Re: PlayStation 3 hits 6 Million Sales WorldWide, XflopThreeShitty almost dead and the XflopMoronSquad in pathological denial!
Skwisgaar Skwigelf
"SHaKeY STeVe" <shakey...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1185834118.9...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 30, 1:08 am, J...@yahoo.com (JoJo#1MSFanboy) wrote:
>
> > If the Wii ends up winning this will spell trouble for us hardcore
gamers with
> > dumbed down products.
>
> Using the Weeeee is like stepping back to gaming circa 1999...a
> fucking joke of a console...
... which is TROUNCING your patheticly selling PoS3, even with its clearance
sale price.
JBgarbuz
"Skwisgaar Skwigelf" <Skwi...@dethklok.org> wrote in message
news:yO6dnXRat8tgbTPb...@comcast.com...
Just like the sale of Hondas trounces the sale of Jaguars and Rolls Royces.
Why even bother
with a Wii when the old Xbox and PS2, which you can still buy for $129
today, is easily as good if not better? Why even waste $250?
>
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Doug Jacobs
> Just like the sale of Hondas trounces the sale of Jaguars and Rolls Royces.
> Why even bother
> with a Wii when the old Xbox and PS2, which you can still buy for $129
> today, is easily as good if not better? Why even waste $250?
Last I checked, you couldn't play Mario on the PS2, nor does the PS2 have
the motion sensing controller.
Really now, what is it with all the hatred towards the Wii? Are you
really THAT scared of a tiny block of plastic/metal? Afraid that you
might actually HAVE FUN? Single handedly destroy the PS3/360 and all
gaming as we know it? Or maybe that it'll somehow give you teh ghey?
--
It's not broken. It's...advanced.
jgarbuz
> In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 JBgarbuz <jgar...@netzero.com> wrote:
>
> > Just like the sale of Hondas trounces the sale of Jaguars and Rolls Royces.
> > Why even bother
> > with a Wii when the old Xbox and PS2, which you can still buy for $129
> > today, is easily as good if not better? Why even waste $250?
>
> Last I checked, you couldn't play Mario on the PS2, nor does the PS2 have
> the motion sensing controller.<
Is Mario any good? Never played it. Have you ever played Max Payne?
> Really now, what is it with all the hatred towards the Wii? Are you
> really THAT scared of a tiny block of plastic/metal? Afraid that you
> might actually HAVE FUN? Single handedly destroy the PS3/360 and all
> gaming as we know it? Or maybe that it'll somehow give you teh ghey?<
The question for me is, how does Wii advance the graphics? If the
graphics are no better than can be produced on an old Xbox or PS2,
then all of the other gadgets and gizmos mean nothing to me. Same with
the PS3. If the future games show no substantive improvements in the
graphics, I won't buy it either. I'll stick with my old PS2 and Xbox.
There are still new games coming out for the PS2.
Doug Jacobs
> > Last I checked, you couldn't play Mario on the PS2, nor does the PS2 have
> > the motion sensing controller.<
> Is Mario any good? Never played it. Have you ever played Max Payne?
I've enjoyed Mario Sunshine in small doese. Mario Galaxy looks pretty fun
too.
Max Payne I played on the PC - better graphics, better controls, cheaper
price.
> > Really now, what is it with all the hatred towards the Wii? Are you
> > really THAT scared of a tiny block of plastic/metal? Afraid that you
> > might actually HAVE FUN? Single handedly destroy the PS3/360 and all
> > gaming as we know it? Or maybe that it'll somehow give you teh ghey?<
> The question for me is, how does Wii advance the graphics? If the
> graphics are no better than can be produced on an old Xbox or PS2,
> then all of the other gadgets and gizmos mean nothing to me. Same with
> the PS3. If the future games show no substantive improvements in the
> graphics, I won't buy it either. I'll stick with my old PS2 and Xbox.
> There are still new games coming out for the PS2.
Why does every game have to 'advance the graphics'? One of my favorite
games is Nethack. This game is close to 20 years old, runs on just about
anything with a CPU (ANY CPU) and uses ASCII characters as its "graphics".
Despite this, the game has a large worldwide following, and new versions
are still being introduced.
