know your consoles

I'm fixing this shit now.

I agree with this new tier with crappy futuristic font.

I have only owned the Saturn and 360, but they were both quality machines.

lol jayson

jaysons is dead on for me

except i would switch the dreamcast and N64

PS3 in the same tier as Gamecube/ Dreamcast? You should be beaten to death with a blu-ray disc.

Switch the PS3 with the Wii and the SNES with the Genesis and we'll talk.

Talon wrote:PS3 in the same tier as Gamecube/ Dreamcast? You should be beaten to death with a blu-ray disc.

Switch the PS3 with the Wii and the SNES with the Genesis and we'll talk.

Wii has had far more of an impact on the current gaming generation. If the PS3 can get out of worldwide last-place sales in the current generation, then we'll see.

I'll grant you the SNES/Genesis thing being much more debatable, though.

haha fuck I don't even know which ones you guys are talking about.

Sega made the genesis right?

thewalrus wrote:Sega made the genesis right?

That is correct

JaysonAych wrote:

thewalrus wrote:Sega made the genesis right?

That is correct

Is it the one on the top. Second from the left?

thewalrus wrote:

JaysonAych wrote:

thewalrus wrote:Sega made the genesis right?

That is correct

Is it the one on the top. Second from the left?

Third row far right?

i was just playing a time trial in midnight club LA on xbox live and i got the second fastest time in the whole world out of thousands of players.


im famous!

yeah, im stoked. that's by far the highest i've ever been on any online rankings.

thewalrus wrote:Third row far right?

Top row, far right

i've never had an online ranking.

kinda hard to do when you dont even own a console

honor man wrote:except i would switch the dreamcast and N64

More like N64 and gamecube. Fuck the cube.

honor man wrote:kinda hard to do when you dont even own a console

dunnas wrote:

honor man wrote:except i would switch the dreamcast and N64

More like N64 and gamecube. Fuck the cube.

yeah, +1. that thing was a stupid piece of shit.

JaysonAych wrote:

Talon wrote:PS3 in the same tier as Gamecube/ Dreamcast? You should be beaten to death with a blu-ray disc.

Switch the PS3 with the Wii and the SNES with the Genesis and we'll talk.

Wii has had far more of an impact on the current gaming generation. If the PS3 can get out of worldwide last-place sales in the current generation, then we'll see.

I'll grant you the SNES/Genesis thing being much more debatable, though.

The Wii sells a lot because of good marketing. Nintendo realizes the whole supply/ demand thing and purposely cut down supply... people want what they can't have. Nintendo realized that X people would want it, so they sent over X/ 1.5, so a lot more people wanted it because they couldn't get it. I know TWO guys at work that bought one just because Wal-Mart happened to have them in stock and they were hard to get. One of the guys rarely plays it since he got his PS3, and the other for his 360. The system blows; the graphics suck; and it can't do anything but play games (can you even play online?). The novelty of the controller wore off after about 5 mins.

Just because Chevy sells more Cobalts than Corvettes, doesn't mean they're better.

Yeah you can go online with the Wii, but I never do.

Talon wrote:

JaysonAych wrote:

Talon wrote:PS3 in the same tier as Gamecube/ Dreamcast? You should be beaten to death with a blu-ray disc.

Switch the PS3 with the Wii and the SNES with the Genesis and we'll talk.

Wii has had far more of an impact on the current gaming generation. If the PS3 can get out of worldwide last-place sales in the current generation, then we'll see.

I'll grant you the SNES/Genesis thing being much more debatable, though.

The Wii sells a lot because of good marketing. Nintendo realizes the whole supply/ demand thing and purposely cut down supply... people want what they can't have. Nintendo realized that X people would want it, so they sent over X/ 1.5, so a lot more people wanted it because they couldn't get it. I know TWO guys at work that bought one just because Wal-Mart happened to have them in stock and they were hard to get. One of the guys rarely plays it since he got his PS3, and the other for his 360. The system blows; the graphics suck; and it can't do anything but play games (can you even play online?). The novelty of the controller wore off after about 5 mins.

Just because Chevy sells more Cobalts than Corvettes, doesn't mean they're better.

It's not just the fact that Wii outsells PS3 by a wide margin...it also attracts people who are not normally gamers. Casual players get into the Wii as well. It also moves more games per console than the PS3. I'm looking at its overall impact to gaming at large.

