Nintendo DS or Sony PSP?

[Onizuka-GTO]

Originally Posted by Lumir

You said yourself you dont care about the numbers. Simply put you dont care about some of the facts. So why are you in this topic?

I'm in this topic because this is a forum for users to post their games related opinions, and this happens to be the thread about NDS & PSP and I happened to be a Gamer.
That is, a person who likes to play games, so I think i'am certain this is the right place to be.
It's that simple. really, It's not rocket science.

Originally Posted by Lumir

This topic is a debate and facts are well apreciated and if you dont care for those facts then why do you even bother to post other then to express your opinion?

Actually this topic is about "Nintendo DS or Sony PSP?" , it is not about financial or hardware statistics, You are right about one thing it is a debate, and in a debate you are encourage to "express your opinion" because frankly that is exactly what matters.


If opinion does not matter, then this debate would easily become a simply thread to praise Sony, with all the statistics and facts thrown about it, it would more likely resemble a companies daily report on sales or something, no one would know you were talking about a product built for entertainment and fun. The very fact that you have to throw numbers around just shows how insecure you are about the PS3.

As Nintendo states Playing is believing, if you have to point your finger at all this stiff opposition to your own support of Sony, blame them for faning the flames. Nintendo has just reinforced the belief in them, while Sony just keep throwing the numbers. If they had shown something s interesting as Nintendo perhaps they would of had a better time at E3, but they didn't and disappointing announcement from them just makes it worse for them.
PR wise no matter what the numbers say, Nintendo is at this moment winning the limelight.
Nothing you'll say, nor your statistic will convince me of the PS3 until i've seen something genuinely interesting from them. Something that will make me want to spent £500 on.

As for your information, I built many custom PC's from the ground up, and I find those prices of your absurb, there are many factors to building a great gaming platform, performance is based not just on the CPU and graphic card, for you to say this and quote those rediculous prices which i gather you were picking from the most expensive components you could find based upon your baseless assumption that the latest components can only rival or better the PS3, just shows your inexperienced. So i will still stand by my previous post.

Once again, you post more proof why you should just take a break and stop causing us all so much grief. I sympathize with iKumdo, Arias and countless others who have to put up with your rediculous babbling, and your regular attack on them simply because they oppose your opinions.

[Benoit]

Why does the EyeToy sell like crazy in Europe

Because Europeans can't appreciate good gaming anymore. :/

Why is the XBOX successful in the US yet enjoys only 3% of Japanese console market share?

They don't like Western consoles.

Your PC can be as strong as you want, but there are no games for it in all seriousness.

The PC does have one thing going for it, though, and that is a free market. We get our bishoujo games on PC.

The reason why I do not believe the Nintendo Wii will pull ahead is simple, it cannot even be considered nextgen. The system specifications still lie in the previous generation of PS2 and Xbox.

The specs weren't even announced yet. But we did see the graphics, and they hold their own.

Will the Wii redefine gaming by making coming next generations rely on innovation as opposed to the current standard of nextgen graphics? That's the big question, and in my case I believe that this is quite a gamble and as reflected in David Mercer's report it will probably not succeed. It just isn't historically supported and I find it hard to believe that the nextgen will be dominated by simply old graphics.

I find "not historically supported" to be a weak argument, considering that each generation starts with a clean line, really. Also, I contest the "old graphics" point, as seen above.

[uLTraCarL-]

with all these numbers being thrown around, I feel like i'm watching a Sony Press conference all over again

[Busaiku Chama]

Originally Posted by uLTraCarL-

with all these numbers being thrown around, I feel like i'm watching a Sony Press conference all over again

There's an awful lack of crabs though.

[arias]

Originally Posted by Busaiku Chama

There's an awful lack of crabs though.

...

Giant, crabs.

[iKumdo]

Originally Posted by arias

Wow, seriously, I just have to say that if you've been reading my posting history then.. ... oh well.

Had to see your "meaningful" posts you were talking about. Besides, didn't you say you were going to stop talking to me? Typical of people like you. "I'm not going to say anything anymore.... This time I'll REALLY shut up.... Now I'm really..."

