Wii>PS3

[d112crzy]

so then i can make my accord rwd?

[sackingz123]

playstation FO LIFE!

[lil_dcb7]

The PS3 will get good games, for sure, but all the good games wont make it to the US.

Blu-Ray is too fucking expensive. and its just not going to be marketable. Betamax any one? Wasnt Sony the ones to come up with that brilliant idea too?

Games for the wii cost just as much as games did for the cube.

if you want a play station 3, just because its a fucking play station and want to be on the brand name band wagon, do yourself a favor, save some money, and get a 360.

if you want a PS3 just to play shit like madden

drive into a lake, now

[accordaffair]

nah, I'd want a ps3 because they're slick, GT4 HD is being released as a free download (they abandoned that project), and I am hoping for some really good games to be releases that will firmly cement it as the best.

I'm not sure right now though... aside from MGS4 of course, developers need to get behind it right away and do something impressive, something epic.

The 360 might be set to do just that, soon, with Halo 3.

http://www.break.com/index/halo_3_preview.html

Although I never even finished Halo 2, Halo 1 was a great game.

The 360 and PS3's games just look too similar, and 360 has a 1 year head start...lets go PS3, do something!

[sackingz123]

The PS3 will get good games, for sure, but all the good games wont make it to the US.

Blu-Ray is too fucking expensive. and its just not going to be marketable. Betamax any one? Wasnt Sony the ones to come up with that brilliant idea too?

Games for the wii cost just as much as games did for the cube.

if you want a play station 3, just because its a fucking play station and want to be on the brand name band wagon, do yourself a favor, save some money, and get a 360.

if you want a PS3 just to play shit like madden

drive into a lake, now

nuthin to do with brand names bro....playstation has a legacy, they done great jobs with the PS and PS2, it should be the same with PS3

[ACC0RD22]

Although I never even finished Halo 2, Halo 1 was a great game.

The 360 and PS3's games just look too similar, and 360 has a 1 year head start...lets go PS3, do something!

I think the PS3 will pick up steam just like the 360 did. so far the only major problems Ive heard about are firmware issues, so its already ahead of the 360 in that arena. Honestly, Im not sure if its a fair comparison right now, since the PS3 hasnt had that year for good games to come out. until recently the 360 didnt have amazing games either.

On the *nix on PS3 front, I did hear about someone installing Linux on it, I just wasnt sure what distro. Its good to hear. PC users can have OS X with the latest kernel, even if you have an SSE2 processor (like me). The SSE2 compatible kernel was just released yesterday, and is still a beat release, but its hope for every one who has been running on the 10.4.4 kernel (Darwin 8.4.1) and has heard of the massive speed gains that switching to the 10.4.8 kernel (Darwin 8.8.1) has given the rather large amount of SSE3 processor users. Im excited. Im just sad that I cant be part of the beta testing process, since I only have one computer with me at school, and just cant risk being without it. Although, I could just use windows . . . yeah, thats too much of a risk.

[LinX]

I'm a Zelda fan and so I got the wii but for what its worth you're definately getting your money's worth with the new nintendo. I'm also a playstation fan but the price is simply to high and quantities are extremely low.

Wii (pros)
-Relatively inexpensive ($250) and that includes everything needed to play right out of the box including a game(wii sports)
-Very nicely built machine that is very compact and looks awesome
-Backwards compatible
-Uses sd cards for memory
-Very nice motion sensor controls which i don't think are a "gimmick"
-Nice game lineup

Wii(cons)
-Not HD compatible but you could still hookup component cables instead of composites and get a crisper image
-graphics aren't cutting edge
-no charging system for batteries for the wii-mote

yes the ps3 has HD but not for all games and whats more, you have to buy the component cables!! THat's even more money and then you have to buy the game which is $60 not $50 like the wii. The way I look at it, the ps3 is aimed more towards the hardcore gamer while the wii is aimed at a bigger audience. Nintendo is playing is smart and still making a profit. I'd get the ps3 considering it employs the cheapest blue ray player on the market but others than that, I could wait a while.

[91 H23 Accord]

nuthin to do with brand names bro....playstation has a legacy, they done great jobs with the PS and PS2, it should be the same with PS3

ameeeeeeeeeeeeennn oN tHAT bRO

[texasvtak]

Video games are for entertainment, not technological advancement.

[Joshy]

sorry about this being so long of a post, but its kinda worth thinking about. i'm an avid gamer and i'm majoring in animation at MICA to hopefully work in the video game industry. we have reps from game studios visit us and give us lectures, so combined here's some food for thought:

As of now, the PS3 has far less going for it than X360. PS3's cell processor is really difficult to code for, and you won't see a dramatic showcase of its power until developers have worked with it and gained enough experience to push it to its potential. The X360 had a year's head start and its got a better online infastructure than Sony's got right now for PS3.

But if you're thinking about PS3 vs. Wii, look at it from this perspective: Sony is an electronics company, and Nintendo is a video game company.

That's why Sony is making you pay $600 for hardware that costed them millions to develop; and they're actually losing money on each console they sell until the PS3 is profitable. Because of the price of the components you're getting in PS3 and also because the manufacture process to make them is so new, parts are often faulty in production. It's got a proprietary processor and media systems - the Cell and blu-ray.

