easy, i've grown to hate certain franchises actually...not only cus the story is ruined but because i suck at the game for some unknown reason..

Most recently liked and explaination:

Battlefield bc 2 - ever play chinese checkers or go? its like that fps style, fun fast and very tactical @times

C&C zerohour - not so great sometimes, but you can cheat and maphack, a poor man's chess

CS source - obviously its balanced and i grew up with it...but i like it because its made for violent fast gaming and headshots

Ghost recon 2 - besides for the cinematic scenes in 1 player, a good game and very easy to pick up. Controls feel natural. Wish it could be liek iraq style realism. played demo for a few years and recently bought.

Over-g - i love flightsims, this was the best for me..however its too realistic.

Batman asylum - enjoyed

Perfect dark zero - enjoyed

Mugen - havent played it for a while but it kind of sums up my fighting game history for the last 10 yrs, along with dreamcast, a slow pc and xbox 360 is my second bought console

Most hated

halo series - story went downhill, maps changed, too hard. Doesnt save. I beat it on legendary basically. it cant save that record though. no gaming points for me!

cs go - i bought this recently, check out my review to find out why its @best 78percent...another game with wierd stats..you lose when you win?!? Same with bf bc2 sometimes i noticed. and only god can use xbox 360 controllers without autoaim..only god.

ghost recon 1 (+mini-review) - great graphics, not so great AI. My teams AI does nothing. They 'squirrel' me sometimes. A term i coined up for when you run infront of someones scope or point of view, constantly. However the AI on the other team can track positions, headshot u from 1000s of yards away, duck cover and well act as the terminator gone rogue when youre in the area, basically. If i duck under a barrel, they will snipe me. Sometimes i notice head shots with machine guns at 1000 yards plus. They can or can not detect scopes, basically. The controls are similar to gwar 2 but also too slow, and frustrating at times. Sometimes a button function is expectable, but that's not going to change. Grenades are useful at certain intervals where u know where your enemy is. Expect to die at least four times on certain parts. Frame rate dips alot. Must be the unified ram thing...needs to be on gamecube or soemthing. Future setting works. The realistic movement is too slow, which puts you as an average amatuerish soldier instead of the pro fast and mobile super-soldier u get in graw 2. All-in-all both games are very similar so it is worth purchasing esp now. Currently playing so not really sure. Will let you know about the plot snf massive urban environments in future edits. Right now, i can say its def a change from its predecessor being more massive and detailed.

Past games

Seeing how i had dreamcast and Pc as i grew up, i would say...skies of arcadia. FF7, zelda oot, PSO, were my fav rpgs. The PC had those good sharewaregames like doom..and xwing. I followed the crowd, and went on to rainbow six series and complex realistic sims. Never had a real nack for racing games. I like realism. However I stuck to the doom style fps shooters like descent and stuff. Had xbox briefly, and liked. Splinter cell was fun however it lacked in games and game choices for me. Never cared to uprd pcs though. Sometimes played other consoles too which my bro had.

Loved fighting games and puzzle games like ssf puzzle fighter. Have a large dreamcast library. That's about it.

Consoles I never really owned

Everyone loved n64...i played alot fo mario kart, 007 etc. I also played a lot of mario 64, zelda oot, ff7 (see above), tekken series and twisted metal 2. Those games were addicting to me.

americans like gamecube cus its mystical. Its like a pretty package under a f'd up ego. It makes sense because their continent is **** up beyond belief. They liike the idea of this eve or beuatiful nature within chaotic destruction. Its just the way it is.

After watching this video i came to the conclusion Dreamcast is better than xbox 360. If you pause at 6:26 dreamcast v. and 5:26 xbox, you will notice the xbox's textures are flat. Just look at the background textures. Lol. It looks like no depth or detail in the bricks. Who would have thought, xbox has some downsides compared to an 8 year old console dreamcast. The character model and hair also looks more flat. Wow, really?!? Yes, really! Take a look for yourself. But if you notice what this noob who posted the video did wrong I will let you know. That's right, the idiot used his hd vga port to upscale the image. Therefore dreamcast looks blurrier, downgrading the quality of color drastically. Don't follow this noob, post comparison videos accuretly. Do it with an HD converter, not your vga port.:evil:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gqPQY9nn7I

Wii has more effects basically. Its just better because it is more capable to program for developers. More ability for bump-mapping etc. will make a console superior. Xbox 1 was good with gamecube but gamecube had the 8x bumpmapping going. Wii is technically the ps3 seventh gen system. It may be underpowered but so was dreamcast. Its equivalent to xbox 360 because of the ati processor but with nintendo games. One example is wii can do cartoon games better than xbox 360 and ps3 in my honest opinion. It does the effects with extra hardware bump-mapping, meaning its ram is not unified or shared. With ram strictly made for the ati hollywood video processer you get steady framerates and ability to have more particle effects. One example is the realtime motion blur on ps3, can be done on wii not on 360. ;)

Whoops!?! Sorry!:?

As for the thread i deverted topics into talking about xbox 360 accidently. Whoops! or maybe not.The problem with american consoles is they incorporate the unified ram theory. Robotics at work.Here's an example. Notice all the xbox 1 games look pretty but lack the environment? Noticethe environments are all small? There aren't really any large mario world games. Its more likesonic adventure because of lack of video ram. That's why fanboys call it the second dreamcast actually, cus itacts just like dreamcast in terms of graphics which are streamed from the ram (dreamcast graphics or data arestreamed from the disc). Besides Wii is an overly enhanced gamecube, therefore it's ram is a whopping88 mb putting far into the next gen era, compared to the 64 actually. 24 mb of ati video ram+64 mb of high speed 1.6 gb ram comparedto xbox's meager 200 mhz. Linear bandwagon downgraded pc games are not soo great sometimes, but i do have to admit xbox had nice nvidia lookingtextures for those realistic games like the textures of the robot in star wars battlefield and the shadow movements of splintercell. If wii could do rogue squadron again, i would consider your argument beat, butluckily no hit franchises that require those graphics from developers of that calibur came into play in that era. My argument though is its not an realistic fps made for franchise console. If you compare halo to like metroid you'll see what i'm saying. Two totally different consoles. Your argument is like me comparing crash bandicoot to like mario galaxy 2 or something. In the long run though..Yes, Wii is better.