As Nintendo states Playing is believing, if you have to point your finger at all this stiff opposition to your own support of Sony, blame them for faning the flames. Nintendo has just reinforced the belief in them, while Sony just keep throwing the numbers. If they had shown something s interesting as Nintendo perhaps they would of had a better time at E3, but they didn't and disappointing announcement from them just makes it worse for them.
PR wise no matter what the numbers say, Nintendo is at this moment winning the limelight.
Nothing you'll say, nor your statistic will convince me of the PS3 until i've seen something genuinely interesting from them. Something that will make me want to spent £500 on.

Thank you.
I think the stats are important, but it's not a way to judge how good a system is, but how popular it is. The N64 didn't sell well, but the analog stick it created revolutionalized the gaming industry.

[AnimePlus]

Originally Posted by Benoit

The specs weren't even announced yet. But we did see the graphics, and they hold their own.

I find "not historically supported" to be a weak argument, considering that each generation starts with a clean line, really. Also, I contest the "old graphics" point, as seen above.

I can but contest my cordial disagreement. I saw trailers of Red Steel and the Mario and if you have seen what Xbox360 and PS3 are capable of (Fight Night, Metal Gear Solid 4, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter) I doubt that the Wii specs can handle that, but of course that is merely speculation. Though Nintendo did state that they were going for innovation not graphics, but it is true that you need some graphics. Of course, the Wii has not been finalized so no one knows and your argument is as good as mine.

However, I disagree with your latter statement. The gaming market is currently dominated by games like Elderscrolls IV: Oblivion, God of War, Halo, Half-Life 2, Call of Duty 2, Battlefield 2 etc. etc. These games constantly tout better graphics with advancing tried and true genres. The future is Bioshock, Heavenly Sword, Metal Gear Solid 4, Halo 3, Final Fantasy XIII, War Hawk, God of War II, Gears of War etc. etc. This is a continuing trend, there is no denying it. Referring to my previous statement, let me modify it if you will, "it is not historically supported, nor is it presently supported."

I agree that there are trends in innovation. That is seen in the Nintendo DS, which I mentioned. It is seen in the EyeToy, it is seen in Guitar Hero.

Surely, my insinuations are rather simple yet the principle analyst at Strategy came up with the same result?

[Radd]

I find it rather amazing that people are still dignifying Lumir's posts with replies. He has clearly stated several times he is only making such absurd posts to get a rise out of people so he can watch them sputter and flail.

I'd also like to mention that Nintendo did not create the analogue stick. That's been around since some of the earliest videogames. The analogue controllers we see today are not even true analogue, they are digital, but with many degrees of pressure sensitivity to mimic an analogue stick. Sega released a controller with such an analogue stick before the N64 was released. What Nintendo did do, however, was to make it their main control option. This is what pushed analogue control back into mainstream gaming. Developers tend to ignore that which does not come standard for a console, most Saturn games did not take advantage of Sega's analogue controller because it was an extra, an accessory, not many Saturn owners had one. The N64 controller came with the system, it was used for pretty much every game, rather than being a novelty for one or two games.

[Radd]

For all the talk about graphics, I must assume all of you touting superior graphics all stuck with your Dreamcasts when the PS2 was launched, because early PS2 games didn't look any better (and in many cases actually looked worse), and decided to skip Sony's console altogether when you saw the XBox and Gamecube?

As for comments on what is "historically supported", we'd all still be playing Atari consoles if history completely defined the future of gaming, and there would be zero debate between the PSP and the DS since Nintendo has dominated the hand held market for so long. Console developers in a good position in the previous generation do tend to bring some clout with them to a new generation of hardware, but causality is in full effect and there are many things which can bring down a giant.

This new home console generation will be interesting to watch unfold because there are so many uncertanties. This isn't simply another generation of consoles, two companies are driving up the price of the home gaming console, while the third is trying to keep costs low. One of the former companies is driving up the cost of a home gaming console much further, this will likly affect their sales, which in turn will likely affect their developer support. The other has been lacking in Japanese third party support with their previous console, but their new console already seems to be doing much better in that regard. Developement costs are another factor. The more graphically impressive games get, the more expensive it is to take full advantage of that power. Not every game is going to look like the MGS4 trailer, it will simply cost too much. Already we're likely to see the cost of individual games go up. Historically, to try some of the logic currently being tossed around in this thread, gamers have been opposed to this. Also, for the first time since the NES, Nintendo will not be launching a significant amount of time after the competition. They've already announced an unusually impressive launch lineup, too. Take all of these factors, along with the respective horespower between the three consoles, and there are many outcomes that seem pretty reasonable.