The original XBox had a gimmick no one else had--a hard drive. It gave them a foothold and something to build on, but they were beind the competition in most markets, and lacked in killer apps and exclusives. The PS3 has a gimmick no one else has--the Blu-Ray drive. But they're behind the competition in most markets, and lack in killer apps and exclusives. Taking all of this in consideration, and sales and attach rates and all of the promised potential that has yet to be delivered on, IMO that puts it on the same tier with the original XBox in terms of its impact on this generation. Whatever the capabilities of the Wii are, it's not denied that it's a powerhouse that opened up to types of customers that weren't there before, and rescued Nintendo from collapse despite the pundits thinking it was a terrible idea when they saw the specs, whereas the PS3 has dragged Sony down and given them a few PR black eyes along the way.

thank god for talon, spaced, and sbf, cuz the rest of you are either clueless or in denial.

Going by your posts in xtines thread I assume you're included in the clueless section?

hahaha spot on, dunnas. like i said, thank god for sbf and talon.
EDIT, er and spaced.

The Wii is the Gameboy of the late 000s. Nintendo are genius nichemasters, I'll give them that.

With the original NES, it was Mario's addictively shitty music and sound affects.

The SNES was genuinely great: a brilliant controller and range of awesome games such as Mario Kart to ease the Monday Blues.

The N64 was essentially crap, but four controller slots conspired to make Goldeneye the best game ever.

The Gamecube was their big mistake, with no innovation nor cheesy draws for man-on-the-street Milleniahead.

The Wii has Nintendo back to its old, Gameboy-style "basic, with a twist" self.

If anyone's interested I'll chart the highs and lows of the console age, with a dose or two of reality thrown in for good measure.

big_jesus wrote:hahaha spot on, dunnas. like i said, thank god for sbf and talon.
EDIT, er and spaced.

And Aris, and wally.

JaysonAych wrote:

Talon wrote:

JaysonAych wrote:

Talon wrote:PS3 in the same tier as Gamecube/ Dreamcast? You should be beaten to death with a blu-ray disc.

Switch the PS3 with the Wii and the SNES with the Genesis and we'll talk.

Wii has had far more of an impact on the current gaming generation. If the PS3 can get out of worldwide last-place sales in the current generation, then we'll see.

I'll grant you the SNES/Genesis thing being much more debatable, though.

The Wii sells a lot because of good marketing. Nintendo realizes the whole supply/ demand thing and purposely cut down supply... people want what they can't have. Nintendo realized that X people would want it, so they sent over X/ 1.5, so a lot more people wanted it because they couldn't get it. I know TWO guys at work that bought one just because Wal-Mart happened to have them in stock and they were hard to get. One of the guys rarely plays it since he got his PS3, and the other for his 360. The system blows; the graphics suck; and it can't do anything but play games (can you even play online?). The novelty of the controller wore off after about 5 mins.

Just because Chevy sells more Cobalts than Corvettes, doesn't mean they're better.

It's not just the fact that Wii outsells PS3 by a wide margin...it also attracts people who are not normally gamers. Casual players get into the Wii as well. It also moves more games per console than the PS3. I'm looking at its overall impact to gaming at large.

The original XBox had a gimmick no one else had--a hard drive. It gave them a foothold and something to build on, but they were beind the competition in most markets, and lacked in killer apps and exclusives. The PS3 has a gimmick no one else has--the Blu-Ray drive. But they're behind the competition in most markets, and lack in killer apps and exclusives. Taking all of this in consideration, and sales and attach rates and all of the promised potential that has yet to be delivered on, IMO that puts it on the same tier with the original XBox in terms of its impact on this generation. Whatever the capabilities of the Wii are, it's not denied that it's a powerhouse that opened up to types of customers that weren't there before, and rescued Nintendo from collapse despite the pundits thinking it was a terrible idea when they saw the specs, whereas the PS3 has dragged Sony down and given them a few PR black eyes along the way.

