Kinda, see Intel's upcoming 45nm Montevina chip is likely to be faddy, yet underclocked so it runs cooler and doesn't require as much power. Of course hackers would get their hands on it and let us run the faddy chip at it's full speed minimising loading times and slow downs.
I have a Wii and an Xbox 360. My opinion of the Wii is that it's kind of a cool novelty at first but it has not revolutionized videogames. There are clearly things it has issues with. For example, the new mario kart is much more responsive with the classic analog stick meaning it could have come out on the gamecube. Mario galaxy is pretty fun but it would have been nearly the same game without having to shake the remote to attack. Metroid prime is another metroid game but the wii controls can be unresponsive at times. After pushing the remote forward, twisting it, and pulling it out to open a door for the 3rd time you'd rather just press a button. The wii also has probably the highest ratio of very poor games compared to any other system and nintendo is slapping their seal on every 5 year old ps2 budget title wii port they can get their hands on because it's making them money. In the end it's very similar to Nintendo's last 2 systems, you get the high quality big nintendo launches, some great 3rd party games here and there, and this time around instead of very little average quality 3rd party support, you've got a ton of very low quality 3rd party support which doesn't make much of a difference. So despite Nintendo raking it in on the wii, it's really not much different of a story as the gamecube and n64 for the end consumer.
Xbox 360 is great if you're into online. If you're not, then it's great as an alternative to PS3. Really the PS3 and 360 are so close right now in terms of their games library and graphics it comes down to if you want to spend an extra $50 for the ps3 to get bluray. So if you've gotta have some HD movies right now I'd take a PS3 before a 360. When I got the 360 though the PS3 was $100 more and didn't have much of a games library.
Long post considering I really don't care about either one that much and I play my sega genesis and snes more than either one.
No matter what you all say. I still think the Wii is the most fun you can get out of a video game right now.
When I feel like playing things online, I would generally play a fps, and I would want to do it with a mouse and a keyboard, I would do it on an ordinary computer. It's much easier for me to appriciate good graphics when I'm playing single player, and graphics aren't that bad on modern computers today.
The Wii is a console which I could play with just about anyone I know. It is also a machine which I think of as a video game, rather than a computer which is made for gaming purposes. The wiimote has worked perfectly for me, since I got a hang of it, so I can't see why so many seem to have a problem with it.
When I get together with some friends, I would usually bring my SNES so that we can play 5-player Bomberman or 4-player Micro Machines. Now the Wii is offering an alternative, since it's also very easy to transport.
PS 3 and 360 sure are powerful machines (for now) but I would rather buy some new retro games than any of those two at the moment.
Since, as I wrote, it has many games that can entertain almost anyone. It is the console that is most party-like.
I'm sure that there are wonderful singleplayer and online multiplayer experiences to be enjoyed from the forceful ps3 and 360. But the Wii is perfect for multiplayer offline gaming, which I'd say is more fun as you get to do other things with your friends than just play games.
Besides, I really don't feel a need to play better looking games than those avalible for computers. I could play BioShock or Crysis on my laptop, and do this while traveling or at any time when I'm not at home, without the need for a TV, and my laptop is far from the best you can get. The ps3 and 360 just makes me wonder if there is any meaning with the concept of video games at this point of technology.
Since, as I wrote, it has many games that can entertain almost anyone. It is the console that is most party-like.
I'm sure that there are wonderful singleplayer and online multiplayer experiences to be enjoyed from the forceful ps3 and 360. But the Wii is perfect for multiplayer offline gaming, which I'd say is more fun as you get to do other things with your friends than just play games.
Besides, I really don't feel a need to play better looking games than those avalible for computers. I could play BioShock or Crysis on my laptop, and do this while traveling or at any time when I'm not at home, without the need for a TV, and my laptop is far from the best you can get. The ps3 and 360 just makes me wonder if there is any meaning with the concept of video games at this point of technology.
Originally Posted by Captain Andyman I don't see what benefits you get from having to pay for Xbox live over Playstation network.
Cross-game invites. Person 1 plays Halo 3, person 2 plays Bioshock, person 1 invites person 2 to play with him in Halo 3. AFAIK they haven't got that to work on the PS3 yet.
Originally Posted by Zezard Since, as I wrote, it has many games that can entertain almost anyone. It is the console that is most party-like.
I'm sure that there are wonderful singleplayer and online multiplayer experiences to be enjoyed from the forceful ps3 and 360. But the Wii is perfect for multiplayer offline gaming, which I'd say is more fun as you get to do other things with your friends than just play games.
Translation: The Wii is a console for non-gamers.
- Ok, you must admit that was the most creative cussing this site have ever seen -
Besides, I really don't feel a need to play better looking games than those avalible for computers. I could play BioShock or Crysis on my laptop, and do this while traveling or at any time when I'm not at home, without the need for a TV, and my laptop is far from the best you can get. The ps3 and 360 just makes me wonder if there is any meaning with the concept of video games at this point of technology.
I'm loving more and more people in this thread I agree completely. What's more is that after a game or 2 I can go back to work on the same device ^^
I also agree on the more fun front. Sure some 360/PS3 games are technically more impressive, but a lot go for realism. My biggest complaint for GTAIV is that they've tried to be too realistic and the "fun" suffers. I haven't been back on GTA IV in a while, San Andreas and Vice City Stories took over again. Some people get kicks from realism. I get mine from the abstract foundation in reality from games like Galaxy, books like Narnia and all that kinda jazz. Fun is silly playaround stuff, you don't have a smart dinner party or a champagne reception and walk out with a stiff upperlip claiming "that was fun!" (or at least I never said that ). But it doesn't really matter if you don't care for fun. I'm also much too sleepy for this!
Just as most PS2 games were awful and had bad graphics? Didn't seem to harm that system. We're 18 months into the Wii and we already have 5 games above 90%, 3 exclusive (one being TP which is kinda grey). The PS3 also has 5, only 1 of them being exclusive. Does having a slew of games you're never going to play affect the quality of the many highly rated exclusive games? Course not. Otherwise where on earth does the PC stand?
Advertisement
I agree completely. What's more is that after a game or 2 I can go back to work on the same device ^^