Personally, I do not suspect Nintendo will dominate the generation as Sony has done in the past two console generations. I do, however, suspect Nintendo and Microsoft will make significant gains into Sony's market share. Before E3, I was certain Microsoft would benefit the most from this. After E3, I'm no longer so certain, Nintendo seems to be onto something, and their lower price point could well convice the skeptical to try it firsthand. Also, before E3 I doubted te PS3 would cost as much as $600. I expected $450, to $500 at the very most. Now we find $500 will get you a stripped down PS3 with no memory card slot, no wireless support, and no HDMI support (so no full HD resolutions if you have an HDMI tv).

[arias]

Originally Posted by iKumdo

Had to see your "meaningful" posts you were talking about. Besides, didn't you say you were going to stop talking to me? Typical of people like you. "I'm not going to say anything anymore.... This time I'll REALLY shut up.... Now I'm really..."

No, I just didn't want to argue with you any further.. I wanted to end the pseudo-argument then and there, but doesn't mean I'm bearing any personal grudges against you and won't respond to you anymore, or anything of the sort. Well.. it's okay if you keep going on your tirade against me, I'm not biting

Originally Posted by Animeplus

I can but contest my cordial disagreement. I saw trailers of Red Steel and the Mario and if you have seen what Xbox360 and PS3 are capable of (Fight Night, Metal Gear Solid 4, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter) I doubt that the Wii specs can handle that, but of course that is merely speculation. Though Nintendo did state that they were going for innovation not graphics, but it is true that you need some graphics. Of course, the Wii has not been finalized so no one knows and your argument is as good as mine.

However, I disagree with your latter statement. The gaming market is currently dominated by games like Elderscrolls IV: Oblivion, God of War, Halo, Half-Life 2, Call of Duty 2, Battlefield 2 etc. etc. These games constantly tout better graphics with advancing tried and true genres. The future is Bioshock, Heavenly Sword, Metal Gear Solid 4, Halo 3, Final Fantasy XIII, War Hawk, God of War II, Gears of War etc. etc. This is a continuing trend, there is no denying it. Referring to my previous statement, let me modify it if you will, "it is not historically supported, nor is it presently supported."

I agree that there are trends in innovation. That is seen in the Nintendo DS, which I mentioned. It is seen in the EyeToy, it is seen in Guitar Hero.

Surely, my insinuations are rather simple yet the principle analyst at Strategy came up with the same result?

What good is your argument when, it's obvious that I have already said it and have been roundly rejected by perhaps only one poster. No other consequent poster actually quoted me to respond to my assertions, though. I will proceed to point out a couple of simple points that parallel and will support your argument:

(1) The Wii's weak specs

This is in line with Nintendo's strategy for their past two consoles; the N64 and the Gamecube. They are not about cutting edge, instead they choose a "sweet spot" for their technology -- enough strength for a great price. This is how they produce cheap consoles, and this is combined with basically Shigeru Miyamoto's brilliance in Zelda, Mario, Donkey Kong, Pikmin and Animal Crossing, all of which are basically just some of his creations that keep the Nintendo company going.

The "brilliance" of Nintendo however, now extends to its console in the Wii. The pointer device will allow new sorts of gameplay and interaction, and it is quite promising indeed. It's incredibly hyped right now, but let's take a look at the flip side.

Like you said, the games that drive the industry are the Metal Gears, the GTAs, the Gran Turismos, the Resident Evils, the Halos and such. All of them intend to fully tap next-generation console capacities. This is only really provided by the XBOX360 and the PS3, both of which have specs have ~3Ghz, 512MB RAM. This cannot be matched by Nintendo's Wii, the most recent spec details of which were 750Mhz, 88MB RAM. Basically, it's just impossible to fit MGS4 onto the Wii purely because of its computational limitations.. what is possible is to design games using a scaling engine like Half-Life 2, but this is costly for the developers.


