PS3 - X-Box 360 - Nintendo Revolution

[Daedalus]

Edpon wrote:
PS3 -
Yes it's backwards compatible, the single best reason alone to get a new system, in my eyes. Yes it's very powerful, and they'll have loads of RPG's, the second best reason to own a new system.

I don't go for the backwards compatibility thing. I've no problem running my N64 whenever I want a game of Perfect Dark or Conker's Bad Fur Day. RPGs o nthe PS2 never really appealed to me

Nintendo Revolution -
Their idea of being backwards compatible with all it's software ever made, is simply a way of cashing in on their old titles, and to put a stop to the illegal ROMS swapping going on with websites;

Oh? Is that all that different from the reasons other manufacturers (such as Sony) are doing it? You're being a bit hypocritical there, check what you said back up the top there about the PS3 backwards compatibility, then make up your mind.

1 - Because I'm a true gamer, and true gamers have the widest variety of games to keep themselves happy.

Hmmm... We can all call ourselves true gamers. I'd like to think I'm a true gamer, but I'd go for quality over quantity. Volume of games doesn't matter to me, but if there are 5 good games on a console, that's good enough for me. The Gamecube was in there right away, Zelda, F-Zero, Mario Kart, Pikmin, Metroid Prime for starters (and all Nintendo games too...), and the PS2 just about made it in my opinion with GT3&4, Forza, Final Fantasy, but once you've played a lesser-known game on the PS2, you've played them all in that genre. The X-Box wasn't even a consideration. Played Halo for a while, nothing too special, and went back to my PC for that type of game... Also, playing DVDs is no biggie. I've a DVD player here that has an output far superior to anything you can get out of any DVD-playing console. I liked Nintendo's attitude. The Gamecube is a games machine, nothing more, nothing less, and so it really excelled at that. Picture, sound, games and controllers all surpass the PS2 IMO.

I'll be buying the next Nintendo as soon as they release some of their signature titles for it. Hell, I'll even be buying the new Zelda game when it's released in February over here for the Gamecube. I'll borrow a PS3 and play it for a while, but I'd imagine that'd be the end of it. Xbox 360? Hmmm... If Rare release a couple of gems for it I might consider it, but apart from that I wouldn't even bother looking.

[Daedalus]

Edpon wrote:
The main reason I say I'm a TRUE gamer, is not because of all the games I have. It's mainly because of all the games, systems, and types of games I have.  A true gamer, likes all games, all systems and plays them with showing any special interest towards a particular system, like you are doing, and very obviously too. It's clear you took offense to me doing a little picking on Nintendo, so clearly your a Nintendo fanboy. I on the other hand, like all systems and types of games; but prefer RPG's and the PS and X-Box. Nintendo is fine too, but they disappoint me because they're too kiddy like. Just my opinion though.

No, I didn't take offence, and will try them all (like I said I did) but with being so disappointed with the current XBox and PS2 that I would have to be seriously persuaded to go out and buy updated versions of either. Maybe I am a little biased towards Nintendo, but the current generation of consoles I went into with a very open mind (I am still using Amigas after all!). I was just generally disappointed when I got a PS2 with most of the games, and horrified that they kept the PS1 controller design. At the time my N64 saw just as much use as my PS2. Then the GC and XBox came out. Bought the GC, tried out the XBox, gave the XBox back and never once felt like I'd like to play anything on it again.

I'll give you the kiddy thing, but I don't let that bother me, especially when you can get a lot of the "standard" titles on all the main machines. I think kiddy image games like the Zelda and Mario series can hold just as much grown-up attention provided they're well-written games, and they are.