does the console with the cheapest graphics always win?

I started thinking and noticed that most console nowadays that are packed with less power on their snarf usually come out as the winner. Now don't snarf me on this because i'm not an old school gamer but for those of you who gamed way beack can fill me in to improve some of my facts.

the wii had noticeably worse graphicsthan the 360 and the ps3.

the ps2 had worse graphics then the gc and xbox, but not by much.

the ds had worse graphics than the psp.

gba had worse graphics than the nokia.........

ps1 had worse graphics then the n64.

Is this a fact or just great marketing plans. Who the snarf knows, not me thats for sure.

I started thinking and noticed that most console nowadays that are packed with less power on their snarf usually come out as the winner. Now don't snarf me on this because i'm not an old school gamer but for those of you who gamed way beack can fill me in to improve some of my facts.

the wii had noticeably worse graphicsthan the 360 and the ps3.

the ps2 had worse graphics then the gc and xbox, but not by much.

the ds had worse graphics than the psp.

gba had worse graphics than the nokia.........

ps1 had worse graphics then the n64.

Is this a fact or just great marketing plans. Who the snarf knows, not me thats for sure.

Gotham-Calls

Um... what? Are you serious? Is this guy serious? You can't be serious.

Most people just blindly buy a Wii only because of price.

the n64 had better graphics then the ps1 right guys? I'm positive it did

Most people just blindly buy a Wii only because of price.

NoodleFighter

Why do people always look for stupid generalizations ...

Why do people always look for stupid generalizations ...

hakanakumono

Snes had the best graphics (excluding the 1000$ Neo Geo or whatever it cost) and NES definitely was pretty powerful on its release.

the n64 had better graphics then the ps1 right guys? I'm positive it did

Gotham-Calls

Yeah, by quite a lot too.

[QUOTE="Gotham-Calls"]

I started thinking and noticed that most console nowadays that are packed with less power on their snarf usually come out as the winner. Now don't snarf me on this because i'm not an old school gamer but for those of you who gamed way beack can fill me in to improve some of my facts.

the wii had noticeably worse graphicsthan the 360 and the ps3.

the ps2 had worse graphics then the gc and xbox, but not by much.

the ds had worse graphics than the psp.

gba had worse graphics than the nokia.........

ps1 had worse graphics then the n64.

Is this a fact or just great marketing plans. Who the snarf knows, not me thats for sure.

SPYDER0416

Um... what? Are you serious? Is this guy serious? You can't be serious.

It is true that the console with the weakest hardware usually comes out on top since they can charge less and still make a profit. And it's nothing new. It's been happening since the beginning

[QUOTE="Gotham-Calls"]

I started thinking and noticed that most console nowadays that are packed with less power on their snarf usually come out as the winner. Now don't snarf me on this because i'm not an old school gamer but for those of you who gamed way beack can fill me in to improve some of my facts.

the wii had noticeably worse graphicsthan the 360 and the ps3.

the ps2 had worse graphics then the gc and xbox, but not by much.

the ds had worse graphics than the psp.

gba had worse graphics than the nokia.........

ps1 had worse graphics then the n64.

Is this a fact or just great marketing plans. Who the snarf knows, not me thats for sure.

SPYDER0416

Um... what? Are you serious? Is this guy serious? You can't be serious.

I'm pretty sure he is. And he's right.

Snes had the best graphics (excluding the 1000$ Neo Geo or whatever it cost) and NES definitely was pretty powerful on its release.

magnax1

uhhh....no. Mega Drive was more powerful than the SNES, and it even has a better sound output.

just look at this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05ydclvNaDY

this came out 17 years ago for the Mega Drive. daaayuuummm...

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

[QUOTE="Gotham-Calls"]

I started thinking and noticed that most console nowadays that are packed with less power on their snarf usually come out as the winner. Now don't snarf me on this because i'm not an old school gamer but for those of you who gamed way beack can fill me in to improve some of my facts.

the wii had noticeably worse graphicsthan the 360 and the ps3.

the ps2 had worse graphics then the gc and xbox, but not by much.

the ds had worse graphics than the psp.

gba had worse graphics than the nokia.........

ps1 had worse graphics then the n64.

Is this a fact or just great marketing plans. Who the snarf knows, not me thats for sure.

Phoenix534

Um... what? Are you serious? Is this guy serious? You can't be serious.

I'm pretty sure he is. And he's right.

I think it's also wrong to say PS2 was the "weakest" console last gen because, when it was released, it was in fact stronger than the Dreamcast which was its immediate competition.

The GBA vs. Nokia part is kinda funny. The Nokia was not a serious rival to the GBA... the GBA dominated the market, practically unimposed. Its rivals were all but irrelevant in the handheld space.