Points taken, but I think the Wii is the "rice" of the video game world. I'd be willing to bet that a lot of the people that you're referring to that started playing games simply because of the Wii are not real videogame people and shouldn't be compared with the rest of enthusiasts. I am not trying to sound like a fag-nerd, but stick with me. Both of my co-workers I mentioned that had Wiis have girlfriends, and the girls like playing the Wii whereas the guys their PS3/360. Their girlfriends have no idea about games and probably couldn't point out which was a PS3, PS2, 360, SNES, etc if they were laid out on a table. It may move more games as a whole than the PS3, but I bet if you took any game that was available for all three systems, the Wii would be last. The PS3 also has direct competition with the 360, where the Wii really has none. The majority of games that are release for the PS3 are also released for the 360, and vise-versa. The Wii is kind of off on its own, and that can be seen as a good or bad thing. You want to play Mario, you have to buy a Wii; you want to play NHL 09, you have a choice. The 360 bites into a lot of PS3 sales and vice-versa.

I think you're looking at volume and I am thinking quality. I kind of like my previous example... I just see it as a chick going to buy a Cobalt you’re saying she’s considered a car enthusiast, whereas I would say the person with the Corvette is the enthusiast. Chrysler just dumped the Viper because it “has [help to] dragged them down,” but it’s still a much better car to the enthusiast than a Neon. I don’t really care what people buy but as far as being a video game enthusiast, I can’t put the Wii in the same category as the PS3/ 360.

yeah i thought the list was just based on how much we liked the systems, not how well they did in the market, etc.

Talon wrote:

JaysonAych wrote:

Talon wrote:

JaysonAych wrote:

Talon wrote:PS3 in the same tier as Gamecube/ Dreamcast? You should be beaten to death with a blu-ray disc.

Switch the PS3 with the Wii and the SNES with the Genesis and we'll talk.

Wii has had far more of an impact on the current gaming generation. If the PS3 can get out of worldwide last-place sales in the current generation, then we'll see.

I'll grant you the SNES/Genesis thing being much more debatable, though.

The Wii sells a lot because of good marketing. Nintendo realizes the whole supply/ demand thing and purposely cut down supply... people want what they can't have. Nintendo realized that X people would want it, so they sent over X/ 1.5, so a lot more people wanted it because they couldn't get it. I know TWO guys at work that bought one just because Wal-Mart happened to have them in stock and they were hard to get. One of the guys rarely plays it since he got his PS3, and the other for his 360. The system blows; the graphics suck; and it can't do anything but play games (can you even play online?). The novelty of the controller wore off after about 5 mins.

Just because Chevy sells more Cobalts than Corvettes, doesn't mean they're better.

It's not just the fact that Wii outsells PS3 by a wide margin...it also attracts people who are not normally gamers. Casual players get into the Wii as well. It also moves more games per console than the PS3. I'm looking at its overall impact to gaming at large.

The original XBox had a gimmick no one else had--a hard drive. It gave them a foothold and something to build on, but they were beind the competition in most markets, and lacked in killer apps and exclusives. The PS3 has a gimmick no one else has--the Blu-Ray drive. But they're behind the competition in most markets, and lack in killer apps and exclusives. Taking all of this in consideration, and sales and attach rates and all of the promised potential that has yet to be delivered on, IMO that puts it on the same tier with the original XBox in terms of its impact on this generation. Whatever the capabilities of the Wii are, it's not denied that it's a powerhouse that opened up to types of customers that weren't there before, and rescued Nintendo from collapse despite the pundits thinking it was a terrible idea when they saw the specs, whereas the PS3 has dragged Sony down and given them a few PR black eyes along the way.

Points taken, but I think the Wii is the "rice" of the video game world. I'd be willing to bet that a lot of the people that you're referring to that started playing games simply because of the Wii are not real videogame people and shouldn't be compared with the rest of enthusiasts.
.............

I think you're looking at volume and I am thinking quality. I kind of like my previous example... I just see it as a chick going to buy a Cobalt you’re saying she’s considered a car enthusiast, whereas I would say the person with the Corvette is the enthusiast. Chrysler just dumped the Viper because it “has [help to] dragged them down,” but it’s still a much better car to the enthusiast than a Neon.

I'm not looking at "enthusiasts" vs. "casual gamers" though, and I didn't say anything to suggest a chick buying a Cobalt is automatically a car enthusiast. I'm looking at general impact to gaming, and the Wii has done something remarkable to bring the enthusiasts and the casual gamers together. Volume's part of it, but it's not the only thing. If the PS3 were removed from this generation's gaming landscape, very little would be different. The Wii has done a lot more to expand the reach of the market, has introduced some new innovations, and can be the bridge to turn today's casual gamers into tomorrow's enthusiasts. The iPhone is a gimmicky thing to me and expensive to boot, as is the Toyota Prius (which is certainly not a car for car enthusiasts), yet I can't deny that those products had significant historic impact to their respective industries, regardless of what I think of the products.

