By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - which console is better and 6 good games?

Spankey on 18 November 2008
BengaBenga said:

I would highly recommend the DS.

But for consoles I'd say a Wii60 would give you 95% of the games for about the same price as a PS3. And most multiplat games are (slightly) better on 360.

Wii exclusives:
Mario Galaxy
Metroid Prime 3
Mario Kart
Super Smash Bros Brawl
Zelda Twilight Princess
Fire Emblem Radiant Dawn

360 exclusives
Halo 3
Gears of War
Tales of Vesperia
Ninja Gaiden II
Fable II
Mass Effect

@Kantor: I have a HDTV and the Wii is looks perfectly fine, thank you. For your interest: Wii has 16x9 and 480p output, so a HDTV is better than a regular TV for Wii as well.

 

 

One of the OP's requirements is a Blu-Ray player, but i like your way of thinking!

Blu-Ray player + DSi = win



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

Around the Network
Kantor on 18 November 2008
BengaBenga said:

I would highly recommend the DS.

But for consoles I'd say a Wii60 would give you 95% of the games for about the same price as a PS3. And most multiplat games are (slightly) better on 360.

Wii exclusives:
Mario Galaxy
Metroid Prime 3
Mario Kart
Super Smash Bros Brawl
Zelda Twilight Princess
Fire Emblem Radiant Dawn

360 exclusives
Halo 3
Gears of War
Tales of Vesperia
Ninja Gaiden II
Fable II
Mass Effect

@Kantor: I have a HDTV and the Wii is looks perfectly fine, thank you. For your interest: Wii has 16x9 and 480p output, so a HDTV is better than a regular TV for Wii as well.

 

I didn't say the Wii looked bad, I said it didn't look as good as the PS360. Wii goes to 480p, PS3 and 360 go to 1080p.

 



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective

EaglesEye379 on 18 November 2008
Spankey said:
TWRoO said:
Spankey said:
@ lol mature
It's a remake of a thread mistakingly made in the SONY thread.

@sepisfu, my opinion still stands, if you are looking for Blu-Ray and a console, the PS3 is still the most economical option for now.

Blu ray player for less than £150
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_w_h__1_4?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=blu+ray+player&sprefix=blu+

Xbox 360 cheapest is now £130

 

 

150 pounds = $200+ does it not?

so 150 + 130 = 280 pounds.

PS3 bundle (with hard drive) = +/-285 pounds 

All in one unit, so it saves space too. for just 5 pounds more.

I'd say thats more economical.

 

 

 

People need to explain to me how adding a feature that people are not interested in makes it economical. First off, hands down if you are a Blu-Ray/DVD collector and big movie enthusiast with a home cinema then PS3 is the best choice. But what do you tell the huge percentage of consumers who are not collectors and barely even have any DVDs?

 



tuoyo on 18 November 2008
Kantor said:

 

 

I stand by what I said earlier. PS3 is cheaper than a 360 and blu-ray player, and since you have a high-def TV, Wii would be a waste.

If I said what I want to say in reply to this post I would get a ban so I would just say it in my head and leave you to imagine what I am saying and also leave you to continue to stew in your ignorance

 



Biggest Pikmin Fan on VGChartz I was chosen by default due to voting irregularities

Super Smash Brawl Code 1762-4158-5677 Send me a message if you want to receive a beat down

 

Spankey on 18 November 2008
EaglesEye379 said:
Spankey said:
TWRoO said:
Spankey said:
@ lol mature
It's a remake of a thread mistakingly made in the SONY thread.

@sepisfu, my opinion still stands, if you are looking for Blu-Ray and a console, the PS3 is still the most economical option for now.

Blu ray player for less than £150
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_w_h__1_4?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=blu+ray+player&sprefix=blu+

Xbox 360 cheapest is now £130

 

 

150 pounds = $200+ does it not?

so 150 + 130 = 280 pounds.

PS3 bundle (with hard drive) = +/-285 pounds 

All in one unit, so it saves space too. for just 5 pounds more.

I'd say thats more economical.

 

 

 

People need to explain to me how adding a feature that people are not interested in makes it economical. First off, hands down if you are a Blu-Ray/DVD collector and big movie enthusiast with a home cinema then PS3 is the best choice. But what do you tell the huge percentage of consumers who are not collectors and barely even have any DVDs?

