The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Bid farewell to the unbiased video game article.
Not that I ever wrote one, but I can’t even pretend anymore. The arguments over which was the better system (PS2, X-box, Gamecube, Dreamcast) last generation were largely arbitrary, mainly because they were all the bloody same. It didn’t matter where your allegiances lay, we were all playing identical games on slightly different machines and therefore a lack of bias was perfectly conceivable.
Now though things are different.
Sitting on the fence is not an option now that all three contestants from the never-ending console war have reached the battlefield. Gamers are no longer playing identical games on similar machines, they are playing different games on different machines and you will, by human definition, favour one option over the others.
As a gamer your choice isn’t between Zelda, Gran Turismo and Halo, but between totally different philosophies. Of course each system has its strengths. PS3 is a masterful console, it’s aesthetically dominating, both in physical and software form, and oozes possibility out of every air duct. Every week you hear something new about Sony’s multimedia monster. From uploading photos and organising your MP3 player to watching blu-ray discs wirelessly on your PSP. It appears to do everything and then some and every self-respecting gadget w***e will want it. A system with vast potential that prides itself on an unmatched level of detail.
The Wii spits on such dreams. Simplicity is essential to Nintendo plans. Aesthetically tiny yet sleek, refreshingly uncomplicated and ultimately loveable. You cannot play Wii Sports on a PS3, but then again you cannot play Resistance: Fall of Man on a Wii either. Nintendo are set to inspire a generation of new gamers and rejuvenate those jaded enough to walk away from the industry. Fresh and exciting sums up everything Nintendo do these last few years, something epitomised by the Wii.
Of course in the new console excitement it is easy to forget the X-box 360. The system that prides itself on its online capabilities, capabilities that Nintendo and Sony can never dream of matching. It’s also easy to forget that the 360 already boasts an installed user base and huge software line up. Some analysts have even predicted Microsoft to win the console war with its now profitable hardware (unlike Sony, who are reportedly losing $300 a system!) and unmatched spending power.
Yet with individual strengths come cataclysmic weaknesses. The PS3 looks astounding, as if sent from the future or another world, yet its insistence on the Duel shock pad is keeping it firmly in the past. I recently played on a Playstation 3 and the introduction of the six-axis felt like a rushed effort to capitalise on Nintendo’s hype. Its inclusion adds nothing but a lost rumble feature and therefore the PS3, despite looking unquestionably new, feels distinctly familiar. Nintendo’s problems are in exact opposition. The Wii’s software line up does feel new and fresh but looks dated already. Imagine how dated the Wii will appear in 3-4 years time?
Yet I fear for the X-box 360 more than any other. Microsoft’s 7 million-console head start may sound impressive but are they really going to reach their 10-million target by the end of 2006? Is it even going to surpass the first year achievements of the original X-box? And is it actually any different to what has come before? The X-box 360 is essentially a continuation of the last generation, bigger, louder but the same. Indeed the console feels a bit like a bridge between the generations, a bit like the Dreamcast, and it lacks the potential of both the Wii and the Playstation 3.
Microsoft are on the worn-track that leads to the top of the console pile, whereas Sony and Nintendo have discarded their compasses and have taken alternative, more dangerous yet exciting routes. Who wins, you decide.
Here’s to the future.
Dringo.
Not that I ever wrote one, but I can’t even pretend anymore. The arguments over which was the better system (PS2, X-box, Gamecube, Dreamcast) last generation were largely arbitrary, mainly because they were all the bloody same. It didn’t matter where your allegiances lay, we were all playing identical games on slightly different machines and therefore a lack of bias was perfectly conceivable.
Now though things are different.
Sitting on the fence is not an option now that all three contestants from the never-ending console war have reached the battlefield. Gamers are no longer playing identical games on similar machines, they are playing different games on different machines and you will, by human definition, favour one option over the others.
As a gamer your choice isn’t between Zelda, Gran Turismo and Halo, but between totally different philosophies. Of course each system has its strengths. PS3 is a masterful console, it’s aesthetically dominating, both in physical and software form, and oozes possibility out of every air duct. Every week you hear something new about Sony’s multimedia monster. From uploading photos and organising your MP3 player to watching blu-ray discs wirelessly on your PSP. It appears to do everything and then some and every self-respecting gadget w***e will want it. A system with vast potential that prides itself on an unmatched level of detail.
The Wii spits on such dreams. Simplicity is essential to Nintendo plans. Aesthetically tiny yet sleek, refreshingly uncomplicated and ultimately loveable. You cannot play Wii Sports on a PS3, but then again you cannot play Resistance: Fall of Man on a Wii either. Nintendo are set to inspire a generation of new gamers and rejuvenate those jaded enough to walk away from the industry. Fresh and exciting sums up everything Nintendo do these last few years, something epitomised by the Wii.