And Chrysler didn't dump the Viper because it dragged the company's image down. Everyone loves the Viper and it's nothing but positive PR and licensing opportunities for Chrysler. They're dumping it simply because it's expensive to build, it's due for a replacement soon, and that money needs to be diverted elsewhere due to a suddenly crippling economic situation.

I disagree that the Prius isn't a car for auto-enthusiasts. I actually think that it is. But in a different way.

I'm all about fuel economy right now. More so than any other performance evaluation.

Ideally, something small and cool - like the Insight though.

Talon - the flaw in your Corvette/Cobalt comparison is that the prices for the 360 and PS3 are hardly different. They're two similar devices at a similar cost for a similar purpose with the exact same demographic.

If you discount that very few so-called 'true gamers' (whatever the fuck that is) bought the Wii and that few 'non gamers' bought either the 360 or the PS3 (or at least did so in similar proportions), then comparative sales can be viewed as how they're judged by your defined inner ring. It's apples to apples at that point.

911 wrote:Talon - the flaw in your Corvette/Cobalt comparison is that the prices for the 360 and PS3 are hardly different. They're two similar devices at a similar cost for a similar purpose with the exact same demographic.

If you discount that very few so-called 'true gamers' (whatever the fuck that is) bought the Wii and that few 'non gamers' bought either the 360 or the PS3 (or at least did so in similar proportions), then comparative sales can be viewed as how they're judged by your defined inner ring. It's apples to apples at that point.

I am saying the PS3 is the Vette and the Wii is the Cobalt, not the 360.

JaysonAych wrote:
I'm not looking at "enthusiasts" vs. "casual gamers" though, and I didn't say anything to suggest a chick buying a Cobalt is automatically a car enthusiast.

No, you didn't, I was just using that as an example comparing the Wii (Cobalt) to the PS3 (Vette). That was my comparison because the Vette costs 3x, but has 10x the performace and abilities even though more people drive a Cobalt and Chevy makes more money from it. If you're simply looking at which one moves more systems, the Wii wins; but if you're looking at which system is a better and more capible video gaming console (which is what I thought this whole chart was all about), PS3 hands down.

JaysonAych wrote: I'm looking at general impact to gaming, and the Wii has done something remarkable to bring the enthusiasts and the casual gamers together. Volume's part of it, but it's not the only thing. If the PS3 were removed from this generation's gaming landscape, very little would be different...

That can be attributed to my statement before in that there's the 360 to pick up the slack. The 360 takes a lot of sales (and innovation) away from the PS3. If there were no 360, I don't think your statement would be true. The PS3 has Blu-Ray, Bluetooth, 1080p abilities, and probably a bunch of other stuff I don't even know, etc. That's all pretty innovative IMO. Nunchucks be damned, the ability to play games in HD with the graphic capabilities of the PS3 is the shit.

JaysonAych wrote:And Chrysler didn't dump the Viper because it dragged the company's image down. Everyone loves the Viper and it's nothing but positive PR and licensing opportunities for Chrysler. They're dumping it simply because it's expensive to build, it's due for a replacement soon, and that money needs to be diverted elsewhere due to a suddenly crippling economic situation.

I never said the Viper dragged Chrysler's image down, they've done that with pretty much EVERYTHING else they've released in the past few year. I am not sure how you concluded to that...? But, like the PS3, the Viper is an expensive piece to build (relatively) and they cut it because of that and only that. It's not a high volume vehicle and they make less money per year than other products.

thewalrus wrote:

big_jesus wrote:hahaha spot on, dunnas. like i said, thank god for sbf and talon.
EDIT, er and spaced.

And Aris, and wally.

I STAND BY WHAT I SAID

big_jesus wrote:

thewalrus wrote:

big_jesus wrote:hahaha spot on, dunnas. like i said, thank god for sbf and talon.
EDIT, er and spaced.

And Aris, and wally.

I STAND BY WHAT I SAID

SO DO I