(2) Specs is cost

Do not believe rumours that the Wii will be "as powerful as the Xbox360". This is entirely stupid; because if it were, it couldn't be sold at US$200.

Amongst the three competitors, Sony has the greatest advantage in hardware because they are an electronics company that produces their own hardware. They produce their own Cell chips and avaoid middle-man and upmark fees. Microsoft has close ties to the electronic manufacturing industry and so might get great prices, and Nintendo has a long history in the console industry. However, it remains fact that Nintendo's advantage in getting cheap hardware prices is also probably the least of the three.

This is also why Nintendo doesn't opt to fight with Sony/Microsoft with brawns; because it can't. They can't match their low prices for hardware, and so they don't. The Nintendo Wii WILL be low in spec, and also low in price.


(3) Cross-platform portability

As a result, it should be entirely logical to see that games designed to take advantage of PS3/X360's hardware will not be able to port to the Wii with ease. In fact, it is probable that late in the next-gen console life, PS3 games will also not be able to port to X360 with ease because of their vastly different architecture (Cell vs 3-Core model). Initial launch games should be able to port easier, because as reported, many launch games for the X360 will only be utilizing ONE core, or at least use them in a serial fashion since programmers have yet to master the system, and developers intend to port games to the PS3.

So, we will probably see a "lock" of the franchise bestsellers --- MGS, GTA, DMC, RE, Halo, DoA, GT, FF, etc etc on their respective PS3/X360 consoles. Indeed, we see companies creating special spin-offs for the Wii to accomodate its lower-specs (see for example FF:CC 2 for the Wii).

HOWEVER, it is important to know that the "lock" goes both ways. Games designed to take full advantage of the Wii will also be locked to the Wii, because the PS3 and the X360 both do not have the pointing device. I honestly have no idea whether the recent controller-motion-sensor implanted for the PS3 controller can substitute the Wii Nunchuck. If it can, then we could see Wii games ported to the PS3 with added frame-rate smoothness etc etc. If not, Wii games will be locked to it.

So, it is important to know that cross-platform portability of games may not be possible late in this console generation. Perhaps the next-gen after this will have a unified architectural structure for the hardware, or perhaps they will diverge even further. I don't know.


(4) Does this mean Wii will lose out, or die?

No, this is a non-sequitur.

Despite not having the main franchise series, the Wii will probably be a success; moreso than the GC. In fact, the GC survived well (and had almost the same market share as the XBOX) without having any of the aforementioned mainstream games. I think at this point in time, we can at the very least predict that the Wii will do at least as well as the Gamecube --- not in terms of market share, but in terms of sales.

Market share is a tricky issue, because the Wii's target audience is different from the PS3/X360, the two of which share mostly the same target audience. So, measuring the next-gen war in terms of market share might be a mistake, because the Wii will probably bring in a new audience; be that the casual gamer, the family, or whatever.


(5) What does this mean?

That the PS3 and X360 are really fighting for essentially the same portion of the market (roughly 70-90% of the current gen PS2/XBOX/GC), which has limited growth potential. However, whichever wins out this war will probably dominate, and earn plenty of moolah. The current situation seems to, I think, indicate that the PS3 will win this out, although this might be a pyrrhic victory.

The PS3 and X360 will retain their gaming audience, because gamers still want their franchise series. They will live on.

The Wii will definitely thrive, and probably succeed as well, because of the current hype and Nintendo's long track record of economic success in their consoles. They have also managed to broadened their audience through the DS with games like Nintendogs and the IQ game series, and they are essentially applying the same strategy to the Wii by roping in a new audience, and new cashcows to milk.




Conclusion: The "meat" of the battle is really between the PS3 and X360.

Although there is some overlap in the target audience between the PS3/X360 and the Wii, it is independent enough such that success on either side will not severely affect the other.

Nintendo is exploring foreign lands by simplifying their games and making it accessible to the layman. Its route, then, is less restricted by competition than the other two consoles. As a corollary, its success will be entirely dependent on the games it will produce to rope in new money.

[Radd]

I believe it is safe to assume, at this point at least, that Wii games will be locked to that system.