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

[QUOTE="Gotham-Calls"]

I started thinking and noticed that most console nowadays that are packed with less power on their snarf usually come out as the winner. Now don't snarf me on this because i'm not an old school gamer but for those of you who gamed way beack can fill me in to improve some of my facts.

the wii had noticeably worse graphicsthan the 360 and the ps3.

the ps2 had worse graphics then the gc and xbox, but not by much.

the ds had worse graphics than the psp.

gba had worse graphics than the nokia.........

ps1 had worse graphics then the n64.

Is this a fact or just great marketing plans. Who the snarf knows, not me thats for sure.

Phoenix534

Um... what? Are you serious? Is this guy serious? You can't be serious.

I'm pretty sure he is. And he's right.

I bolded the PSone and N64 because I think its not easy to determine, but I'm edging towards PSone.

Was the N64 really more powerful though? I know the cartridge format severely handicapped its potential compared to the superior disc format, and I can remember it being a major pipeline in graphics and content compared to PSone. The PSone was also capable of higher quality audio and textures if I remember right.

Other then that (and the SNES) I think TC has a point. Systems with better graphics cost more, so people will be more willing to buy the cheaper console for their kids and for themselves since it saves them cash. It also tends to come out sooner (or around the same time) so impatient types don't have to wait either.

PC gaming is also an interesting example. Everyone has a PC, but a cheap PC that can barely run old titles can be found in more households then a nice, custom PC with all the fillings and 2 high end graphics cards and what not.

SO in the end I guess its not so much the power, but the mix of cost, availability and how soon it comes.

Not always. I mean last gen the Dreamcast was the weakest.

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

[QUOTE="Gotham-Calls"]

I started thinking and noticed that most console nowadays that are packed with less power on their snarf usually come out as the winner. Now don't snarf me on this because i'm not an old school gamer but for those of you who gamed way beack can fill me in to improve some of my facts.

the wii had noticeably worse graphicsthan the 360 and the ps3.

the ps2 had worse graphics then the gc and xbox, but not by much.

the ds had worse graphics than the psp.

gba had worse graphics than the nokia.........

ps1 had worse graphics then the n64.

Is this a fact or just great marketing plans. Who the snarf knows, not me thats for sure.

Phoenix534

Um... what? Are you serious? Is this guy serious? You can't be serious.

I'm pretty sure he is. And he's right.

[QUOTE="Phoenix534"]

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

Um... what? Are you serious? Is this guy serious? You can't be serious.

Inconsistancy

I'm pretty sure he is. And he's right.

The polygon graphics of the PS1 weren't really that far removed from the N64. They were hardly "bad" in comparison with anything released in that age.

Dreamcast

thread/

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

[QUOTE="Gotham-Calls"]

I started thinking and noticed that most console nowadays that are packed with less power on their snarf usually come out as the winner. Now don't snarf me on this because i'm not an old school gamer but for those of you who gamed way beack can fill me in to improve some of my facts.

the wii had noticeably worse graphicsthan the 360 and the ps3.

the ps2 had worse graphics then the gc and xbox, but not by much.

the ds had worse graphics than the psp.

gba had worse graphics than the nokia.........

ps1 had worse graphics then the n64.

Is this a fact or just great marketing plans. Who the snarf knows, not me thats for sure.

charizard1605

Um... what? Are you serious? Is this guy serious? You can't be serious.

[QUOTE="Phoenix534"]

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

Um... what? Are you serious? Is this guy serious? You can't be serious.

SPYDER0416

I'm pretty sure he is. And he's right.

I bolded the PSone and N64 because I think its not easy to determine, but I'm edging towards PSone.

Was the N64 really more powerful though? I know the cartridge format severely handicapped its potential compared to the superior disc format, and I can remember it being a major pipeline in graphics and content compared to PSone. The PSone was also capable of higher quality audio and textures if I remember right.

Other then that (and the SNES) I think TC has a point. Systems with better graphics cost more, so people will be more willing to buy the cheaper console for their kids and for themselves since it saves them cash. It also tends to come out sooner (or around the same time) so impatient types don't have to wait either.

PC gaming is also an interesting example. Everyone has a PC, but a cheap PC that can barely run old titles can be found in more households then a nice, custom PC with all the fillings and 2 high end graphics cards and what not.

SO in the end I guess its not so much the power, but the mix of cost, availability and how soon it comes.

The Xbox 1 slashed prices throughout most of its life to try and keep the same cost as a PS2, but in the end that didn't really help push units. On the other hand, the Gamecube also had better graphics than the PS2, and cost $100 less (!) - yet it still sold way, way worse.