Seriously, if you're just going to be a graphics whore, why are you even
bothering with consoles at all? PCs have better graphics and cheaper
games (though the hardware is a tad more pricey ;)
And fact is the Wii DOES have better graphics than the PS2 - even the
GameCube has better graphics than the PS2. Wii vs. 360 and PS3 is a bit
lopsided since the Wii doesn't have HD support, like the 360 and PS3 do.
However, all the shiny graphics hardware in the world don't mean anything
if you have nothing interesting to play on it... Nintendo has
traditionally had the strongest first-party lineup of the 3 consoles.
jgarbuz
> In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2jgarbuz<jgar...@netzero.com> wrote:
>
> > > Last I checked, you couldn't play Mario on the PS2, nor does the PS2 have
> > > the motion sensing controller.<
> > Is Mario any good? Never played it. Have you ever played Max Payne?
>
> I've enjoyed Mario Sunshine in small doese. Mario Galaxy looks pretty fun
> too.
>
> Max Payne I played on the PC - better graphics, better controls, cheaper
> price.
>
...
> > The question for me is, how does Wii advance the graphics? If the
> > graphics are no better than can be produced on an old Xbox or PS2,
> > then all of the other gadgets and gizmos mean nothing to me. Same with
> > the PS3. If the future games show no substantive improvements in the
> > graphics, I won't buy it either. I'll stick with my old PS2 and Xbox.
> > There are still new games coming out for the PS2.
> Why does every game have to 'advance the graphics'? One of my favorite games is Nethack. This game is close to 20 years old, runs on just about anything with a CPU (ANY CPU) and uses ASCII characters as its "graphics". Despite this, the game has a large worldwide following, and new versions are still being introduced.
>
One of my favorite games is chess, and needs no graphics at all.
However, playing chess on a computer means I don't need to have a
human partner. But I agree, a good game doesn't necessary good
graphics, or any graphics, for that matter.
> Seriously, if you're just going to be a graphics whore, why are you even
> bothering with consoles at all? PCs have better graphics and cheaper
> games (though the hardware is a tad more pricey ;)<
First of all, don't what being a whore has to do with any of it. I'm
not a whore; I screw for free,but then I'm not a female. In any case
consoles are cheaper to buy than dual SLI machine with advanced CPUs
and dual GPUs etc. A really cutting edge machine costs close to $6000,
or ten times more than a PS3. As for games, I rent them from Gamefly,
which enables to me to play about three to four games a month for
about $24, or roughly $6-$8 per game play. Also, I bought Max Payne 1
& 2 for a total of $6 bucks from an EB bin of used games.
> And fact is the Wii DOES have better graphics than the PS2 - even the
> GameCube has better graphics than the PS2. Wii vs. 360 and PS3 is a bit
> lopsided since the Wii doesn't have HD support, like the 360 and PS3 do.
> However, all the shiny graphics hardware in the world don't mean anything if you have nothing interesting to play on it... Nintendo has
traditionally had the strongest first-party lineup of the 3
consoles.<
I have played many games on the Xbox and PS2 with adequately high
quality graphics. So, as far as I personally am concerned, I have no
reason to spend money on another console, or PC, unless the graphics
are almost of cinematic quality. That is, as realistic as a movie. As
for how good a game is, that all depends on the capabiliies of the
game designer, just as good movie depends on a good script and a good
director.
Of course, it doesn't take much imagination to make a another sports
game, or mindless "hack and slash"
game with loads of explosions and gore,but little in terms of plot.
Just like making summer blockbuster movies for teens. But for older,
more discerning audiences, many of us want quality rather than just
mindless activity. And I want a cinematic, interactive movie
experience, and not just "a game." If all I want is just a game, chess
is more than enough for me. I want an engrossing experience, and
realistic graphics definitely can enhance it, albeit not replace good
game design, for sure.
Doug Jacobs
> > Seriously, if you're just going to be a graphics whore, why are you even
> > bothering with consoles at all? PCs have better graphics and cheaper
> > games (though the hardware is a tad more pricey ;)<
> First of all, don't what being a whore has to do with any of it. I'm
> not a whore; I screw for free,but then I'm not a female. In any case
> consoles are cheaper to buy than dual SLI machine with advanced CPUs
> and dual GPUs etc. A really cutting edge machine costs close to $6000,
> or ten times more than a PS3. As for games, I rent them from Gamefly,
> which enables to me to play about three to four games a month for
> about $24, or roughly $6-$8 per game play. Also, I bought Max Payne 1
> & 2 for a total of $6 bucks from an EB bin of used games.
