Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Why console systems should not be played or bought

M

mollymotes

New Member
Ok,

Lets talk about this. After many years of playing a "console" system i have learned but one thing:$$$$$$$$$$. Thats all. Ok let me explain. Note not in order and might be missing some. Nes, snes, n64 gamecube. playstations, ps2, ps3. xbox, xbox360 see a differce. Thats right nothing but money hogging. Now every new company every 2 years comes out with a new game system or utility. Why they want more money. Oh here is the new xbox360 more graphics. What happend to the old one? Are we thinking it crapped out? The further we progress the better it gets. . . No we can have games like halo 3 for xbox. But they act like there is a difference. Why didnt they just make it compatible. And i understand that they use to release games for ps1 and ps2 like madden 2001-05. I really think that people should just go computer. I no it cost a lot of money. 800 from dell for a crapped out version. NO you can pay 650$ for all the parts and some for a really kick *censored* computer. Do you see games being released for a brand new spefic computer no. It just has to be good. With computers you upgrade. In my opinion more ppl play online games then play online xbox live, ps2. You might have to go buy a new video card or buy more ram but you can run most games without having to buy a lot of stuff. Some people like the controls. WEll you can just go buy a controller for ur ps2. Also ppl like that its easily movable. Well so are laptops. Which 1.5ghz=2.5ghz. So what i think we should just drop consoles and have pc
 
Last edited:
ZAKtheGeek said:
I kind of agree.

My computer has thus far been unable to sense motion in 3D space like revolution can, though.
Click to expand...
You don't know what the revolution does/doesn't do, it's not out yet.

Trust me, the cost of a console quickly becomes significantly less then the cost of a PC. You seem to be missing the fact that to play new PC games, you have to have an upgraded PC. Which costs a lot of money and has to be done more frequently then buying new consoles.
 
In terms of overall cost, they are about the same.

For now, let's forget about games. For the most part, the best games cost $40-50, no matter the platform, when they first come out.

For the hardware alone, you'll probably have to either upgrade your computer or buy a new one every year or two in order to keep up with the current gaming capabilities. My computer is less than 2 years old, top of the line when it was bought, and it can't play the top games right now. In general, there are two things that need upgrades every year or two: RAM and Vid card. Two years ago, 256 MB of ram was average, and 512 was top of the line. Right now, you can't run a good game without 1 GB RAM. How much does a single 512 MB chip cost? About $75-100 for a desktop, depending on where you shop. A single 1 GB chip is about $175-225, again depending on where you shop. Now, for the vid cards. A top of the line vid card would probably last no more than 5 years, at the current pace of technology. That particular vid card is about $500, depending on where you shop (GeForce 6800 Ultra). If you want a vid card that will play today's games, that would probably be the ATI Radeon X700 Pro, at $200. That is, in order to upgrade a top of the line computer from 2 years ago, it would cost somewhere between $300-600, depending on how long you want the upgrade to last.

Consoles are getting more expensive, no doubt. Xbox 360 comes out at $400, and (I think) is backward compatable with all Xbox games (Core system isn't worth anything, really). PS3 is speculated to be in the $300-400 range, with speculated backward compatibility with all PS2 games (no word yet on PSX). Revolution is an unknown, with reports ranging from $150 all the way up to $500, with reported backward compatibility with ALL Nintendo games.

The hardcore gamers will probably splurge on all three systems, which would be about $1000 (estimate based on low-end speculated prices). However, most people aren't hardcore gamers. They would probably buy the system that had the types of games that they like. Nintendo, with the new controller, looks like it will be a good place for FPS and RTS games, with heavy weaknesses in sports. Playstation has always been good with platformers and RPGs. Xbox likes FPS, but will probably see that market slide over to Revolution. I'm seeing Xbox 360 as a good place for sports and platformers.

Based on what average gamers like to play, they'll buy that system, more than likely. The prices for the top end of the spectrum (for now defined as Xbox 360 and high-end computers) are more favorible for consoles. Even the low-end estimates are heavily favored towards the console gaming industry, depending on what Revolution comes out at.

Again, this is based on the assumption that software is generally similarly priced accross all platforms, so it can be essentially neglected. Also, this is NOT taking into account other accessories that might be necessary in order to play games (Hard drive for PS3? multiple controllers for all platforms?).
 
bullados said:
Revolution is an unknown, with reports ranging from $150 all the way up to $500, with reported backward compatibility with ALL Nintendo games.
Click to expand...