My understanding of the PS3 controller, what Sony has said about it, is that it will have tilt motion sensing. That's it. It will not have the point sensor technology, and it will not have the nunchuck accelerometer.

Again, I do suspect Sony's next console will feature a remote even more similar to what Nintendo is doing with this generation.

[arias]

Originally Posted by Radd

I believe it is safe to assume, at this point at least, that Wii games will be locked to that system.

My understanding of the PS3 controller, what Sony has said about it, is that it will have tilt motion sensing. That's it. It will not have the point sensor technology, and it will not have the nunchuck accelerometer.

Again, I do suspect Sony's next console will feature a remote even more similar to what Nintendo is doing with this generation.

If you're right, then you're right.

Sneaky developers might develop games for the Wii that are portable to the PS3 by utilizing the nunchuck only to the extent where it is replicable for the PS3. But of course, doing this could be a mere waste of money, or whatever.

It is possible that Sony's next console could follow more in Nintendo's footsteps. but I just want to be very clear on one thing. If Nintendo succeeds with the Wii's controller, then it would be STUPID for competitors not to follow suit. To be stubborn in this case, would mean suicide. There are so many posters who spit on Sony for mimicking Nintendo at the last minute, but if anything, that's the mark of a fine business plan.

Remember, Nintendo played stubborn and held onto catridge technology for the N64.

[Radd]

I agree on all counts. I want to see the companies picking up the best ideas of the competition. If they didn't, we'd all still be using a D-pad for awkward, Tomb Raider like control, and paying too much money for cart based games.

[Onizuka-GTO]

All i can say is : Bring it on! I too im interested if Nintendo will force Sony to follow with the same control devices.

Of ocurse if the competition starts to mimc you, well imitation is the best form of flattery.

But it will force Nintendo to push harder for more innovation. And unlike the other companies who are quite reserve in their pursuit of the unique, i hope Nintendo finds another gem for us to go gaga over.

[Radd]

Nintendo wasn't always the company to push the hardest, they were quite satisfied to sit on their laurels when they were top dog. They crushed Gunpei Yokoi's Virtual Reality console idea, giving us Virtual Boy instead. This is why competition is important, and it's foolish to pick a side as your own, and wish failure on the rest.

[Lumir]

@Onizuka-GTO

Give me a link to a site that sells pc parts were i could make a pc as powerful or more powerful then the ps3 for 600USD or less. I doubt you can do that... my lack of comp experience? Lol you know nothing of my comp experience, but if you can prove what i asked above then i might consider you to be some what pc edjucated.

If you really want to debate me on this, find out the specs of the ps3, its capabilities, and hardware. Search the web for the same equip for pc's and see if you get a price anywere around 600USD. Yea its a "yea right" situation. Did i supply you with enough information that you can finally understand that the ps3 is 1 cheap a$$ computer/consule with its capabilities/hardware???

Your deffinetly right about this topic and the opinions in it. Yet what i posted about you im my last post was due to the fact your post lead no were. It was strait up nintendo fanboism. With no real info and facts. Its true that opinion is highly exceptable but i found no reason for you to post here as you provided nothing of great value.

If you understood a good debate you would also understand that facts, numbers, and charts are very much a part of them. What if no one knew about the facts yet the DS sold lets say 3billion while sony sold 5mil. Wouldnt that send a clear picture to the consumer? Yet they way your going you could care less what the statistics say. This leads me to the conclusion your nothing more then a nintendo fan boy who only cares about his opinion and actuall facts mean nothing to you.

Also did i ever say... "Opinion dosent matter" i think not, dont assume so much or you could end up somewere you dont want to be.

Also at nintendo's "Playing is believing" comment. It was jacked strait from the quote "seeing is believeing", yet how can playing somthing lead you to believing it? In fact what is there to believe in??? The game??? ROLF!

Again to clarify your opinion, nintendo dose not hold the "limelight" as you proposed.

