Lets END the Console WAR!!

[Twad]

the only argument that matters is: are you having fun? If yes, then you win.

 

[Stuberfinn88]

These threads never get anywhere conclusive, there will always be some ignorant/fanboyism for each side to try and nitpick at the others side for the simple fact that there are minor differences to begin with AND end with...

This isn't even up to Special Olympic comparison quote quality since the participants are just going to keep fighting at the start line and never reach the finish line.... and they will still be retarded.....

Just the act alone by bringing up the "end these types of threads" posts brings up these kind of thread posts...

Its like starting an unintentional riot by breaking a window and running away at a large gathering of people....

 

[Wolfram23]

OP, seriously? You don't understand why people act like that?

...let's go with "insecure".

 

[Funkysandwich]

At times like these I wish I was a PC gamer.

You don't. You just get both sides bitching at you about being a "PC elitist" and then people complain about everything you write and they moan about PC gaming being expensive (When it's really not). I'm sick of the "consoles are cheaper" argument. And after all that, we just get shoddy console ports of most AAA games. Usually with better graphics though.

 

[Fenring]

Uhh... Just an FYI, the 360 tends to have the better graphics. and you might want to add all the hacking with PS3 to the list.

Why? I thought PS3 have better spec. Like Dragon age look much better on PS3 than Xbox.

Because almost always the 360 is the lead version. The GPUs are almost equal. The 360 has unified RAM, which the PS3 has the same amount of RAM, but is split into two sticks. The Xenos has 10mb of ERAM, which almost always means the 360 will have better anti-aliasing. While the PS3's CPU is indeed better than the 360's, not very many games are going to be CPU limited on consoles (or a modern PC, except for RTSs which can be a CPU monster at time [also Battlefield Bad Company 2]), you can see this on many PS3 exclusives where some of the SPEs take some of the work of the GPU, iirc.

EDIT: Oh, I forgot to address the Dragon Age thing. The PS3 streams the textures in some way that makes them look better. Here's a write up. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/xbox-360-vs-ps3-face-off-round-23?page=1

And here's an archive of a bunch of PS3-360 comparisons. http://www.eurogamer.net/archive.php?platform=digitalfoundry&type=face-off

 

[teh_Canape]

may I say, this isn't a console war, it's a fanboy war

console war was back in the day, when the companies were the ones that had at each other

Sega, would be my primary example

straight up bashing on Nintendo with their classic "Sega does what Nintendon't"

or when the ColecoVision released the add on to play Atari 2600 games

would you imagine if that kind of shit happened today? like, say, Sony releasing an add on that allows the PS3 to play Xbox 360 games?

There would be many, many, many lawsuits...

/the point

oh well, as bullshit as it may be

it's pretty funny seeing little fanboys fighting over over consoles and shit

though it has many times made me contemplate suicide, or build my own space ship to get the fuck out of this planet

 

[Beastialman]

Took out LINUX - Ok.. Really... If you want a computer, get a computer. It's a gaming console. I remember back when people put Linux on their Ipod Mini's... for what I ask?? It doesn't cost much to run a damn Linux box you can put it on any cheap computer, that's a redundant argument, it's a gaming console not a PC.

Actually the US Navy and other companies/corporations used the PS3 as cheap computer farms/servers. They're powerful and can run for quite sometime

Edit: Fixed the quoted HTML

 

[Adimos]

Frankly, the current generation of console wars is really just a bad joke, at least as far as the Xbox and ps3 are concerned. Both are so painfully similar

Consider that the main way to differentiate between the two is when one comes out with a DLC before the other one. Rarely is there any truly exclusive content.

In the prior generation, there were significant differences between all three consoles. Now, whenever a big name game comes out, it'll almost certainly be for both the Xbox 360 and PS3, or exclusively for the Wii.

It just doesn't make sense to me why so many people make such a fuss about it.

 

[Spencer Petersen]

The problem IMO is that of the 4 competitive consoles out there, 1 utilizes alternate control schemes to create a niche market for itself, 1 utilizes its long history to specialize its most effective genres and technology, and 2 try to have everything at once and come out as less effective on both ends.

The Wii may not be powerful, but it utilizes its simple operation and control premise to be more accessible to new gamers and families. It serves as a nice transitional console that's easy to grasp and thus fills its game library with kid-friendly games such as platformers, fighters, minigame collections and JRPGs. (I know there are some adult oriented games for the Wii, but just look at the Wii aisle at Gamestop and browse the ratings. Most probably sit at E or T.)