Its gonna be $199.99, as that's historically what nintendo consoles price at launch is(NES through Gamecube all launched at 199.99). And it isnt "backwards compatable" for all games perse, but you can download all nintendo games from past generations.

Oh, and consoles are a much better buy btw. $3000+ for a gaming quality pc when you can get a great system for 200 bucks? pfft. Additionally, each game is optimized for A specific console, while pc games are optimized for a specific computer set up(which relatively very few have).
 
CFK: I wouldn't state that as fact until officially announced. Nintendo is known for doing some wacky things. Also, I use the term "backward compatable" very loosely to mean that it can play games from past consoles. Nowhere do I state that it can play cartdriges, or anything like that. Yes, it has been announced that the Revolution has the capability to download play every game in the Nintendo library. There have also been whispers that it can play GCN disks, but those aren't confirmed yet.

Also, when analyzing the costs earlier, I completely neglected to include the "new computer" factor, which is pricy to say the least. I merely analyzed the two factors that will most greatly affect the number and quality of games that a person can play, and checked the upgrade costs for those various features. A gaming quality PC probably wouldn't cost less than $2000 (and that's being VERY generous, I've found some 2.0 ghz, 1.0 ram comps for less than that, but bad vid cards...), and one that will not need extensive upgrades in the near future will probably run well in excess of $4000, or about the cost of a used car (I got a 95 Camry for less than that). Quite personally, I'd rather put my money on a car than a PC. Mobility > entertainment, IMO.

But, I get off track. Console gaming is cheaper than PC gaming, at least in terms of hardware. I have yet to see any significant differences in the relative cost of games for the two systems.

BTW, I was looking up the price of the Xbox 360, and found this. Now, I don't know bout you guyz, but that's quite a lot of shtuff, am I right?
 
Dictionary.com said:
prof·it ( P ) Pronunciation Key (prft)
n.
1. An advantageous gain or return; benefit.
2. The return received on a business undertaking after all operating expenses have been met.
3.
a. The return received on an investment after all charges have been paid. Often used in the plural.
b. The rate of increase in the net worth of a business enterprise in a given accounting period.
c. Income received from investments or property.
d. The amount received for a commodity or service in excess of the original cost.
Click to expand...

I think that answers the question as to why they keep making systems :rolleyes:
 
You don't know what the revolution does/doesn't do, it's not out yet.
Click to expand...
None of the next-gen consoles are "out" just yet. That doesn't mean that we don't know anything about them.

Go google nintendo revolution and then tell me I'm wrong.
 
ZAKtheGeek said:
None of the next-gen consoles are "out" just yet. That doesn't mean that we don't know anything about them.
Click to expand...

Technically thats wrong and right. Not out for sale as of yet, but I and a few others on this forum have already played the 360 in stores, so its sorta out. But I'm sure you know this and thats why you used quotes around "out".

ZAKtheGeek said:
My computer has thus far been unable to sense motion in 3D space like revolution can, though.
Click to expand...

why are people so obsessed with this? while it may be fine and dandy, it will be YEARS before its accepted as the choice for FPS gamers. I for one have looked at that controller and thought long and hard about how ANNOYING it will be to hold that thing in shooting position for hours on end. Might be great for 30 mins but for 2 hours? i see a lot of wrist pain in people's future.

bullados said:
PS3 is speculated to be in the $300-400 range
Click to expand...

I posted in the 360 vs Rev vs PS3 thread about Sony announcing the price in Japan (yes i know thats not here) would be around $465. Yikes!

bullados said:
Xbox likes FPS, but will probably see that market slide over to Revolution.
Click to expand...

Again, i cant see this happening anytime soon. That "controller" has yet to prove itself any where near as capable with people that have already developed skills on a standard controller. That aside, Nintendo first has to make decent games that will attract the FPS crowd, which it has thus far failed to do.


I also originally thought PC gaming was a bit cheaper, but everyone brings up good points. Its really about the same if you build your own PC. But not a lot of people know how to do that which makes Console gaming and excellent choice.

Yes you can lug a laptop over to a friends house and play with them...but let me ask you this...... Can you (easily) hook up 2 laptops to a 60in HDTV and play side by side picture in picture while having both comps linked together for co-op or multiplayer mode? I know i've had 2 Xbox's hooked up that way in about 90s seconds
 
TheCrossFormatKid said:
Oh, and consoles are a much better buy btw. $3000+ for a gaming quality pc when you can get a great system for 200 bucks? pfft. Additionally, each game is optimized for A specific console, while pc games are optimized for a specific computer set up(which relatively very few have).
Click to expand...
That may be true to some degree. However, $3000 is for a PC that goes under one of the following qualifications...