So why did the PS2 cruise to victory? Its DVD-playing functionality, PS1 compatability and exaggerated "power" helped put the PS2 over the Dreamcast in the early days. After that, it already had a large install base and received some of the most popular software of last generation first: Grand Theft Auto 3, Metal Gear Solid 2, Final Fantasy X, etc.

So after that, the PS2's strong brand-appeal, install base and unanimous dev support helped ensure its victory. But I don't think it was because consumers actually wanted worse graphics, nor was the PS2 even the cheapest system. We just go where the games are and (more importantly this gen) where the most popular brand is.

TC : does the console with the cheapest graphics always win?

----------

No, otherwise the Sega Genesis would have beat(outsold) the SNES.

No, otherwise the Sega Saturn would have beat(outsold) the PSOne and N64.

Finally, No, otherwise the Sega Dreamcast would have "beat" outsold the Xbox, Gamecube, and PS2.

BTW : Sega was awesome, I'm just demonstrating that the cheapest graphics don't always win sales...although, I personally don't care about sales, other than the launch period where it's a bit worrisome if the console may die, like the Dreamcast suddenly did.

TC : does the console with the cheapest graphics always win?

----------

No, otherwise the Sega Genesis would have beat(outsold) the SNES.

No, otherwise the Sega Saturn would have beat(outsold) the PSOne and N64.

Finally, No, otherwise the Sega Dreamcast would have "beat" outsold the Xbox, Gamecube, and PS2.

BTW : Sega was awesome, I'm just demonstrating that the cheapest graphics don't always win sales...although, I personally don't care about sales, other than the launch period where it's a bit worrisome if the console may die, like the Dreamcast suddenly did.

SolidTy

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

[QUOTE="Gotham-Calls"]

I started thinking and noticed that most console nowadays that are packed with less power on their snarf usually come out as the winner. Now don't snarf me on this because i'm not an old school gamer but for those of you who gamed way beack can fill me in to improve some of my facts.

the wii had noticeably worse graphicsthan the 360 and the ps3.

the ps2 had worse graphics then the gc and xbox, but not by much.

the ds had worse graphics than the psp.

gba had worse graphics than the nokia.........

ps1 had worse graphics then the n64.

Is this a fact or just great marketing plans. Who the snarf knows, not me thats for sure.

Phoenix534

Um... what? Are you serious? Is this guy serious? You can't be serious.

I'm pretty sure he is. And he's right.

No, he's not right...he completely forgot about SEGA systems, mentioned in my post above. All I really need to mention is the Sega Dreamcast, honestly.

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

[QUOTE="Gotham-Calls"]

I started thinking and noticed that most console nowadays that are packed with less power on their snarf usually come out as the winner. Now don't snarf me on this because i'm not an old school gamer but for those of you who gamed way beack can fill me in to improve some of my facts.

the wii had noticeably worse graphicsthan the 360 and the ps3.

the ps2 had worse graphics then the gc and xbox, but not by much.

the ds had worse graphics than the psp.

gba had worse graphics than the nokia.........

ps1 had worse graphics then the n64.

Is this a fact or just great marketing plans. Who the snarf knows, not me thats for sure.

charizard1605

Um... what? Are you serious? Is this guy serious? You can't be serious.

Actually, he's incorrect. He completely forgot about the SEGA Dreamcast as well as other past Sega machines, like the Saturn.

[QUOTE="SolidTy"]

TC : does the console with the cheapest graphics always win?

----------

No, otherwise the Sega Genesis would have beat(outsold) the SNES.

No, otherwise the Sega Saturn would have beat(outsold) the PSOne and N64.

Finally, No, otherwise the Sega Dreamcast would have "beat" outsold the Xbox, Gamecube, and PS2.

BTW : Sega was awesome, I'm just demonstrating that the cheapest graphics don't always win sales...although, I personally don't care about sales, other than the launch period where it's a bit worrisome if the console may die, like the Dreamcast suddenly did.

Inconsistancy

Oh, I'm well aware of the Sega follies...but that's a whole 'nother fun topic, one that I've participated before a lot last generation System Wars. :P

Most people just blindly buy a Wii only because of price.

NoodleFighter

Because of motion controls, not because of price.

[QUOTE="charizard1605"][QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

Um... what? Are you serious? Is this guy serious? You can't be serious.

SolidTy

Actually, he's incorrect. He completely forgot about the SEGA Dreamcast as well as other past Sega machines, like the Saturn.

He is right on the point that N64 was more powerfull graphicaly than PS1. Way more powerful, actually.

[QUOTE="SolidTy"]

[QUOTE="charizard1605"] He's right :|BlbecekBobecek

Actually, he's incorrect. He completely forgot about the SEGA Dreamcast as well as other past Sega machines, like the Saturn.

He is right on the point that N64 was more powerfull graphicaly than PS1. Way more powerful, actually.

