The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Console wars eh ? Who needs them ? Well quite a few people actually. We hated them when is was vic20 vs Atari, Spectrum vs C64, Master System vs NES, Game gear Vs Lynx, Gamegear vs Gameboy, Megadrive vs SNES, Saturn Vs SNES, Gameboy Colour Vs....., N64 Vs Playstation Vs Dreamcast , Playstation 2 Vs Gamecube Vs Xbox, ad infinitum.
Endless, but lets take a better look.
Nintendo stand unapposed in the handheld market thanks to this endless cycle. Arguably handheld gamers have suffered for this - high priced games and a pretty inadequate and overpriced spec for the GC and GBA. You're paying nearly £30 a game, and with the release of the GBA SP a load of people will be ripped off again. Nintendo has no competition, and this is bad for all of us. However, the death of any other handheld system marked the end of that bushfire in the console wars.
Still it persists. Why ? Well pacifists - or normal people as we call them - argue they are pointless because all the systems are good in their own way, and equal, and also that many people own multiple systems. In other words they are all good consoles. But, if we look at the companies themselves - Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft - they are themselves involved in quite publically attacking each other through press releases, adverts, interview answers and so on. Not one of them thinks this is a game of cricket where they all go home tired but happy, oh no, this is WAR.
Sony can be likened to America; it's big, rich, popular and impressive, but it has niggling faults and all these people who insist it is badly flawed and too powerful.
Microsoft ? Kind of like Europe. It wants to be America in so many ways, but cannot ever be so it'll settle for second place.
Nintendo ? Easy, Japan. It has its own way of working and a strange appeal but many shun it and think it weird or a little crazy.
So, if those three went to war who wins ? Probably America yes ?
Question is, do we want Sony to be the metaphorical America ? Wil it make the console world any better, or worse ? Or to put it better, how would we like it if every country was like America ? Exactly, so we don't want every game to be like Sony games are or every console to be a Sony one. Variety is good, competition is good. In this case war is good. Sure, like every conflict it has those who go to far, but that happens in everything on the whole planet, so why do we want gaming to buck this "marvel" of evolution ?
The worst thing that can actually happen in the future is that the war can end, besides, look how many people it keeps amused :)
~~Belldandy~~
Endless, but lets take a better look.
Nintendo stand unapposed in the handheld market thanks to this endless cycle. Arguably handheld gamers have suffered for this - high priced games and a pretty inadequate and overpriced spec for the GC and GBA. You're paying nearly £30 a game, and with the release of the GBA SP a load of people will be ripped off again. Nintendo has no competition, and this is bad for all of us. However, the death of any other handheld system marked the end of that bushfire in the console wars.
Still it persists. Why ? Well pacifists - or normal people as we call them - argue they are pointless because all the systems are good in their own way, and equal, and also that many people own multiple systems. In other words they are all good consoles. But, if we look at the companies themselves - Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft - they are themselves involved in quite publically attacking each other through press releases, adverts, interview answers and so on. Not one of them thinks this is a game of cricket where they all go home tired but happy, oh no, this is WAR.
Sony can be likened to America; it's big, rich, popular and impressive, but it has niggling faults and all these people who insist it is badly flawed and too powerful.
Microsoft ? Kind of like Europe. It wants to be America in so many ways, but cannot ever be so it'll settle for second place.
Nintendo ? Easy, Japan. It has its own way of working and a strange appeal but many shun it and think it weird or a little crazy.
So, if those three went to war who wins ? Probably America yes ?
Question is, do we want Sony to be the metaphorical America ? Wil it make the console world any better, or worse ? Or to put it better, how would we like it if every country was like America ? Exactly, so we don't want every game to be like Sony games are or every console to be a Sony one. Variety is good, competition is good. In this case war is good. Sure, like every conflict it has those who go to far, but that happens in everything on the whole planet, so why do we want gaming to buck this "marvel" of evolution ?
The worst thing that can actually happen in the future is that the war can end, besides, look how many people it keeps amused :)
~~Belldandy~~
Tiltawhirl wrote:
> I thought this was going to be a topic about your incontinance
> problem.
Incontinence isn't it ? Now we have here a prime example of the console wars, a shell shocked veteran - exposure to Nintendo over a long period cause him to use childish retorts, instead of plain "shut up idiot" :)
~~Belldandy~~
> I thought this was going to be a topic about your incontinance
> problem.
Incontinence isn't it ? Now we have here a prime example of the console wars, a shell shocked veteran - exposure to Nintendo over a long period cause him to use childish retorts, instead of plain "shut up idiot" :)
~~Belldandy~~
*Thinks about it*
*Realises he doesn't care and this doesn't affect his life in the least*
*Takes a nap*
*Realises he doesn't care and this doesn't affect his life in the least*
*Takes a nap*
I thought this was going to be a topic about your incontinance problem.