Of course in the new console excitement it is easy to forget the X-box 360. The system that prides itself on its online capabilities, capabilities that Nintendo and Sony can never dream of matching. It’s also easy to forget that the 360 already boasts an installed user base and huge software line up. Some analysts have even predicted Microsoft to win the console war with its now profitable hardware (unlike Sony, who are reportedly losing $300 a system!) and unmatched spending power.
Yet with individual strengths come cataclysmic weaknesses. The PS3 looks astounding, as if sent from the future or another world, yet its insistence on the Duel shock pad is keeping it firmly in the past. I recently played on a Playstation 3 and the introduction of the six-axis felt like a rushed effort to capitalise on Nintendo’s hype. Its inclusion adds nothing but a lost rumble feature and therefore the PS3, despite looking unquestionably new, feels distinctly familiar. Nintendo’s problems are in exact opposition. The Wii’s software line up does feel new and fresh but looks dated already. Imagine how dated the Wii will appear in 3-4 years time?
Yet I fear for the X-box 360 more than any other. Microsoft’s 7 million-console head start may sound impressive but are they really going to reach their 10-million target by the end of 2006? Is it even going to surpass the first year achievements of the original X-box? And is it actually any different to what has come before? The X-box 360 is essentially a continuation of the last generation, bigger, louder but the same. Indeed the console feels a bit like a bridge between the generations, a bit like the Dreamcast, and it lacks the potential of both the Wii and the Playstation 3.
Microsoft are on the worn-track that leads to the top of the console pile, whereas Sony and Nintendo have discarded their compasses and have taken alternative, more dangerous yet exciting routes. Who wins, you decide.
Here’s to the future.
Dringo.
True elements have been stolen from other systems BUT then if Sony want to be top once again they need to compete and mimic.
I think the PS3 could really be the multimedia machine it is designed to be. Yes we've heard it all before but the 360 and PS2 hardly pushed the idea. Six-axis, PSP link up, Blu-Ray high definition DVD, the future prospects of cell, the connection with MP3 players (much improved over the 360 effort)... I feel this PS3 really look next gen. It looks the part and has the functionality, it isn't simply following the same route of successful video game software, it is selling itself to a multi-media nation.
I think the PS3 could really be the multimedia machine it is designed to be. Yes we've heard it all before but the 360 and PS2 hardly pushed the idea. Six-axis, PSP link up, Blu-Ray high definition DVD, the future prospects of cell, the connection with MP3 players (much improved over the 360 effort)... I feel this PS3 really look next gen. It looks the part and has the functionality, it isn't simply following the same route of successful video game software, it is selling itself to a multi-media nation.
I'd love for you to highlight some of this so called 'potential' that you see in the PS3 that you don't in Xbox 360. As far as I can see it's just another walk down the same well trodden path of previous Playsation consoles, only with a few bits and bobs that they've stolen from other consoles and developers to try and keep things a bit fresh.
Bid farewell to the unbiased video game article.
Not that I ever wrote one, but I can’t even pretend anymore. The arguments over which was the better system (PS2, X-box, Gamecube, Dreamcast) last generation were largely arbitrary, mainly because they were all the bloody same. It didn’t matter where your allegiances lay, we were all playing identical games on slightly different machines and therefore a lack of bias was perfectly conceivable.
Now though things are different.
Sitting on the fence is not an option now that all three contestants from the never-ending console war have reached the battlefield. Gamers are no longer playing identical games on similar machines, they are playing different games on different machines and you will, by human definition, favour one option over the others.
As a gamer your choice isn’t between Zelda, Gran Turismo and Halo, but between totally different philosophies. Of course each system has its strengths. PS3 is a masterful console, it’s aesthetically dominating, both in physical and software form, and oozes possibility out of every air duct. Every week you hear something new about Sony’s multimedia monster. From uploading photos and organising your MP3 player to watching blu-ray discs wirelessly on your PSP. It appears to do everything and then some and every self-respecting gadget w***e will want it. A system with vast potential that prides itself on an unmatched level of detail.
The Wii spits on such dreams. Simplicity is essential to Nintendo plans. Aesthetically tiny yet sleek, refreshingly uncomplicated and ultimately loveable. You cannot play Wii Sports on a PS3, but then again you cannot play Resistance: Fall of Man on a Wii either. Nintendo are set to inspire a generation of new gamers and rejuvenate those jaded enough to walk away from the industry. Fresh and exciting sums up everything Nintendo do these last few years, something epitomised by the Wii.