Sorry. 'Graphics Whore' refers to someone who thinks graphics are the
sole factor for deciding if a game is any good or not. Nowadays they're
having a field day slamming the Wii for not being "next gen" because it
doesn't represent the same leap in technology and doesn't support HD like
the others do. As you point out, a fun game is a fun game - graphics not
withstanding.
> > And fact is the Wii DOES have better graphics than the PS2 - even the
> > GameCube has better graphics than the PS2. Wii vs. 360 and PS3 is a bit
> > lopsided since the Wii doesn't have HD support, like the 360 and PS3 do.
> > However, all the shiny graphics hardware in the world don't mean anything if you have nothing interesting to play on it... Nintendo has
> traditionally had the strongest first-party lineup of the 3
> consoles.<
> I have played many games on the Xbox and PS2 with adequately high
> quality graphics. So, as far as I personally am concerned, I have no
> reason to spend money on another console, or PC, unless the graphics
> are almost of cinematic quality. That is, as realistic as a movie. As
> for how good a game is, that all depends on the capabiliies of the
> game designer, just as good movie depends on a good script and a good
> director.
Well, we're still a good ways off from true photo-realism and realistic
physics models. Some games can do bits and pieces better than others, but
overall you still know you're playing a game. Personally, I don't mind.
> Of course, it doesn't take much imagination to make a another sports
> game, or mindless "hack and slash"
> game with loads of explosions and gore,but little in terms of plot.
> Just like making summer blockbuster movies for teens. But for older,
> more discerning audiences, many of us want quality rather than just
> mindless activity. And I want a cinematic, interactive movie
> experience, and not just "a game." If all I want is just a game, chess
> is more than enough for me. I want an engrossing experience, and
> realistic graphics definitely can enhance it, albeit not replace good
> game design, for sure.
This is going to be a harder issue to overcome than the technical one. If
you think about it, the art and science that constitutes computer design
and programming isn't even a century old yet. However, the art of
literature is 1000s of years old - and even then has only managed to
produce a handful of true classics that have survived through the centuries.
I think most of the problem today lies with the fact that despite the
advances in technology, we're still relying on the lead game developers to
actually craft the story. I don't know about you, but most programmers I
know, no matter how brilliant in their field they may be, aren't really
trained in the art of crafting a good story. Some developers know they
aren't story tellers. I'd point to Id as an example. They weren't
concerned with a good story for the DOOM series. The story basically
boils down to "here's your shotgun - go kill things and don't die." It's
a mindless action flick with about as much "story" as a porno movie but
you end up having so much fun gunning down monsters, demons and your
fellow players, that you don't really care.
If Hollywood can wake up and realize the potential that video games can
provide, then maybe we'll see games sporting big names not just in the art
and programming department, but in the actual areas of story and scripting
as well. Of course, we'll probably still end up with an inordinate amount
of action, splatter, horror type schlock - mainly because that's what
sells... Of course, I can remember back in the 80s, there used to be a
company called CinemaWare which basically tried just that - it used
Hollywood writers to create stories and then wrapped game elements around
that. These games were known for their action sequences and were among
the earliest games to contain full screen animated cut scenes - pretty
impressive for computers like the floppy-driven Apple ][, Commodore 64 and
IBM PC systems of the day...
I've been reading a few articles about some attempts to create more
drama-driven games which almost sounds like another attempt at the whole
interactive-fiction genre from years and years ago. In one game, for
instance, you are at a friend's house for a dinner party when he has an
argument with his wife. The "game" then allows you to try different
things - do you try to help the couple get back together? Do you just
ignore the situation? Heck, you can even try to pickup your friend's wife
if you want! The idea is to create a scenario with an unparalelled number
of possibilities for you to explore as you play through the game time and
time again.
I think it's too early to tell if these experiments will yield a feasible
product, much less a whole new genre, but it's interesting to see what
some people are trying to do to break out of the relatively small confines
of what most games provide you with today. Perhaps we'll see the
re-invention of the text-based adventure game, now using state of the art
graphics to replace the paragraphs of text used to describe each room and
item...