I think console wars are just something built up by the media and gamers. I don't actually think the developers are too concerned about where they are, as long as the cash is still rolling in and they are not bankrupt. I think the next generation consoles have created the biggest stir in the gaming industry history, and it is all overrated. Sure, the console developers make one or two cheap pops at there rivals in the spur of the moment, but its nothing that they are really bothered about.
Think about it.
Think about it.
maddmun wrote:
> pfft, Gameboy Colo(u)r versus Puddle In The Ground
That was a tough one... :)
> pfft, Gameboy Colo(u)r versus Puddle In The Ground
That was a tough one... :)
pfft, Gameboy Colo(u)r versus Puddle In The Ground
Gameboy Colo(u)r vs Neo Geo Pocket
Console wars eh ? Who needs them ? Well quite a few people actually. We hated them when is was vic20 vs Atari, Spectrum vs C64, Master System vs NES, Game gear Vs Lynx, Gamegear vs Gameboy, Megadrive vs SNES, Saturn Vs SNES, Gameboy Colour Vs....., N64 Vs Playstation Vs Dreamcast , Playstation 2 Vs Gamecube Vs Xbox, ad infinitum.
Endless, but lets take a better look.
Nintendo stand unapposed in the handheld market thanks to this endless cycle. Arguably handheld gamers have suffered for this - high priced games and a pretty inadequate and overpriced spec for the GC and GBA. You're paying nearly £30 a game, and with the release of the GBA SP a load of people will be ripped off again. Nintendo has no competition, and this is bad for all of us. However, the death of any other handheld system marked the end of that bushfire in the console wars.
Still it persists. Why ? Well pacifists - or normal people as we call them - argue they are pointless because all the systems are good in their own way, and equal, and also that many people own multiple systems. In other words they are all good consoles. But, if we look at the companies themselves - Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft - they are themselves involved in quite publically attacking each other through press releases, adverts, interview answers and so on. Not one of them thinks this is a game of cricket where they all go home tired but happy, oh no, this is WAR.
Sony can be likened to America; it's big, rich, popular and impressive, but it has niggling faults and all these people who insist it is badly flawed and too powerful.
Microsoft ? Kind of like Europe. It wants to be America in so many ways, but cannot ever be so it'll settle for second place.
Nintendo ? Easy, Japan. It has its own way of working and a strange appeal but many shun it and think it weird or a little crazy.
So, if those three went to war who wins ? Probably America yes ?
Question is, do we want Sony to be the metaphorical America ? Wil it make the console world any better, or worse ? Or to put it better, how would we like it if every country was like America ? Exactly, so we don't want every game to be like Sony games are or every console to be a Sony one. Variety is good, competition is good. In this case war is good. Sure, like every conflict it has those who go to far, but that happens in everything on the whole planet, so why do we want gaming to buck this "marvel" of evolution ?
The worst thing that can actually happen in the future is that the war can end, besides, look how many people it keeps amused :)
~~Belldandy~~
Endless, but lets take a better look.
Nintendo stand unapposed in the handheld market thanks to this endless cycle. Arguably handheld gamers have suffered for this - high priced games and a pretty inadequate and overpriced spec for the GC and GBA. You're paying nearly £30 a game, and with the release of the GBA SP a load of people will be ripped off again. Nintendo has no competition, and this is bad for all of us. However, the death of any other handheld system marked the end of that bushfire in the console wars.
Still it persists. Why ? Well pacifists - or normal people as we call them - argue they are pointless because all the systems are good in their own way, and equal, and also that many people own multiple systems. In other words they are all good consoles. But, if we look at the companies themselves - Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft - they are themselves involved in quite publically attacking each other through press releases, adverts, interview answers and so on. Not one of them thinks this is a game of cricket where they all go home tired but happy, oh no, this is WAR.
Sony can be likened to America; it's big, rich, popular and impressive, but it has niggling faults and all these people who insist it is badly flawed and too powerful.
Microsoft ? Kind of like Europe. It wants to be America in so many ways, but cannot ever be so it'll settle for second place.
Nintendo ? Easy, Japan. It has its own way of working and a strange appeal but many shun it and think it weird or a little crazy.
So, if those three went to war who wins ? Probably America yes ?
Question is, do we want Sony to be the metaphorical America ? Wil it make the console world any better, or worse ? Or to put it better, how would we like it if every country was like America ? Exactly, so we don't want every game to be like Sony games are or every console to be a Sony one. Variety is good, competition is good. In this case war is good. Sure, like every conflict it has those who go to far, but that happens in everything on the whole planet, so why do we want gaming to buck this "marvel" of evolution ?
The worst thing that can actually happen in the future is that the war can end, besides, look how many people it keeps amused :)
~~Belldandy~~