The PC is the most powerful console but less accessible, so it serves as the "final tier" of games in terms of system requirements and smoothness. Its long history has trimmed its core demographic to veteran gamers with good knowledge of computer systems, which tend to prefer FPSs, WRPGs, RTSs, and MMOs, all of which go along with the PCs great online capability. (I'm not counting emulators and controller plug-in options because they rarely run as effectively as intended and are usually only available in retrospect)

The Xbox and PS3 on the other hand have tried to hard to wedge themselves in between as the do everything consoles. Both try to be as accessible as the Wii (with their new motion control systems) but fail because of their hardware problems and reliance on online support. Both try to be as powerful as PCs but fail due to lack of effective,non-restricted multimedia usage, manufacturing costs and assembly-line production removing customization.They both try to be as good as the Wii and PC at their respective genres, but fail due to "jack of all trades, master of none"-like syndrome, where FPSs, WRPGs, MMOs and RTSs are slow and sluggish due to analog control and lack of keyboard, and platformers, fighters and JRPGs are wonky due to unintuitive controller layout and button overload.

I'm not saying the Xbox and PS3 shouldn't exist, I'm just saying they need to figure out what they do well and then specialize in those things. Nintendo didn't get to where it is by building consoles that try to do everything, they saw that they did platforming and RPGs well, so they worked at making future consoles better at those things. SEGA were good at sports games and fighters really well, but failed when trying to expand to CD based games and FMV. Very few gamers play every genre, so making a console that tries to do it all is wasted focus.

EDIT: I guess its worth talking about exclusives, but this is less "which console is best" and more "which game developers are willing to sell out to the console maker." There isn't any reason why Halo couldn't be on PC or PS3, it only is because Microsoft has Bungie's balls in a vice. I'm fine with games being exclusive to a console, but not when the only reason for exclusivity is due to backroom politics and shady dealing. Exclusive DLC? Bite my ass.

 

[Macrobstar]

I actually feel ashamed of my console when a fanboy gets all mad and shouty in defense of it

 

[Lizmichi]

Look this THREE way console war isn't going to end anytime soon. Hell my self being a PC gamer I'd say there are 4 contenders to the war, Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft and the PC but hey that's just me. I say PC because well we PC gamers can be dicks; I don't have anything other then a Wii and my PC because I can't afford a PS3 or a 360.

 

[Space Spoons]

I don't like fanboys and their petty arguments, either, but the fact is, competition is a necessary part of the industry. Let's say Microsoft bought Nintendo and Sony. With no alternatives left to challenge the Microsoft Stationcube 1080, what would be stopping Microsoft from charging, say, $200 a year for Xbox Live instead of $60? They'd know gamers wouldn't have a choice; after all, how else are you going to game? It's not like there's alternatives. It wouldn't be long before the suits at Microsoft ended up nickel-and-diming the videogame industry straight into a second crash.

Just try to grin and bear it. It isn't like the whole console war thing exists outside of Internet message boards and schoolyards, anyway.

 

[Jekken6]

How I see it:

PC for any first person game, RPG or strategy game that is not exclusive to consoles.

Consoles for exclusives, fighters and for third person action games like Assassins Creed.

 

[dream_nexus]

I personally love that there are three gaming consoles in the market(and pc of course). Competition breeds innovation, so why would anyone want a world with only one brand of console? Hell if anything I wish there was more competition so we'd see more and more amazing things being developed. All unabashed love aside does anyone really want a world with only Nintendo making games? or Sony and Microsoft for that matter?

 

[theriddlen]

Let's put all the consoles of the world in one place and nuke em.

Then thou shall become happy PC users!
Also, nVidia and intel is better than AMD in every way! (oh, did i just say that every-godddamn-where there are fanboy wars?)

 

[floppylobster]

Let's end the console war!

Make arcades popular again.

 

[Solo-Wing]

I find it funny how everyone Ignores the Wii. It's like Switzerland that way. Sits off to the side during the war. You know I myself cant choose between the PS3 or Xbox. Both have similar gaming capabilities. PS3 has more Exclusives, and Xbox has more features, like party and chat support. One thing I especially like is being abbe to play music while gaming.