Of course in the new console excitement it is easy to forget the X-box 360. The system that prides itself on its online capabilities, capabilities that Nintendo and Sony can never dream of matching. It’s also easy to forget that the 360 already boasts an installed user base and huge software line up. Some analysts have even predicted Microsoft to win the console war with its now profitable hardware (unlike Sony, who are reportedly losing $300 a system!) and unmatched spending power.
Yet with individual strengths come cataclysmic weaknesses. The PS3 looks astounding, as if sent from the future or another world, yet its insistence on the Duel shock pad is keeping it firmly in the past. I recently played on a Playstation 3 and the introduction of the six-axis felt like a rushed effort to capitalise on Nintendo’s hype. Its inclusion adds nothing but a lost rumble feature and therefore the PS3, despite looking unquestionably new, feels distinctly familiar. Nintendo’s problems are in exact opposition. The Wii’s software line up does feel new and fresh but looks dated already. Imagine how dated the Wii will appear in 3-4 years time?
Yet I fear for the X-box 360 more than any other. Microsoft’s 7 million-console head start may sound impressive but are they really going to reach their 10-million target by the end of 2006? Is it even going to surpass the first year achievements of the original X-box? And is it actually any different to what has come before? The X-box 360 is essentially a continuation of the last generation, bigger, louder but the same. Indeed the console feels a bit like a bridge between the generations, a bit like the Dreamcast, and it lacks the potential of both the Wii and the Playstation 3.
Microsoft are on the worn-track that leads to the top of the console pile, whereas Sony and Nintendo have discarded their compasses and have taken alternative, more dangerous yet exciting routes. Who wins, you decide.
Here’s to the future.
Dringo.
Not that I ever wrote one, but I can’t even pretend anymore. The arguments over which was the better system (PS2, X-box, Gamecube, Dreamcast) last generation were largely arbitrary, mainly because they were all the bloody same. It didn’t matter where your allegiances lay, we were all playing identical games on slightly different machines and therefore a lack of bias was perfectly conceivable.
Now though things are different.
Sitting on the fence is not an option now that all three contestants from the never-ending console war have reached the battlefield. Gamers are no longer playing identical games on similar machines, they are playing different games on different machines and you will, by human definition, favour one option over the others.
As a gamer your choice isn’t between Zelda, Gran Turismo and Halo, but between totally different philosophies. Of course each system has its strengths. PS3 is a masterful console, it’s aesthetically dominating, both in physical and software form, and oozes possibility out of every air duct. Every week you hear something new about Sony’s multimedia monster. From uploading photos and organising your MP3 player to watching blu-ray discs wirelessly on your PSP. It appears to do everything and then some and every self-respecting gadget w***e will want it. A system with vast potential that prides itself on an unmatched level of detail.
The Wii spits on such dreams. Simplicity is essential to Nintendo plans. Aesthetically tiny yet sleek, refreshingly uncomplicated and ultimately loveable. You cannot play Wii Sports on a PS3, but then again you cannot play Resistance: Fall of Man on a Wii either. Nintendo are set to inspire a generation of new gamers and rejuvenate those jaded enough to walk away from the industry. Fresh and exciting sums up everything Nintendo do these last few years, something epitomised by the Wii.
Of course in the new console excitement it is easy to forget the X-box 360. The system that prides itself on its online capabilities, capabilities that Nintendo and Sony can never dream of matching. It’s also easy to forget that the 360 already boasts an installed user base and huge software line up. Some analysts have even predicted Microsoft to win the console war with its now profitable hardware (unlike Sony, who are reportedly losing $300 a system!) and unmatched spending power.
Yet with individual strengths come cataclysmic weaknesses. The PS3 looks astounding, as if sent from the future or another world, yet its insistence on the Duel shock pad is keeping it firmly in the past. I recently played on a Playstation 3 and the introduction of the six-axis felt like a rushed effort to capitalise on Nintendo’s hype. Its inclusion adds nothing but a lost rumble feature and therefore the PS3, despite looking unquestionably new, feels distinctly familiar. Nintendo’s problems are in exact opposition. The Wii’s software line up does feel new and fresh but looks dated already. Imagine how dated the Wii will appear in 3-4 years time?
Yet I fear for the X-box 360 more than any other. Microsoft’s 7 million-console head start may sound impressive but are they really going to reach their 10-million target by the end of 2006? Is it even going to surpass the first year achievements of the original X-box? And is it actually any different to what has come before? The X-box 360 is essentially a continuation of the last generation, bigger, louder but the same. Indeed the console feels a bit like a bridge between the generations, a bit like the Dreamcast, and it lacks the potential of both the Wii and the Playstation 3.
Microsoft are on the worn-track that leads to the top of the console pile, whereas Sony and Nintendo have discarded their compasses and have taken alternative, more dangerous yet exciting routes. Who wins, you decide.
Here’s to the future.
Dringo.