http://malstrom.50webs.com/birdman.html

Linkified for the lazy among us

Its a long article, but worth a read.

I read this article some time ago. The man makes some good points. But then I don't quite agree with Nintendo moving slowly to the upmarket. This won't happen. N64 and NGC both had piss poor sales. The Wii wich is catered to mainly non traditional gamers has allready exceeded the sales of its previous systems in a short time. So Nintendo aiming towards the elderly and little girls payed off in the end, while releasing metroid prime and zelda for hardcores to suck it all up.

The downmarket will stay downmarket. Especially in the Wii fanbase considering these moms and dads will not suddenly become hardcore gamers and start playing more complex games such as S.T.A.L.K.E.R, The Witcher etc.

This strategy called disruption will utterly fail. Stop acting like the article is the great Revelation -_-

When you look at exclusives and multi-plats, you have to keep in mind what gaming system the multi-plats are actually on.

If you compare the PS3 and the 360, and you leave out multi-plats, you should only leave out the games that the two systems actually share with each other to determine the overall quality. Leaving out Bioshock because its on the PC makes no since, being just because its on the PC does not mean that somehow the PS3 can play it, or it doesnt matter.

Sheep are the main offenders in the "Multi-plats dont count" bunk. The sad fact is that Nintendo's console, while it has its own games, gets NONE of the big AAA multi-plats, and never will. So Nintendo fans just pretend that games like Burnout, COD4, Oblivion, Orange Box, Assassins Creed, Ninja Gadien Sigma, and Rainbow 6 Vegas simply do not exist. All of those games are AAA on the PS3, and none of then are available on the Wii. Thats more AAA's right there then the Wii has in total.

If the system your trying to defend doesnt have the game, its counts. Sorry Wii, you miss out on far more good games then you actually get.

evilross

Absolutely, so true. Nintendo fans are getting cocky lately. I don't blame em though, look at the sales statistics. Its friggin insane. Both Sony and MS are just emberassing when compared to it. Hopefully it gets better when GTAIV hit the stores.

''But, Bioshock doesn't matter, its not exclusive!'' Ehm what the hell? Doesn't make any sense to me >_>

[QUOTE="superjim42"][QUOTE="GiveMeSomething"]

just remember pc ports dont count :( so 360 has like 10 AAAEs

evilross

what you talking about pc dont count its a gaming platform as much as any other platform. i own a gaming pc i play all the superior versions of games on their. its system wars for a reason not console wars. so no 360 does not have like 10 AAAE's. you obviously do not know the meaning of exclusivity

The only problem with treatingthe PC on an equal playing field as consoles is this: "When do you start counting games for a PC during any gaming cycle?"

Here is an example: Oblivion was released on 360 and PC at pretty much the same time, most people would say that the PC version on max settings is graphically better, and thats the way it was reviewed. Now, to run Oblivion at the time it was released and have it actually look and preform better then the 360 version, you had to have a top end CPU, and the top end card of the time, which was along the lines of a 7900 i believe.

Fast forward to today. You have games like Crysis available, and are graphically superior to the consoles, but, if you are playing Crysis on the exact same machine that you used to play Oblivion when it came out, the game is NOT graphically all that great, and wont even run well with the visual downgrades. To run Crysis at the levels that its been reviewed at and all the screens are taken from you'd have to upgrade, and not only upgrade your GPU, you'd most likely had to upgrade your RAM, maybe your CPU, and you'd have to even upgrade your OS to the DX10 enabled Vista.

So here's the point. Do you start when the first next gen console comes out, and just ignore the fact that the PC's are not the same? Do you start with the Wii and PS3 releases and say thats when all the next gen systems were out? Or do you wait until the PC actually upgraded to its next gen with DX10? If so then what about all the games that came before.

Its a big mess IMO, and i dont see how PC gaming and console gaming can really be put in the same catagory.

Crysis is just one game. Crysis does not represent PC gaming as a whole.

Starcraft II, Spore, WotLK etc all the big hits that come to the PC don't require expensive hardware. PC gamers don't care about graphics as much as consolites do. Those gamers who have bought Crysis is merely 1% of the userbase... just an estimate. Its probably much much lower then that btw.

[QUOTE="xscrapzx"]

[QUOTE="earthmonkeyyy"]Yes. Because the Wii has won the war already.SpruceCaboose

No it has not won anything, I think a lot of people are forgetting that a system wins the war by the games they present. That has already been decided by a big poll that was done last year.

In the real world, though, winning is determined by profit and revenue.

For the company you support yes. But it doesn't profit you as the consumer. Unless you have invested in Nintendo's stock or something. Wich I wouldn't be surprised with all the obsessive enthousiastic fanboy supporters here in System Wars.

Quality is the winner.

1. PC

I'm not going like S.T.A.L.K.E.R: Shadows of Chernobyl less because it sold poorly.

If you are so blinded by your loyalty then good for you. Go ahead and follow the crowd like sheep buying overrated products like 50 cent bullet proof. Sales is not important in System Wars to me personally. But hey thats just me >_>

MGS3

MGS1 is very memorable, and was a great game for its time. But Snake Eater is many times better.