A. It's built by someone/big company who can afford the necessary computer specs. $3000+ PCs aren't just for gaming. A lot of individuals use it for other Media purposes, such as Music (remember how much GymLeaderPhil has in music? :lol: ), movies, and pictures/picture editing programs. Big companies buy such computers to run servers on, though I'm sure the PCs will end up around $10,000+ at that rate...

B. You buy it from some company such as Alienware, who uses the most advanced/recent technology in their computers.

Hell, I'm using a computer with only 512 MB of RAM, a P4 @ 2.8 GHz, an 80 GB hard drive, an ATI Radeon 9800 @ 128 MB, and a DVD-ROM drive. All of that costed around $800. Add a 17" LCD display (the sexiest part of the computer at this rate), and you have a good $1200 right there.

What do I play? Warcraft 3, Star Wars: Battlefront, Star Wars: Jedi Academy, Phantasy Star Online Blue Burst and, and loads of demos I get from PC Gamer. Am I happy? For the time being. It's not the best library of games, but at least they (as well as my 808.8 MB music collection and school work) keep me busy for hours upon hours.

Personally, as far as what is best for a gamer, here is what I would suggest. Out of two choices...

A. Low-end computer ($500-$700) for research and web browsing and an Xbox/PS2 for your gaming (then again, I'm only saying those choices because they have Battlefront)
B. High-end computer ($1500-$3000) for loads of gaming with a low-end computer (see above) for research and web browsing...

The OS is up to you...

fastphil said:
I also originally thought PC gaming was a bit cheaper, but everyone brings up good points. Its really about the same if you build your own PC. But not a lot of people know how to do that which makes Console gaming and excellent choice.
Click to expand...
If that is the case, may I recommend getting PC Gamer issue # 144 (Holiday 2005)? It has a very nice detailed article on how to build your own PC for under $1500
 
Last edited:
Arthas_Zero said:
If that is the case, may I recommend getting PC Gamer issue # 144 (Holiday 2005)? It has a very nice detailed article on how to build your own PC for under $1500
Click to expand...

It just seems that way. I know how to build my own, been doin it for a looooong time. In fact i find it fun, but it just seems a lot of people that make arguements for consoles because of price, just dont know how to save $$ on a decent system. I guess i just made that statement to say that people who don't know or dont have the desire to learn how to build a cheap system then a console is probably best for them
 
fastphil said:
It just seems that way. I know how to build my own, been doin it for a looooong time. In fact i find it fun, but it just seems a lot of people that make arguements for consoles because of price, just dont know how to save $$ on a decent system
Click to expand...
Yeah, thank god for my brother, built me a nice gaming quality PC for not a whole lot(i dont know exactly how much though..) But my card isnt too hot(geforce 5700). Oh, and

"There have also been whispers that it can play GCN disks, but those aren't confirmed yet."
Thats confirmed.
 
Last edited:
why are people so obsessed with this? while it may be fine and dandy, it will be YEARS before its accepted as the choice for FPS gamers. I for one have looked at that controller and thought long and hard about how ANNOYING it will be to hold that thing in shooting position for hours on end. Might be great for 30 mins but for 2 hours? i see a lot of wrist pain in people's future.
Click to expand...
I don't even like FPS's...

I was just trying to point out how, unlike the other two consoles, revolution distinctively separates itself from the abilities of a PC.
 
considering the revolution is going to be the first to utilize this whole "3d space" crap, it might take a generation or two to perfect the technology. then there's the possiblity that sony and microsoft will rip it off in their future consoles...

personally, i think people take this whole gaming thing way too seriously. i'd probably be fine with the consoles i have now if companies kept making games for them. if the companies are supposed to make more profit on the software, then you would think they would continue making software for the console, even after a next-gen release. i guess when you grow up with an nes having to blow on the cartridges and praying that they'll work, everything else is kind of like a bonus... :)
 
fastphil said:
Again, i cant see this happening anytime soon. That "controller" has yet to prove itself any where near as capable with people that have already developed skills on a standard controller. That aside, Nintendo first has to make decent games that will attract the FPS crowd, which it has thus far failed to do.
Click to expand...

True, but is the FPS genre all that gaming has left? Looking at many recent Xbox games-one might think so. :tongue:

I can understand the fervor of hardcore gamers (especially of the FPS persuasion) in regards to the current progression of the games industry. In many ways, First Person games are the most realized and intuitive in a 3-d interface given the current echnology. Rarely is any half-decent FPS plagued by the same problems even an exceptional third person game faces.