 

 

for my reply, I will quote tuoyo:

"If I said what I want to say in reply to this post I would get a ban so I would just say it in my head and leave you to imagine what I am saying and also leave you to continue to stew in your ignorance"



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

Around the Network
BengaBenga on 18 November 2008

One of the OP's requirements is a Blu-Ray player, but i like your way of thinking!


I don't see that in the OP. If true, that makes this a ridiculous discussion, cause if you want a BluRay player AND a gameconsole there is only one option.

I didn't say the Wii looked bad, I said it didn't look as good as the PS360. Wii goes to 480p, PS3 and 360 go to 1080p.


You literally said that it would be a waste to buy a Wii if you have a HDTV, which is a ridiculous statement. My DVD player is not HD, is it a waste that I watch DVD's on my HDTV?


PC: Collecting dust usually since most have given up WoW but Burning Crusade/WotLK keeps it alive and alot of anticipation for Starcraft 2/Diablo 3.


Funny, most hardcore online gamers I know prefer the PC over anything else. Especially for shooters.



Spankey on 18 November 2008

@ BengaBenga
It was in his origional thread in the Sony section
http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=49512&page=1



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

EaglesEye379 on 18 November 2008
Spankey said:
EaglesEye379 said:
Spankey said:
TWRoO said:
Spankey said:
@ lol mature
It's a remake of a thread mistakingly made in the SONY thread.

@sepisfu, my opinion still stands, if you are looking for Blu-Ray and a console, the PS3 is still the most economical option for now.

Blu ray player for less than £150
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss_w_h__1_4?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=blu+ray+player&sprefix=blu+

Xbox 360 cheapest is now £130

 

 

150 pounds = $200+ does it not?

so 150 + 130 = 280 pounds.

PS3 bundle (with hard drive) = +/-285 pounds 

All in one unit, so it saves space too. for just 5 pounds more.

I'd say thats more economical.

 

 

 

People need to explain to me how adding a feature that people are not interested in makes it economical. First off, hands down if you are a Blu-Ray/DVD collector and big movie enthusiast with a home cinema then PS3 is the best choice. But what do you tell the huge percentage of consumers who are not collectors and barely even have any DVDs?

 

 

for my reply, I will quote tuoyo:

"If I said what I want to say in reply to this post I would get a ban so I would just say it in my head and leave you to imagine what I am saying and also leave you to continue to stew in your ignorance"

I am asking you a serious question. Are you saying you are incapable of replying an informative reply without insulting or calling people ignorant? Is it so hard to believe that there are people out there not interested in buying Blu-Rays or DVDs?

 



Spankey on 18 November 2008
EaglesEye379 said:
Spankey said:

 

for my reply, I will quote tuoyo:

"If I said what I want to say in reply to this post I would get a ban so I would just say it in my head and leave you to imagine what I am saying and also leave you to continue to stew in your ignorance"

I am asking you a serious question. Are you saying you are incapable of replying an informative reply without insulting or calling people ignorant? Is it so hard to believe that there are people out there not interested in buying Blu-Rays or DVDs?

 

 

wow, so touchy!

I gave my reasoning, read it.

16.71 million people seem to be interested in it to date which should answer your question.

Or did I understand your post incorrectly?

It's pretty difficult to decode.

and as for "Is it so hard to believe that there are people out there not interested in buying Blu-Rays or DVDs?"

no it's not.

Worldwide there are billions of people obviously not interested in any gaming or home entertainment system.  there are millions of people not interested in anything except trying to stay alive right now. so...what's your point?



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

EaglesEye379 on 18 November 2008
BengaBenga said:


PC: Collecting dust usually since most have given up WoW but Burning Crusade/WotLK keeps it alive and alot of anticipation for Starcraft 2/Diablo 3.


Funny, most hardcore online gamers I know prefer the PC over anything else. Especially for shooters.

 

 Well the biggest choice now is playing WotLK/Left 4 Dead/Red Alert 3/Fallout 3/CoDWaW or Gears 2. WotLK/Gears 2 are winning out. Some did pick out L4D on PC though.