And oh! I didnt know! Im causing you and others grief??? Oh im so sorry do you want a cookie?!?!!?? ROLF man peeps like you crack me up all the time. If ya cant stand the posts then get outta the forum... (i jacked a famous quote "if you cant stand the heat then get out of the kitchen" just like nintendo has, yet i just changed around the words to make it my own! ROLF!)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FOR ALL THOSE THAT HOLD AN OPINON IN THIS TOPIC

Now lets take a look at what market nintendo seems to focus in on. From what i have seen nintendo has the most "kiddie" games out of all the systems, and the system itself has proven to look much like a toy then a futuristic game counsule. Just look at the GC and compare it to the x-box and ps2, yes it looks just like a toy. So i safely assume that nintendo "MAINLY" appeals to the kiddie market.

About this crap were people are saying they copied this! and they copied that! Read this and understand your miss fortunate mind set...

"I was surprised when i found out that they also copied the xbox 360 controller by putting a a Round,Pressable Playstation logo in the middle of the controller just like the 360, Lets not forget that they are
"attempting" to imitate Xbox Live. Sony aint Creative at all they are just imitating what the other consoles have."

"So by this logic...are we to believe Microsoft copied Sony for releaseing the XBOX controllers with 2 analog sticks? Are we also to believe that MIcrosoft copied all other console makers by coming into the game with the XBOX?

Or that they ripped off Sony's idea of having a gameconsole that was more than a game console by adding DVD playback to the XBOX?

Or that they copied SOn'y "Greatist HIts" lineup by releaseing "Platnium Hits"

come on now!! How fickle can you be???

Without imitation their wouldn't be innovation.....everyone knows that"


Now lets look at sony and the x-box. They both have many games that relate to the more mature crowd, more then nintedo if i might say. Me being a mature gammer i tend to focus more on the futuristic mature type systems then the innovative toy like one... nintendo. While nintendo has all these new innovative ways to play games, you have to ask yourself whats more important to you...

1: Different ways to play games
2: The newest futuristic power/graphics
3: The amount of options/abilities
4: The games that support the innovative gamming ways as well as create them.

The way i see it all nintendo really has going for it IS the innovative ways. While sony on the other hand has futuristic graphics, hardware and power. While sony may not incorparate as many new innovative ways as nintendo that dose not barr the game creation companies from tapping into the ps3's power to create new innovative gamming ways of there own.

So all this leads to my former statement... What dose nintendo got that sony cant have? And what dose sony have that nintendo cant have???

Think it over...

PSP>DS

[Radd]

Now, just in case anyone has forgotten,

Originally Posted by Lumir

And the funny part is they didnt realize i was flamming and stating hallrious things just for the fun of it even after i told them!

[Lumir]

Originally Posted by Radd

Now, just in case anyone has forgotten,

Actually in that post i was being quite serious im my opinion. Though i laughed at the "playing is believing" part lol.

[Radd]

Well, if by your "playing is believing" comment you're mocking the foolish idea that any company that immitates the competition's best ideas is bad, then I'm all for it. However, Nintendo's "playing is believing" philosophy is actually quite appropriate for the technophobic gaming culture.

Gamers, and I'm only speaking in broad generalizations there are certainly exceptions here, tend to dislike any change that is not related to better graphics or sound. If it's a change that improves either of those categories, it's golden. If it affects any other aspect of gaming, it's almost univerally reviled. This seems especially true of controllers.

SNES pad, when it came out many detractors whinged and cried that it had too many buttons.

The N64 pad came out, lots of people simply did not know how to hold it. Seriously, Nintendo should have simply cut off the right side of the pad because many gamers absolutely refused to try and hold it correctly.

The Gamecube's button arrangement, probably one of the best ideas in game pad design since the analogue stick, but it's simply too different for many gamers.

The DS touchscreen.

The Playstation3's more ergonomic "boomarang" controller caused a public outcry that made Sony pull it back and release a controller virtually identical to the controller they've been using since the PSX.

Many people simply lack imagination. The only way many come around is by trying it themselves and getting used to the new setup.

[iKumdo]

Originally Posted by Lumir

Also at nintendo's "Playing is believing" comment. It was jacked strait from the quote "seeing is believeing", yet how can playing somthing lead you to believing it? In fact what is there to believe in??? The game??? ROLF!