Is the current business model fine? Sure. But it won't help to increase the industry's current fan-base.
 
bullados said:
CFK: I wouldn't state that as fact until officially announced. Nintendo is known for doing some wacky things. Also, I use the term "backward compatable" very loosely to mean that it can play games from past consoles. Nowhere do I state that it can play cartdriges, or anything like that. Yes, it has been announced that the Revolution has the capability to download play every game in the Nintendo library. There have also been whispers that it can play GCN disks, but those aren't confirmed yet.
Click to expand...
Whispers? It does play GCN discs. Even has a flip top for GCN memory cards and controllers. And most likely EVERY game will not be available for download. Atleast not at launch. Probably just first party stuff and some of the more popular third party classics.

Generally, in terms of controllers, Nintendo doesn't have a weakness in anything due to the classic controller cradle. They just might be more proficient in some areas.

You don't know what the revolution does/doesn't do, it's not out yet.
Click to expand...
The Revolution CAN sense 3D motion and tilt of the controller. That was announced. o_O
 
I don't know about you guys, but last year or 1.5 years ago, I bought me a good video card, and 1GB of RAM for my computer that was old enough. This is an computer with a 1.3 AMD processor that is quite old too. Since then, theres been maybe 1 or 2 games it cannot run, and I have no problems with a lot of games. Sure, I don't play the games at 100% with everything turned on, but I can play them and have fun with them.

And I really doubt that you have to pay $3000 just to get a gaming computer. I'm sure for $1000, you could make a pretty awesome computer and play all the games out right now really nicely.

Sure it cost more money than a console, but it also lets' you get on the internet(ooohhhh), allows you to use windows, and you might need a good computer if your doing video editting or 3d modeling. So, its needed for the job, yet you can use it to play games with it. Can consoles even match up to that? "360 can connect to the net and let me talk with my friends over some rehashed PM service!!!!11111"

Okay...
 
Captain Chronic said:
i guess when you grow up with an nes having to blow on the cartridges and praying that they'll work, everything else is kind of like a bonus... :)
Click to expand...

lol...i soooo remember doing that too


Weedler said:
True, but is the FPS genre all that gaming has left? Looking at many recent Xbox games-one might think so.
Click to expand...

It seems that way because most PS2/GCN gamers dont play Xbox games. I have ALL 3 systems at home. the PS2 and GCN gather dust because the quality and types of games they produce i do not like. I LOVE playing games with friends whethere it is FPS or smashing through my buddies defensive line or taking out his air defenses and the Xbox HAS those types of games, sure so does the PS2 but the quality is just not the same. Xbox is just friendlier when hooking up to play with friends, hands down!

There have been many times that i have compared games released for both or all 3 systems side by side and i can tell the difference. Some people say they can't but, I'm military trained, I pay attention to detail especially when staring at satellite photos all day in a dark room. Picking out subtle differences in graphics is way easy for me. With that said, some people dont think that slightly improved graphics is much better, but it sure makes a difference to people like me and who agree with me that the Xbox > PS2 on titles that are released for both systems. I'm sure i'll get all 3 of the new systems in time, but history repeats itself time and time again and I'm sure I know which 2 systems will be gathering dust.

[/RANT]

oh by the way, nice post Prime (agreed 100%)
 
Myself, I've got a pretty decent gaming desktop (once i get a new job im gonna buy a new video card for it, got a GeForce 6600 in there right now), and a gaming notebook that's taken everything I can throw at it (with it's Radeon 9600... is playable with the HL2 Lost Coast demo with everything set at maximum!!). And a Gamecube and a PS2, and I'm probably going to be buying all 3 new consoles.

You don't need to spend a lot of money to build a gaming computer. I spent probably $800 on my desktop when I got it in May. Could build it now for even less than that (its an emachines machine, and at the time I bought it it costed less than if I were to buiild that same machine myself with the parts it uses, and then I bought the 6600 after that). You can get a really nice video card, the GeForce 6800GS, for $200. (granted you'll need a PCI-e motherboard, so either an AMD64 machine like I have, or a Pentinum 4 machine is what you'll be building). That can score 5000 in the 3DMark05 benchmark. For comparison, my notebook scores 1200 and my desktop scores 2100.

If anything, reasons for not buying the new consoles arent about the money for either consoles or computers, or the features from them. They are different categories, with different purposes. If anything should be dettering it is the crap that's been going on lately from Sony, like this for example:

http://www.boingboing.net/2005/11/12/new_sony_lockware_pr.html
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top