know your consoles

Talon wrote:

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.

The cobalt has not introduced millions of new people to driving like the Wii has done for gaming.

The whole argument is chalk and cheese.

Talon wrote: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.

I thought I've made it clear what the chart was about...the impact of the consoles to gaming, not just the capabilities. That's in one of the paragraphs you quoted. If I were simply going by capabilities, then all four of the top consoles on the chart would be much closer to the bottom. I'd definitely put the Saturn higher than the PS1, as it was much better at rendering textures and polygons than the PS1 was. But hardly anyone bought the Saturn. It didn't change the landscape like PS1 did.

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...

Talon wrote: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.

Well your questions have been around "why is the Wii higher on Jay's meaningless chart than the PS3," not anything to do with the 360. If one of those two were gone (the Wii or the PS3), the loss of the Wii would have a more dramatic impact because the 360 already does most of what a PS3 can do minus the Blu-Ray player. The PS3 hardware's certainly capable of more, but the games don't reflect that. In most side-by-side comparos in this generation on various gaming websites, you need a magnifying glass to see which console's game has the better textures, shading, etc in any given game. If there is a barely perceptible edge, it often goes to the PS3. But despite all of that potential and those small edges, the XBox 360 is still the console of choice for more people between it and the PS3, because it's not $80-$150 worth of an edge to most people. Not like the differences between PS2 and Xbox were in the last generation.

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.

Talon wrote: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...?

My original point with Sony being dragged down by PS3 had everything to do with their image and the miscues Sony has made equipping and marketing it. You countered that by bringing up how the Viper is "dragging down" Chrysler ["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."]. You didn't explain how that had anything to do with my argument about a product being a boat anchor to a company's PR, so I assumed that you were talking about the financial aspect, since that's why Chrysler dumped the Viper, not because it was dragging them down in terms of PR. I didn't know what other point you were trying to make.

Talon wrote:

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.

yes, but a casual gamer's money is just as green as yours. sony doesn't give a fuck about casual or hardcore, they just want to move consoles and sell games. and they've failed to do so successfully. the wii may not be for the hardcore, but that's fine, it's a form of entertainment. and as a form of entertainment it outsells the other systems handily, because it goes beyond the hardcore to provide fun stuff for a larger group of people. don't think for a second that if sony could figure out how to get that group, they wouldn't toss your ass to the curb.

heck, i'm a casual gamer. i have only got 3 games. gt5: prologue, and then tenchu 1 and tenchu 2 for the PS One. i didn't see a big need to buy anything else, i have no interest in complex rpg's, and haven't seen anything really fun that grabs me. i don't want a mindblowing, semi-cinematic experience with hour long cut scenes (a la the last metal gear), i want a fucking good time. and super mario brothers 3 is still that...

Jesus, I keep having to make the same points over and over.

I think Jay and I both made our points and it's obvious we're both standing by them hence why we gave up the debating and agreed to disagree.

And Dunnas, sftu... you obviously don't understand my metaphor.

And you obviously continue to fail to see the whole point of the chart and how it has nothing to do with performance or capabilities.

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

Thanks? I'm not sure what I said.

i drove a cobalt ss really quickly around a very tight autocross course. it was pretty damn capable in that setting

big_jesus wrote:i drove a cobalt ss really quickly around a very tight autocross course. it was pretty damn capable in that setting

I've heard the SS is a fine car. The styling kills it. Weight doesn't help either.