[QUOTE="BlbecekBobecek"]

[QUOTE="SolidTy"]

Actually, he's incorrect. He completely forgot about the SEGA Dreamcast as well as other past Sega machines, like the Saturn.

charlesdarwin55

He is right on the point that N64 was more powerfull graphicaly than PS1. Way more powerful, actually.

[QUOTE="NoodleFighter"]

Most people just blindly buy a Wii only because of price.

BlbecekBobecek

Because of motion controls, not because of price.

Well that too :P

[QUOTE="charlesdarwin55"]

[QUOTE="BlbecekBobecek"]

He is right on the point that N64 was more powerfull graphicaly than PS1. Way more powerful, actually.

Inconsistancy

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"][QUOTE="charlesdarwin55"] why does it matter which console have the best graphics when n64 was just full of garbage games anyway? :?

charlesdarwin55

[QUOTE="charlesdarwin55"]

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"] Not sure if serious....Inconsistancy

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"][QUOTE="charlesdarwin55"] Very serious

charlesdarwin55

Zelda: Ocarina of Time is the best game ever made according to most critics, and Super Mario 64 is second best.

see:http://www.filibustercartoons.com/games.htm

(third best is Tetris btw.)

[QUOTE="magnax1"]

Snes had the best graphics (excluding the 1000$ Neo Geo or whatever it cost) and NES definitely was pretty powerful on its release.

rumbalumba

uhhh....no. Mega Drive was more powerful than the SNES, and it even has a better sound output.

just look at this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05ydclvNaDY

this came out 17 years ago for the Mega Drive. daaayuuummm...

The Wii only won because it was gimmicky and casual people like to play there shovel ware and Just Dance.

[QUOTE="charlesdarwin55"]

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"] Killer Instinct: Gold, Star Fox64, SM64, Zelda OoT, Goldeneye... garbage?BlbecekBobecek

Zelda: Ocarina of Time is the best game ever made according to most critics, and Super Mario 64 is second best.

see:http://www.filibustercartoons.com/games.htm

(third best is Tetris btw.)

It can't even compete with much older games like Doom and Heretic.

[QUOTE="BlbecekBobecek"]

[QUOTE="charlesdarwin55"] Well I only really played OoT and that game is definitely garbage, at best! But from what I remembered so was SM64. Goldeneye was fun though playing with friends.

charlesdarwin55

Zelda: Ocarina of Time is the best game ever made according to most critics, and Super Mario 64 is second best.

see:http://www.filibustercartoons.com/games.htm

(third best is Tetris btw.)

It can't even compete with much older games like Doom and Heretic.

Thats weird, I bought used N64 two years ago and played OoT for the first time (Im old PC gamer, never touched a console before this gen) and I enjoyed it a lot, definitely one of the best games I have ever played. Maybe you just dont like having to think when playing games?

[QUOTE="Gotham-Calls"]

I started thinking and noticed that most console nowadays that are packed with less power on their snarf usually come out as the winner. Now don't snarf me on this because i'm not an old school gamer but for those of you who gamed way beack can fill me in to improve some of my facts.

the wii had noticeably worse graphicsthan the 360 and the ps3.

the ps2 had worse graphics then the gc and xbox, but not by much.

the ds had worse graphics than the psp.

gba had worse graphics than the nokia.........

ps1 had worse graphics then the n64.

Is this a fact or just great marketing plans. Who the snarf knows, not me thats for sure.

SPYDER0416

Um... what? Are you serious? Is this guy serious? You can't be serious.

Are you serious it did have better graphics than the PS1 the only thing that held it back was it's cartridges.

No, he's not right...he completely forgot about SEGA systems, mentioned in my post above. All I really need to mention is the Sega Dreamcast, honestly.SolidTy

Actually, he's incorrect. He completely forgot about the SEGA Dreamcast as well as other past Sega machines, like the Saturn.SolidTy

[QUOTE="charlesdarwin55"]

[QUOTE="BlbecekBobecek"]

Zelda: Ocarina of Time is the best game ever made according to most critics, and Super Mario 64 is second best.

see:http://www.filibustercartoons.com/games.htm

(third best is Tetris btw.)

BlbecekBobecek

It can't even compete with much older games like Doom and Heretic.

Thats weird, I bought used N64 two years ago and played OoT for the first time (Im old PC gamer, never touched a console before this gen) and I enjoyed it a lot, definitely one of the best games I have ever played. Maybe you just dont like having to think when playing games?

Most people just blindly buy a Wii only because of price.

NoodleFighter

Not allways. Snes and Playstation had better graphics than Turbografx16/Megadrive and Sega Saturn respectively.

Not always. The SNES was stronger than the genesis. But for the past 3 generations the weakest console has had the most sales, but it's only coincidence.