How can you possibly say that?!Sonic said:If one wants to consider games as a form of art, then one has to understand that not all art is good.
How can you possibly say that?!Sonic said:If one wants to consider games as a form of art, then one has to understand that not all art is good.
I say better power=better games. The 48kb ZX Spectrum (Timex 2000) couldn't provide the gaming experience as well as the Amiga. You didn't have Populous, Worms, Syndicate, on the Spectrum, and the games that were ported, like R-Type and Lemmings, were but a shadow of themselves. If better technology didn't empower better games, we'd still be on 8 bit consoles.Guden Oden said:Yes, and no.
Not BETTER games; just different. Early PCs (we're talking pre-stoneage era here) couldn't do true 3D 3D graphics. Wolfenstein, Doom etc were all 2D games for all intents and purposes.
I'm just going to take a wild stab in the dark and say you own a DS, and that that platform has better games...yada, yada, yada. I don't know how you can say that, when Psp has great games due to it's hardware. A game like syphon filter CAN NOT be done on inferior hardware so technology plays a big factor. Now, the frequency of great software is a different matter and could also be linked to technology. Someone eariler stated that it's the artist that matters but if someone were to give a sculpturer a tool other than a chisel to sculp with, see how much his abilities are limited then.see colon said:if more powerful hardware instantly meant better games (as in games that are more fun) i'd still own a PSP, i'd have played my 3Do more than my SNES, and i'd havebought more than 2 game for my Lynx.
hardware quickly becomes irrelevant if developer support disapears, if feaures go unused, and if entertaining titles aren't released.
DUALDISASTER said:I'm just going to take a wild stab in the dark and say you own a DS, and that that platform has better games...yada, yada, yada. I don't know how you can say that, when Psp has great games due to it's hardware. A game like syphon filter CAN NOT be done on inferior hardware so technology plays a big factor. Now, the frequency of great software is a different matter and could also be linked to technology. Someone eariler stated that it's the artist that matters but if someone were to give a sculpturer a tool other than a chisel to sculp with, see how much his abilities are limited then.
I don't see WII as anything but a party game system...thing...Anyway, Sony has more things under it's belt than Microsoft. Blu-ray, connectivity, and all around more potencial. I see Sony setting itself apart just on hardware alone, let alone being a more capable system through the use of Cell's architecture. Ps3 has most of these potencials because of it's install base...it's just worth exploring hardware with that much potencial sells.Johnny Awesome said:While I think that hardware matters, it won't to X360 and PS3 gamers in this generation because the hardware is of comparable power. PS3 doesn't have double the memory and a more fully featured GPU like Xbox had over PS2 last generation. The games will just boil down to developers.
Both will be viable enough in the marketplace, so just pick one that has the games that most appeal to you. For some it's MGS, FF, and GT that turns their crank, for me it's Halo, Gears of War, and Mass Effect. Both machines will have GTA. I'll also pick up a Wii for kicks, but because of the lack of power I don't see it as being my meat and potatoes console of choice. More like an appetizer.
DUALDISASTER said:I don't see WII as anything but a party game system...thing...Anyway, Sony has more things under it's belt than Microsoft. Blu-ray, connectivity, and all around more potencial. I see Sony setting itself apart just on hardware alone, let alone being a more capable system through the use of Cell's architecture. Ps3 has most of these potencials because of it's install base...it's just worth exploring hardware with that much potencial sells.
An easy to use, instant-on device which will do all the entertainment related stuff possible (and get you online as easy nd good as a PC too), what's wrong with that?
Of course, all this assuming they pull it off properly
I truly believe that although certain people complain about the price of the Playstation 3, those same people will buy it...and not after a price drop. And i believe this because of the sheer appeal. It's sexy, sleek, and stylish. And that will suck them in. Now, on the processing capablities...Although it's been said that Cell has a steep learning curve, it's nowhere near as hard as the infamous emotion engine, which has yet to be maxed out. The mere fact that Cell has 8 3.2 Ghz per useable processor verses 6 1.8 Ghz threads is blatant proof of where the "power" is.TheChefO said:lol - what installed base?
Seriously I see your angle WRT ps3 power, but this is mostly infered(hype) and as many devs have pointed out it will not be easy to get to this "potential power". For most, 360 will appear equal to ps3.
The difference will be in what games are available exclusive to each system as the ones that are multiplat by all accounts will appear identical.
DUALDISASTER said:I truly believe that although certain people complain about the price of the Playstation 3, those same people will buy it...and not after a price drop. And i believe this because of the sheer appeal. It's sexy, sleek, and stylish. And that will suck them in. Now, on the processing capablities...Although it's been said that Cell has a steep learning curve, it's nowhere near as hard as the infamous emotion engine, which has yet to be maxed out. The mere fact that Cell has 8 3.2 Ghz per useable processor verses 6 1.8 Ghz threads is blatant proof of where the "power" is.
Yeah, more or less...or wishful thinking. Then again, anything could happen.TheChefO said:ahhh ... I see ... Well I take it this post is more of an informed exageration and not your true perspective on the market right?
DUALDISASTER said:Yeah, more or less...or wishful thinking. Then again, anything could happen.
DUALDISASTER said:I truly believe that although certain people complain about the price of the Playstation 3, those same people will buy it...and not after a price drop. And i believe this because of the sheer appeal. It's sexy, sleek, and stylish.
Wasn't trying to be perfect with exact numbers but you get what i was doing. Also, i'm no tech-head either to you would have to excuse me.TheChefO said:Agreed - anything could happen. BTW you do realize your "power" argument is flawed right? Or is that sarcasm?
Well i guess i should be in marketing 'cause i pull that out of my butt trying to be . But i think PS2 looked like a patio block.thenefariousone said:A quote straight from a marketing department. A quick google search of " sexy, sleek, and stylish" brings up a curiously large number of results.
Back on topic - The ps2 is way sleeker than the ps3. The ps3 doesn't look bad, but it's size takes away from it's "sleekness."
TheChefO said:lol - what installed base?
liolio said:Anyway, lake of wishfull thinking would make these boards boring
_xxx_ said:Over 200 million PS1 and PS2 owners maybe?