The console wars

Meh I don't see how. Lighter maybe, less cumbersome, but the fact that the GBA cartridge sticks out like a sore thumb bugs the hell out of me.

Actually, you were directing that comment specifically in the PS3 -> 360 direction, without stressing that you meant what you just stated.


Sadly enough, there are people who do that. Myself included. I don't own a Wii, I simply use my friends'(though I've been using it for such a long time that I practically own it). However, I do own the 360 and PS3.


Assuming you think the PC is a console, there are better alternatives. The PS3 also has a video service, in case you did not check that feature out.


I'm not quite sure if you've noticed, but all the PS3 to 360 ports have been direct ports, whilst the majority of the 360 to PS3 ports have been upgraded ports.


Add FF Versus 13, New Rachet and Clank, Uncharted 2, Heavy Rain, and God of War 3.


As motion controls aren't my thing, I can't comment.


You pay for the subscription(one of the reasons I don't use my 360, tbqh), so it has to be good.


I understand that you don't need another PSP, as I'm fine with mine as well. However, the DS Lite is definetely worth getting over the fatDS, in my opinion.

Some reasons why the DSL is better:

â–  Weight: 218 g / 7.69 oz (21% lighter than the DS)

â–  Dimensions: 133 mm × 73.9 mm × 21.5 mm (vs. 148.7 mm × 84.7 mm × 28.9 mm—42% less volume than the DS). In imperial units, the DS Lite is 5.24 in × 2.9 in × 0.85 in

â–  Extended battery life. The battery lasts 15 to 19 hours on the lowest brightness setting as compared to 10 to 14 hours. After 500 charges, battery life drops about 25 percent. The DS was supplied with a 850 mAh battery, while the DS Lite has a 1000 mAh battery.

â–  Brighter top and touch screens, with 4 brightness levels, previously backlight on/off. Designed to be more resistant to shock.

â–  Larger and more substantial stylus, making it easier to hold (stylus dimensions: length 87.5 mm × 4.9 mm vs. 75.0 mm × 4.0 mm of the DS). The stylus is now also side-loaded and located next to the power switch, making it easier to reach for right-handed people when needed, but inconvenient for left-handed people.

â–  The processors are the same as the DS, but made on a smaller custom process so they require much less power.

â–  The built-in microphone, originally located below the bottom screen, is now located directly on the hinge between the dual screens.

I really fail to see why everyone thinks that. At least with the PSP-2000, the load times are lessened. Aside from aesthetics, there isn't anything good about the DS Lite as opposed to the original model. Its like comparing blenders because one is slightly smaller with the same power, and a different color, I mean who the hell cares about something as trivial as that?

How about not ignoring my previous post?

And where did you get this concept that the amount of data read has to exceed the speed at which the disk is read?


You do realize most people don't actually buy multiple versions, right? Right?!

How about realizing I was posting that while you were posting yours?



Oh yeah, because it is so common for games nowadays to be more simplistic than their previous generation counterparts. Why didn't I think of that?

Meh, tell that to one of my friends whose only excuse can possibly be that he is a Nintendo lapdog becuase he bought a DS, sold it to buy a Lite, and is now going to buy a DSi to have with his Lite. The way I've heard it, he isn't alone in this.

Do you actually think there are 100 million people in this world with a DS? I don't think so. There are people who sell it for better versions, people who buy a new one because a previous one became faulty, or people who just want to have more than one version.

You've obviously seen it now, so do you still stand by your point that the only new features are aesthetics?

Aside from the battery life, I would say so. Dimensions, more brightness levels, placement of the stylus? Wooo.

it's a better system in all areas, what more do you ask for?
Shorter loading times? they're pretty much non-existant already.

Instead of fighting over console capacity can't we just wait for FF 13 to come out and see what the devs are going to do with the game and how they'll implement the game's distribution.
Anyways with the impending release of ff14 I'm really tempted to splash out for a PS3 for ff14 and Valkyria Chronicles.

The fanboyism is killing this thread :|
I own a 360 but muck around on my mate's PS3.

You weren't expecting fanboyism in a thread called console wars? That's what this thread is all about and if there weren't any it would have died a long time ago.

Well each has its strengths (in terms of game choice) and it mainly comes down to the player's choice and likes. Though I'd say the computer is the best due to the fact that you can get emulators and mods for your games, making replay value huge. Plus you can easily get older comp games and even most new ones for free

Only comp game I've encountered that I absolutely needed a CD-Key for was Ris of Flight

Not Really, I was trying to state a general comment about how almost every game has gone/will be Multi-Platform in the sense of the PS3 and Xbox 360.



Unfortunately, this is the case of most of the posters here.. one would own a PS3 and the other would own a Xbox360 or Wii.. you can go back in forth and say one is better then the other but how can you really prove a point if you only own one console..



PC is not a Console.. I believe it was either KloWn or someone else who provided a very convincing Fact/Comment earlier in the thread.. anyway, the Xbox360 also provides a video service same as the PS3. Besides Netflix.. and tell me.. would you sit and watch your LCD Computer screen.. or would you rather sit down and watch it on your TV?




Like?



FF13 = Multi-Platform.. Rachet and Clank = WTF? thats like a 5yr olds game.. Uncharted 2 = Looks like a Fail version of Far Cry.. Heavy Rain = Honestly it looks more like a CG Visual Novel then a Video Game.. Unfortunatly God of War 3 looks and feels just like the fail game Heavenly Sword.. Personaly I never got into the God of War series..

These are my opinions.. please dont take offense..



Simple logic would dictate.. something you have to pay for is automaticly going to be better and provide a greater service then something you get for free..



I guess you've never collected a gaming system before? its my hobby and i doubt you could sit there and say you own an Atari 2600 or a Virtua Boy? I own almost every gaming system ever developed except a Dreamcast and an Original Gameboy.. and Unfortunately the only game for PS3 I think is interesting.. is MAG

Like I said, even if that was indeed your intention, you did not make that clear enough with your post.


Surprising as this may seem, I don't care which. I have a pretty large monitor, and I have a relatively large TV. I can't speak for others on this behalf.



ToV (costumes, dungeons, attacks, character, full VA).
Eternal Sonata (costumes, characters, dungeons).
Bioshock (some plasmids that you had to DL in the 360 version).
To name a few.


I said FF13 versus
Look here



Does it matter what the target audience is, as long as the game is entertaining?


I'm assuming you've never played Uncharted, and simply judged by its appearance.


Well, can't really prove you wrong here. It's up to one's opinion whether or not they consider VN's video games(though I think, technically, VNs are videogames).


To each his own, I guess.


Which is what I pretty much just said except worded differently(you state that it is "automatic" meaning 100%, whilst I stated that it "has to be", or "should be".
Your statement that paying games > free is "automatic" is not always the case. Have you ever played the freeware game CaveStory? Definetely provides more fun than the mountains of bullshit that videogame shops require you to pay for nowadays.

It seems to me that you're only attempting to bash at the PS3.

ff13 versus is ps3 exclusive

Okay to be fair, those plamids are free to download and Bioshock doesn't run nearly as well on the PS3 as it does on the 360. I'd seriously hesitate to mention that one when it comes to upgraded multi-platform titles.

Regardless of the reason you bought both. To each his own but if the so called perfect gaming machine 360 is all that is needed no one would buy a PS3. That is clearly not that case.

Yes I have owned a Virtual Boy and a Atari 2600 (Atari being my first console followed by Nintendo consoles). Sadly I don't have any of these anymore or even a PS2 for that matter. They did not stand the test of time.

You are not a gamer!

It's not my fault! Soda + Atari 2600 does not equal good things!