Is the PS3 Poised to Obliterate the Xbox 360?

[GePap]

I have heard people who are not usualy gamers sound exited about playing with the Wii, and I am just talking about the basic sports game that comes with the system.

I think Nintendo was right on giving people an option for those that want something original in gaming. Better graphics are nice, but what matters is gameplay.

[DaShi]

Asher is choosing a vibrator over a phallic device.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by GePap
I have heard people who are not usualy gamers sound exited about playing with the Wii, and I am just talking about the basic sports game that comes with the system.

I think Nintendo was right on giving people an option for those that want something original in gaming. Better graphics are nice, but what matters is gameplay.

Asher, noticed a trend yet? Pretty much EVERYONE has been convinced by the Nintendo marketing machine that the Wii won't have good graphics but it will have great gameplay. True or not (it has the potential for tons of innovative gameplay) I know you must die a little inside every time someone says that and I think it bodes well for Nintendo in the console wars.

[MRT144]

Originally posted by GePap
I have heard people who are not usualy gamers sound exited about playing with the Wii, and I am just talking about the basic sports game that comes with the system.

I think Nintendo was right on giving people an option for those that want something original in gaming. Better graphics are nice, but what matters is gameplay.

graphics are part of gameplay. you cant easily seperate the two like that. i think a more apt phrase is game dynamics design.

[MikeH]

Graphics aren't part of gameplay. You can easily seperate the two. As long as the graphics are functional enough to play the game anything else is a bonus.

Something like Tetris is still incredibly playable and addictive and the graphics are very basic.

[MRT144]

the game design doesnt call for intense amazing graphics. the overall gameplay is dictated by many factors. form is dictated by function.

a game with terrible graphics vs great graphics, all things being equal in game design, the one with better graphics will have better gameplay, unless youre going for that "based on the heretic engine" look.

[Tim_Augustus]

Originally posted by MRT144


graphics are part of gameplay. you cant easily seperate the two like that. i think a more apt phrase is game dynamics design.

Ever heard of Civ2?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Asher, noticed a trend yet? Pretty much EVERYONE has been convinced by the Nintendo marketing machine that the Wii won't have good graphics but it will have great gameplay. True or not (it has the potential for tons of innovative gameplay) I know you must die a little inside every time someone says that and I think it bodes well for Nintendo in the console wars.

I've noticed a trend to be sure, but the reality of the situation is quite different thus far and with lots of "innovative, fun" games coming up like Bob Ross Teaches Painting being cancelled, I'm seeing even developers had eyes bigger than their stomachs. It's one thing to say new controller = teh innovation, it's another thing to utilize the controller in a truly innovative fashion given the constraints of the hardware.

Even the elebits I've mentioned above as an example of maybe the Wii being capable of decent physics devolves into a "slideshow" later on in the game. If you guys think graphics are completely outside of the scope of gameplay, you're very wrong. Try using the Wii pointer on a game moving at 10fps.

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Tim_Augustus


Ever heard of Civ2?

the game design doesnt require awesome graphics, and the technology didnt allow it. But if it's there it will enhance gameplay. maybe this is a semantics arguement but I think gameplay is the overall experience of playing the game and is composed of several factors; graphics, sound, game design, story line, functionality, etc etc.

[Bill3000]

a game with terrible graphics vs great graphics, all things being equal in game design, the one with better graphics will have better gameplay, unless youre going for that "based on the heretic engine" look.

That's not how the term is used. Games are considered "classic" because of how good the gameplay is - a function of how revolutionary it is. Why is Pacman considered a good game? Surely not because of its good graphics. It's because of how revolutionary (and good, period) its gameplay was. Why are the early FF games, such as FF1, FF4 and FF6 considered classics in RPGs? Because of how good the gameplay was.

There are plenty of games that are considered awful because, despite it may hae good graphics for the time, it has horrible gameplay. Sudeki is a good example of this. Graphics are not a function of gameplay. Gameplay describes a quality of what the player does, and has nothing to do with how the game looks or sounds. The ratings on numerous gaming sites show this: gameplay is a different function from graphics or sound when they rate games.

This is a matter of how the term is used. And quite frankly, the interpretation of gameplay that you use is quite different from how it is used in general.

And even so, the way you describe graphics isn't very appropriate. What's important with how graphics are measured is how good they are compared with the technology at the time, not how good the graphics are in an absolute sense. A simple example would be, well, any handheld game - gameboy games arn't held to the same measure of graphics as PS3 games, and heck, that's not important.

[Asher]

Official November NPD US Retail sales numbers:

PS3: 196,000
Wii: 476,000
360: 511,300

Notable game sales:

Gears of War (Xbox 360) - 1,035,000 - $61.5 Million
FF12 (PS2) - 896,000 - $49 Million
Zelda (Wii + GC combined)) - 412,000 - $20.2 Million
Guitar Hero 2 (Ps2) - 356,000 - $28 Million

Call of Duty 3:
Xbox 360: 332,900 units
PS2: 106,000 units
Xbox 1: 54,800 units
PS3: 24,800 units
Wii: 47,800 units

[Asher]

Fresh off the news that HD DVD is getting more positive reception than Bluray on the basis that Sony is perceived as "arrogant" and "heavy-handed", Sony again refuses to admit to glaring problems with their products and will not address them.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=748779

There are widespread problems with their $3000+ XBR2/XBR3 TVs, in terms of uneven backlighting on the LCDs. They refuse to fix it or acknowledge it as a problem.

By contrast, a couple people have had the same problem with the $800 Westinghouse models, and Westinghouse swapped them under warranty...

[Q Classic]

Yeah, but you expect that sort of **** from Westinghouse.

Sony's QUALITY with a capital Q. If they admit their products are bad, that'll be like Bush admitting that he ****ed up Iraq!

[Asher]

The problem is they do have serious quality problems, and they're choosing not to address them. That's hurting their brand image more than swapping the odd broken set out under warranty would do.

[Verto]

Originally posted by Asher


I've noticed a trend to be sure, but the reality of the situation is quite different thus far and with lots of "innovative, fun" games coming up like Bob Ross Teaches Painting being cancelled, I'm seeing even developers had eyes bigger than their stomachs. It's one thing to say new controller = teh innovation, it's another thing to utilize the controller in a truly innovative fashion given the constraints of the hardware.

Even the elebits I've mentioned above as an example of maybe the Wii being capable of decent physics devolves into a "slideshow" later on in the game. If you guys think graphics are completely outside of the scope of gameplay, you're very wrong. Try using the Wii pointer on a game moving at 10fps.

The Bob Ross game wasn't cancelled, it just changed developers. Not that I expect it to be any good.