consoles are low tech. Any system. No need to brag about "the great Kutaragi" or "the great N64". The trick is keeping it cheap. Now, I'm not a tech-head, but from what I've heard, PS1 and N64 were pretty much a draw. And PS2 is said to be the weakest of all last gen systems. Correct me if I'm wrong. Still, I'd like to stress that it doesn't matter. It's about the games. When I mentioned Sony progressing the hardware market, I didn't necessarily mean with the best technology or features (Although that is the route the PS3 is taking). I agree with you 100% in that it's always about the games. But by saying Sony has contributed nothing to the video game industry in it's ten-year run is way off. Whether it be popularizing disk-based gaming, multi-media features, or opening up the casual and European markets, there is a lot Sony has to be given credit far, no matter your opinion on their new system. Note that I'm not discounting Nintendo or Microsoft (Ok, maybe Microsoft, ; ) ), just trying to convey my point.

I'm from Europe, and I've played tons of video games before Sony's arrival :)

Disk-based gaming: Not something to be proud of, really. There's good reasons why Nintendo hesitated so long, and I'm pretty sure their nextgen handheld won't be disk based as well. Think loading times, scratch issues, no savegames, power consumption.

Multimedia features: Maybe. But when you look at their Blu-Ray strategy, it leaves a strange aftertaste in your mouth: Maybe gamers are just the key to making Sony the exclusive owner of the next dominating video format? If they succeed, Sony will make Billions on licenses alone.

ElRhodeo said: Quickdraw McGraw said: ElRhodeo said: EDIT: Hardware: Did they progress the market? I tell you what I think: Video game consoles are low tech. Any system. No need to brag about "the great Kutaragi" or "the great N64". The trick is keeping it cheap. Now, I'm not a tech-head, but from what I've heard, PS1 and N64 were pretty much a draw. And PS2 is said to be the weakest of all last gen systems. Correct me if I'm wrong. Still, I'd like to stress that it doesn't matter. It's about the games. When I mentioned Sony progressing the hardware market, I didn't necessarily mean with the best technology or features (Although that is the route the PS3 is taking). I agree with you 100% in that it's always about the games. But by saying Sony has contributed nothing to the video game industry in it's ten-year run is way off. Whether it be popularizing disk-based gaming, multi-media features, or opening up the casual and European markets, there is a lot Sony has to be given credit far, no matter your opinion on their new system. Note that I'm not discounting Nintendo or Microsoft (Ok, maybe Microsoft, ; ) ), just trying to convey my point. I'm from Europe, and I've played tons of video games before Sony's arrival :) Disk-based gaming: Not something to be proud of, really. There's good reasons why Nintendo hesitated so long, and I'm pretty sure their nextgen handheld won't be disk based as well. Think loading times, scratch issues, no savegames, power consumption. Multimedia features: Maybe. But when you look at their Blu-Ray strategy, it leaves a strange aftertaste in your mouth: Maybe gamers are just the key to making Sony the exclusive owner of the next dominating video format? If they succeed, Sony will make Billions on licenses alone.

Well you may personally have played games before Sony's arrival, but it is fair to say that Sony greatly expanded the market, and gave them much more respect (for lack of a better term) than anyone else did. They have largely launched their systems simultaneously in Europe, have Europe-based production studios, and so forth. One of the biggest reasons that the Playstation 1 sold so much better than any console previous to it is that it sold so much better in Europe than all its historical competitors.

There are a couple of good reasons Nintendo waited so long on a disc format, and several enormous, overwhelmingly huge reasons Nintendo should have gone with a disc format -- most notably manufacturing and developing cost, both of which were lower on the PS1 than on N64.

Don't get me wrong, I think Nintendo has innovated far more than any other company in the history of video games, but giving Sony zero credit is unfair. How about we just say: "Sony has contributed to the evolution of gaming, but probably not as much as Nintendo?" I think a lot of us can agree to that.

Don't get me wrong, I think Nintendo has innovated far more than any other company in the history of video games, but giving Sony zero credit is unfair. How about we just say: "Sony has contributed to the evolution of gaming, but probably not as much as Nintendo?" I think a lot of us can agree to that.Â

Agreed :)

Bodhesatva said: Don't get me wrong, I think Nintendo has innovated far more than any other company in the history of video games, but giving Sony zero credit is unfair. How about we just say: "Sony has contributed to the evolution of gaming, but probably not as much as Nintendo?" I think a lot of us can agree to that.

I'd agree to that.

Saves me a lot of typing, =P. 

Tispower - Regarding the batteries...

SONY'S CHEMISTS INVENTED THE LITHIUM BATTERY.

No one refutes that, and yes, they do have a pretty respectable battery division. They make over 50% of the world's laptop batteries. Yet their batteries are the ones that blew. And it was proven in a civil court that Apple/HP/Dell's laptops were not to blame. It's actaully pretty sad that Dell received all the bad PR that they did, their stock fell something like 12% with that news story and it was entirely the fault of the battery with the Sony sticker on it.

I dont hate Sony, I just dont like the PS3 for being what it is. A machine that is far too powerful and expensive for even most gamers to like it, they just took the entire power race too far.

Personally I like the PS2 and other Sony items (I had a Sony Bean Walkman as my MP3 player, I loved it but, alas, it broke) and although Sony PR has made some huge and really rather amusing blunders, I still rather like the company.