Scratch

Nintendo.

Nuff said.

Last edited by funelephant (2012-08-15 10:45:17)

each has its own merits which is why i own a ps3, wii, and xbox 360

coolhogs wrote:

You're right, 777w...

But this thread is to discuss the merits of each one, and to compare.

wii has ssbb
ps3 has lbp2
xbox 360 has halo
that basically sums everything for me, and theyre completely different games that would be pointless trying to compare

Eh. The problem with the Xbox is that most games are always available on PC, albeit sometimes horrible ports, though I prefer  these ports to actually playing games on a console. The only things that I questioned actually purchasing on the Xbox are Dark Souls and L.A. Noire, but those came to PC already.

And while we're at Xbox, let's talk PS3. I don't have a PS3, but am I ever waiting for Heavy Rain and Metal Gear Solid, but that's not going to happen.

Finally, Nintendo. Nintendo hasn't put anything worth really purchasing out since the GameCube era. An insult to Metroid (and females, too, really), a Kirby game no one really cared about, a ton of third party shovelware, and seven hundred remakes of their old games. I still have my GameCube, N64, and SNES. The days were better then. But the WiiU looks actually kind of promising. Hopefully Retro Studios will make another freekin' Metroid and redeem the series. Or a Star Fox like the 64 one. We'll see, Nintendo. We'll see.

Edit: Okay, Super Mario Galaxy and Xenoblade Chronicles were pretty good.

Last edited by cocoanut (2012-08-15 11:37:03)

Yes, they do! 

Nintendo. Because...

Super Mario Bros. series, Pikmin series, Luigi's Mansion, Super Smash Bros. series, Super Mario Galaxy series, Xenoblade Chronicles, The Last Story, Pandoras Tower...

Fun fact: you know how Nintendo unintentionally turned Sony into one of their biggest rivals with the whole SNES CD mess? Well, Sega almost did the conceptual opposite with Microsoft. When the Dreamcast died, Sega wanted a last ditch effort to live. They had negotiations with Microsoft to have the original Xbox play Dreamcast games. This would've put Sega under Microsoft's name. If history had played out a little bit differently, Nintendo and Sega could've still fought each other through Sony and Microsoft. Anyway, back to topic.

videogame9 wrote:

CheckItNow12 wrote:

It depend on what you like:

Hardcore games: Microsoft.

Casual games: Nintendo.

DVD Playback: Microsoft.

HD Graphics: Microsoft.

Cheaper price: Nintendo.



I myself am a Nintendo guy. The Kinect is not bad though. Of course, all of the stats above will change with the Wii U.

I don't understand the terms "casual" and "hardcore". They don't seem to have a concrete definition.
I also don't understand how they affect a game's quality.

Hardcore: CoD, Battlefield, Halo, etc.

Casual: Mario, Zelda, Sonic, etc.

videogame9 wrote:

CheckItNow12 wrote:

It depend on what you like:

Hardcore games: Microsoft.

Casual games: Nintendo.

DVD Playback: Microsoft.

HD Graphics: Microsoft.

Cheaper price: Nintendo.



I myself am a Nintendo guy. The Kinect is not bad though. Of course, all of the stats above will change with the Wii U.

I don't understand the terms "casual" and "hardcore". They don't seem to have a concrete definition.
I also don't understand how they affect a game's quality.

Casual usually means more family-friendly games like LBP, Scribblenauts, Mario Kart, etc. Hardcore is usually FPSs and that kind of stuff.

@Topic: Depends on what you want. If you want family games or excellent first-party games, Nintendo (although the Kinect lineup is pretty good). If you prefer gaming on the hardcore side, Microsoft.

Sony


>:3