You can't take a guy serious if he messes up internet slang. I might be mistaken, but ROLF doesn't mean anything right? It's supposed to be ROFL. I also believe Nintendo knew about the "seeing is believing" quote. They did mention in their conference something like "seeing is not enough"/"You don't necessary get what you see." I do believe that was intentional on Nintendo's part.

Again to clarify your opinion, nintendo dose not hold the "limelight" as you proposed.

Breaking the e3 line record does indicate that Nintendo is indeed holding the limelight.

And oh! I didnt know! Im causing you and others grief??? Oh im so sorry do you want a cookie?!?!!?? ROLF man peeps like you crack me up all the time. If ya cant stand the posts then get outta the forum... (i jacked a famous quote "if you cant stand the heat then get out of the kitchen" just like nintendo has, yet i just changed around the words to make it my own! ROLF!)

I'm glad you can live with the fact that no one likes you. I hope you have friends in "reality."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FOR ALL THOSE THAT HOLD AN OPINON IN THIS TOPIC

I think everyone has opinions. What are you? A retarded robot?

Now lets take a look at what market nintendo seems to focus in on. From what i have seen nintendo has the most "kiddie" games out of all the systems, and the system itself has proven to look much like a toy then a futuristic game counsule. Just look at the GC and compare it to the x-box and ps2, yes it looks just like a toy. So i safely assume that nintendo "MAINLY" appeals to the kiddie market.

Oh, so you do have opinions.

About this crap were people are saying they copied this! and they copied that! Read this and understand your miss fortunate mind set...

What?

"So by this logic...are we to believe Microsoft copied Sony for releaseing the XBOX controllers with 2 analog sticks? Are we also to believe that MIcrosoft copied all other console makers by coming into the game with the XBOX?

But Sony copied the analog from Nintendo! I don't know if Cube controller was introduced first or not (notice:introduced not released) but it also has two analogs.

Or that they ripped off Sony's idea of having a gameconsole that was more than a game console by adding DVD playback to the XBOX?

Yes, Microsoft copied something very creative from Sony. They took a DVD disc based game system and made it play DVD movies. Sony must have felt ripped off.

Or that they copied SOn'y "Greatist HIts" lineup by releaseing "Platnium Hits"

Gamecube had "Player's Choice." I'm not sure it was invented by any one company. I THINK.

Now lets look at sony and the x-box. They both have many games that relate to the more mature crowd, more then nintedo if i might say. Me being a mature gammer i tend to focus more on the futuristic mature type systems then the innovative toy like one... nintendo. While nintendo has all these new innovative ways to play games, you have to ask yourself whats more important to you...

I can't argue with the fact that you are a mature gammer. As an actual gamer though, I prefer to have innovation and great gameplay over uber graphics with blood and a toy that looks like a toy over a toy that likes a toy from the future. OMG, there is blood in that game! They cuss and shoot guns! You're so mature!! Playing games in general makes you a child, just because it has "mature" themes doesn't make you any more mature. Nintendo seems more mature than Sony/Microsoft at the moment. They have Brain Games, which older, more mature people plays.

1: Different ways to play games
2: The newest futuristic power/graphics
3: The amount of options/abilities
4: The games that support the innovative gamming ways as well as create them.

Futuristic again? The Wii is more "futuristic." The PS3 and xbox360 only has powerful graphics, but the Wii has a controller that can understand full 3d movement. Wii is a step closer to virtual reality than both ps3 and xbox360. I also perfer innovation with great gameplay. Nintendo has yet to fail me, but every other game company has (well, maybe except Nippon Ichi).

The way i see it all nintendo really has going for it IS the innovative ways. While sony on the other hand has futuristic graphics, hardware and power. While sony may not incorparate as many new innovative ways as nintendo that dose not barr the game creation companies from tapping into the ps3's power to create new innovative gamming ways of there own.

When's the last time we saw something like that happen?

So all this leads to my former statement... What dose nintendo got that sony cant have? And what dose sony have that nintendo cant have???

Sony has powerful graphics, and closer ties with your "mature" games.
Nintendo has a controller that uses 3d movements, virtual console, and their own games.

Think it over...

Nothing you said requires thinking.


I don't understand people who want mature games for the sake of looking cool or something. "That game is too kiddy for me." What a loser. I'd pick a Kirby or Mario game over "mature" games anytime.