Sony is deliberately pushing blu-ray onto consumers with PS3 when it hasn't even proven itself as a dominant media format. Business tactics to push blu-ray when consumers just switched to DVD from VHS. that took what? - almost 5 years. Move studios stopped publishing VHS in like 2002, 2003, right? The average Joe isn't going to plop down ~$500 for a blu-ray drive or a PS3 in the next couple of years until prices drop and movie studios pick a format they like most. It's between blu-ray and HD-DVD. Blu-ray is more fitting for games because with the HD era coming up, games require a LOT of disc space for high resolution textures which you can't even admire if you don't have an HDTV.

And seriously, Sony has been riding their dualshock controller design to death. Three generations for one controller design is ridiculous. It was really time for an upgrade with PS3. The control sticks are still on the bottom of the pad even though the directional pad has been almost completely phased out over the last generation.

Now, for Nintendo: Their machine is basically an upgraded GameCube system. The processor and gpu are the same ones from GameCube, but have been upgraded for about 1.5x power increase and speed increase over GameCube. Believe it or not, the Wii controller was actually developed as an accessoy for GameCube but Nintendo saw enough potential in it to market it as a new console. On Wii, basically you're going to see games that look about even to GameCube, if not, a little cleaner with more texture effects and ligiting - about equal to the original Xbox's graphics. Nothing that PS3 or X360 can't outdo without lifting a finger. Think about this: GameCube ran at 485mhz, Wii runs at 729mhz. Xbox 1 ran at 733mhz and PS3 runs at 3.2ghz - that's 3200mhz - more than twice the processing speed as Wii. Wii games just won't look as good. Period.

Nintendo is banking on its success from DS to pull over onto Wii, with its innovative games that make use of their creative controller interfaces. Sony's SIXAXIS controller for PS3 has motion capabilities, but they're limited. They can only detect tilting motion, unlike Wii's controller, which can detect actual 3D motion and position. The "nunchuck" part of Wii's controller is identical to the motion device used in PS3's SIXAXIS, but the Remote itself can detect tilt and positions in a 3D space. It can detect how far it is from the console and its orientation, not just subtle movements; and it's pixel-perfect. Games have the potential of being a lot more immersive and easier to get into. Nintendo is going mainstream, to your parents, grandparents, girlfriends, etc. The people who don't really play video games.

Now, will game developers go for the innovative controller or the graphics? That's sort of up to you to decide. Developers will develop games for consoles that are profitable so they cam make money. This is a business, after all. If Nintendo sold more N64s and GameCubes than PS1s and PS2s, we'd see Rockstar's GTA series and Square's FF series on Nintendo's systems instead of Sony's.

We'll have to wait and see. It depends on what YOU and ME, as consumers want. Games cost millions of dollars to produce now and because they cost so much to make, prices of games have gone up. Have you noticed? Games for PS3 and X360 are $59.99 instead of $49.99. An attractive point for Nintendo with Wii is the price. Old hardware (which is easy to develop on with past experience on GameCube) means cheaper prices for both hardware and software. The controller is expensive ($60) because of the technology inside of it.

BOTTOM LINE:
If you're into graphics, have an HDTV to admire them and are fine with current controller mechanisms then the PS3 better suited for you. If you want to experience something "fresh," or just find Nintendo's games appealing then Wii is for you. The one thing about Nintendo is that they don't disappoint their fanbase with their games. They're always A+ titles and this cannot be said about either Sony's or Microsoft's INTERNAL development studios, not the "third" unexclusive parties (like Square, Rockstar, EA, Activision, etc.)

MY OPINION:
I'm an all around gamer but I'm sticking with PC and Wii for this generation. You can't go wrong with PC. I built a new computer for my animation courses and I was one of those dumbasses who waited in line for Wii on launch day just to play the new Zelda game (which is excellent). Personally after playing Wii Sports and Zelda I'm impressed. The controller is really immersive and you can't judge it until you've tried it out. With games like these, it's not a "gimmick," but most of Wii's current library is full of cash-ins and the control in them is really bad, and admitedly a gimmick.


again, sorry about the length, but that's just my $.02

[jdm4doorcb7]

atari son lol

[f22a4bandit]

I would have to go with a Wii personally. Having to use a HDTV to get the better graphics from the PS3 isn't worth it to me right now. Nintendo has always been at the cutting edge of gaming, and it continues to do so with the Wii. The GameCube was more oriented to younger children, and I believe with the Wii Nintendo is again reaching out to their older fan base. They have games such as Call of Duty 3 (which looks badass) that are far more interactive than on X360 or PS3. The Wii controller will give games a challenge far more interesting than X360 and PS3. Thank you, Nintendo, for again reviving my love in games.

[d112crzy]

I think ill purchase a Wii whenever i have the money. Zelda is awesome.

[h22sparkle]

I think ill purchase a Wii whenever i have the money. Zelda is awesome.

it is isnt it i was watching xplay and that shit looked tough he was fighting with the sword the shit looked too real to be true

[Raceboy]

I have a Wii and i'm satisfied with it.

I do want the PS3 though.