The Angry Video Game Nerd explains that Super Mario Bros. 3 came from hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by Earthworm_Jim_Fan
Printable View
The Angry Video Game Nerd explains that Super Mario Bros. 3 came from hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by Earthworm_Jim_Fan
Hey Joe, seeing as you're the ban-happy type: everyone who has seriously and non-ironically used 'M$' or 'Micro$oft' or some other variation should be banned post haste for being the kind of moron that would argue at you about consoles seriously and non-ironically (but they're not fanboys, dear lord no)!
i used bold text because i'm just that SERIOUS about all this 'i'm not a fanboy BUT...' talk
Yep. As of late September last year, PS3 was at 5,590,000 units compared to the Xbox 360's 13,400,000 systems sold. Too much opinion being thrown around as fact in this dumb thread. All this topic has shown is that fanboy rants and pulling random "facts" of one's butt doesn't go away with age and presumed maturity as one would think. :p :(Quote:
Originally Posted by mick_aka
"Micro$oft" is lame. Whatever happened to the good old days, when we called them Microshaft?
M$ was never the same after 98SE
Wow, and you know this off the top of your head. I did know the genesis could do rotation and scaling, but I didn't know it could be used to effect gameplay or be used in the fore-ground, I thought (rotation) could only be used as decoration or something stationary, like a billboard that represents the end of the level in the genesis sonic titles.Quote:
Originally Posted by 17daysolderthannes
THANK YOU, THIS WAS THE ENTIRE POINT OF THIS THREADS EXSISTENCE. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by tomaitheous
Sooo sick of these sort of threads on the net. Find it unsual that your title claims it's not a 360 fanboy rant but as displayed by your ignorance on the subject, possibly just due to the fact you're only 14, it quite clearly is.
Is everyone fucking blind or something? In its first year alone you have games like Uncharted, Ratchet & Clank and Heavenly Sword. We are now only in its 2nd year and we already have the absolutely amazing looking MGS4 released. The PS3 may not have had the best start but it's still only in it's infancy and things are only going to get better.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomaitheous
The SMS may not have sold as much as the Nes, did very well in PAL territories however with last games being produced in 95 or 96 and lets not forget Brazil, but as you state yourself it was more powerful than the NES and it shows in the games of which there are plenty of great releases. Your also forgetting that Nintendo had an illegal monopoly in relation with game developers and publishers.Quote:
Originally Posted by sega fan
Can't speak for anyone else here, but I have pretty good vision. Mind toning back the language a bit?Quote:
Is everyone fucking blind or something?
That's possible, but will it exceed the 360 in graphics and performance? So far (by example) it hasn't. Oh and that was of this year. I saw Heavenly Sword on my brothers 1080p display... I wasn't impressed. Shuttering frame rate here and there, normal next-gen graphics. The COD4 PS3 port had some tone downs as well from what I've read. These are minor differences though, but it still brings up the point of why are they charging more for a system that's not delivering more than it's competitor?Quote:
The PS3 may not have had the best start but it's still only in it's infancy and things are only going to get better.
It must be because of their exclusives. I know of someone who just dropped money on a PS3 just to play MGS4 (he's already has a 360 and loves it). I hope the FF series only continues on PS3 and the 360 gets some more original RPG titles. I don't think I can take another FF game :?
Its harder to program PS3 games and is taking much longer for developers to learn how to squeeze the power from the thing. Most PC Ports DO look better on 360 but thats not because its more powerful by any means. MGS4 should trump any 360 game in the visual department I would imagine. Whoever said its only going to get better is right.
And you ask why they charge more for a system that isn't delivering more than its competetor?? What about the Bluray drive? As a player its already a great deal but even if you don't play movies on it the games have the extra storage capacity. MGS4 would be on like what 8 DVDs if on the 360!! Not to mention wireless abilities and the card slots. Say you use the card slots as a memory card to transfer a game to a friends house, you use the wireless and the BD player. If you bought the HD-DVD drive when it came out, or buy the BD player when and IF it comes out, buy a wireless bridge or access point and a memory card. You just spent MORE on the 360!
MGS4 is rumored for 360 and I wonder how they're going to acheive that. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by MN12BIRD
Well, Half of the 360 user base (like Me) didn't give a damn about the 200 dollar doomed HD-DVD player. Instead of wasting 50 bucks on a memory card for 360, I just have my detachable hard-drive and take it left and right, and why do the 360 have memory cards in the first place, it's 50 bucks for a 512 MB card or if you pay double you can get a 20GB hard drive. You have a point with your post and I don't mean to contradict what you said but a good 75% of all 360 accessories aren't even worth the materials they're made out of.
They'll do MGS4 on 360 after ASUS makes them the BD Player lol.
Is it true the 360 HD-DVD player couldn't do HDCP because it was being transfered over an "unsecured" USB connection? So does this mean that IF they do a BD Player it won't play HDCP encrypted movies at 1080 either?
360 has better games now and has been out for years longer so its all great. I'm just saying the PS3 is a better bargin for the future. The PS3 is worth the extra up front cost if your buying it NOW. They are what 399 now??
lol, of course the PS3 will exceed what the Xbox 360 shows in time. The hardware is hard to program, but definately way stronger, the system is younger, thus most of the games we see on both consoles now were started on Xbox 360 and then ported to PS3 during developement. No wonder the PS3-versions look slightly inferior.
Everyone, remember how the early PS2 games looked worse than their Dreamcast-counterparts? Still, after the coders learned to know the PS2 better, the games visual quality by far exceeded everything the Dreamcast had to offer.
Please try to go about the topic with some common sense; no system had the most impressive games so early on in itīs lifespan.
And calling others fanboys wonīt help either; use your brains and look at what videogame-history told us. No fanboy-rant needed to tell that the PS3 will show itīs technical advantage in time, and to see that the PS3 has already outsold the Xbox 360 in both Europe and Japan in total sales; the trend is that the PS3 is speeding up, while the Xbox 360 stagnates; all late analysises see Microsoft as the loser in this race as well.
I donīt own either system; but Iīm sure as hell that in 2 years the Xbox 360 will be sold on eBay for low prices while the PS3 is still getting more and more popular.
While the PS3 may have all this potential peformance, untill a game actually demonstrates graphics clearly beyond what the 360 can do (and is actually fun to play) then its all meaningless really.
The PS3 has been out quite a while now, yet games can't even run at full HD resolution, I've been hearing that some games don't even run in HD at all, and are the same resolution as PS2 games.
While of course its true that the longer a system is out the better devs get used to what they can achieve on it, and the better the games look. Its not so much finiding hidden performance, "oh how did we not see that extra CPU before, doh!" but learning how to make the best use of lighting, textures etc within the limitations of the system. Its the same for all systems, later megadrive games look way better than early ones, because artists got better at making use of the colour pallete and so on.
PS3 games will look better over time, but then so will 360 games too, I don't think there will ever be a huge gap between the two. If anything the slight difference that 360 games have above the PS3 versions will reverse, but its nothing to choose one system over the other for really - its the exclusive games on each system that are the real decision maker.
This is the same for the 360 aswell and pretty sure it has far more games sub HD games than the PS3. Most games that run under 720p are multiplatform titles anyways, the only ps3 exclusive that I can think of that runs at a sub HD resolution is Haze.Quote:
Originally Posted by playgen
Anybody thinking that the PS3 is a system of wasted potential needs to play MGS4 from start to finish :D. The game's graphics are phenomenal and this is only a 2nd year game.
Agree 100% with you and remember people trashing the PS2 on the net when it was released about how the Dreamcast could produce superior graphics but we all know how that turned out.Quote:
Originally Posted by 108 Stars