PS: This is an interesting topic. It puts my theory of generation consoles as better than previous made consoles to rest. However, there is a reason why they are

in that generation and its not because of graphics alone...

Consoles of the current generation are historically equivalent in some fashion or technical capability due to the innovation of technical superiority or technicological leap in that current era of time. They are put there because the consoles in those categories can out perform each other in some specification of quality. For instance, the dreamcast can outperform xbox 1 in terms of realtime bump-mapping (basically, xbox 1 can't recreate sonic adventure's texture streaming or soul calibur's effects particle in the same manner as dreamcast). If you see jet grind radio, and compare it to jet set radio future, one is more colorful and brighter than the other, however xbox is clearly better because of the unified ram being naturally better for cell-shaded games. It also has more ability to manage shimmering textures accurately via the lighting effects BUT with less 'cartoon' glare do to the nvidia processor and its ati sega naomi counter-part (eg cannonspike or linear ps2-like games will appear less bright and smooth on xbox 1). Basically, once again mentioned. Dreamcast has no video card so it works like xbox in terms of data streaming (has an arcade hitachi sh4 power vr 2 naomi motherboard therefore ATI replicated with videoram). On a minor note Dreamcast has trail effects which are hardly used but seen in few times in shenmue, whilst xbox has the fade in blur effects which incorporates use of the whole environment and are taken into future consoles (a sad result of using unified ram, is lack of blur or accuretly made particle effects such as lighting reflected against the environment). If you see also test drive le mans compared to project gotham you get my drift. Xbox cannot do day-to-night transitions or weather made realtime due to lack of video ram (its ram is simply not fast enough). Its almost like the glare is pasted on the images in games. Shenmue is another example. It lacks the shimmer that realtime shenmue gave. An industry fopa. Every hair, tooth and nail can be seen in the original however, it can't be replicated on xbox 1 without sacrifices. Xbox lacks the glares and smooth shimmer due to its choice of nvidia. Gamecube lacks the data on the discs to do shenmue being a large game and ps2 lacks the AA and highdef. Every console has its thing. Bottomline though, xbox 1 was a marketing ploy, a gimmick to get into the game industry fast or an experimental test built like a pc and as big as one too! However xbox 360's test drive can outshine in almost every category via technical performance. To prove its specs are inferior in some retrospect, it lacks the 1.6 gflop pipeline that the dreamcast offers (dreamcast's CPU actually is equivalent to a amd soyo mb 1.0 ghz at that time or better, actually IS four times faster than the pII! it loads slow but outputs fast, however its gpu is small compared to the xbox's 5.8). It has wider pipelines and one processor directly made for the mb eg data streaming (did you ever notice how certain amd mbs are faster than other ones even with the same cpu, but load slower..thats pipelines at work to and from the cpu processor chip). One board consoles have their advantages you know. All the consoles excel in other areas basically. But if you made like a fps game on wii right, it could outshine in almost every category. Console gens are confined to their generation, not only in quality but in performance of the hardware by the developers, however they can mimick the games of previous generations much more effectively.

Links

Here are some source links for references.

-Notice the lack of color and polygonal shimmer in xbox's shenmue 2 (not a good example because its not in component, but when it zooms in close texture detail will not be added as effectively)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gqPQY9nn7I, Here is a reference to the unified ram theoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_(sixth_generation)

i know this is a dead topic popular in 2008 but since my opinion usually counts, i would say def. the SNES is the most durable hardware. Tough plastic around console, controller and cartridge media. Everything about the console doesn't break.;)

Nintendo makes good consoles but if you drop any cd base console u are liable for a damaged unplayable console by far. The nintendo is the best @hardware true, except it's future hardware didn't come close to NES. NES was a big mistake in design and functionality. So its something like n64 and SNES as the top of the game, then like any other consoles imo neo geo was tough and expensive too. CD wise, no competition. It would probably be like gamecube, xbox 1/saturn, dreamcast/ps2, 3d0 and finally Ps1 was horrible whilst its laser lens often sunk into the damn thing! and the seventh gen was packed with way too much power to even be a factor.

I mentioned this before over on this thread.. tjey should have a ufo flightsim on ps3. I got the idea from here a while back when my thread went viral on google. I would like to test planes on area 51 basically...or at least make it sci-fi themed. Ps3 lacks flightsims. Over G is the only flight sim they have and its on xbox 360. Besides that they ruined the idea of a flight sim because of campaign mode, and no parachutes. I didn't like the mode too much since it was like sci-fi but in a real world type scenario. Who wants to fly microsoft flight sim with directions, you know wat i mean? Anyways that's a good idea.:P

I do alot of ufo research so it would be obvious.

Bases= in black forest, germany. area 51, tukenski or watever nuke zone, adams bridge india, washington dc/europe, mars/moon, egypt, secret mountain bases in aztecs, antarctica war with hitler maybe africa, london crop circles, moscow and florida or watever and maybe a atlantis type scenario.

Ships=hanuabu, vimina, vril, bell, pleiadian ships, ifos, ufos, experimental planes, the zetas etc/orion races etc.

Bases=this would be cool because depending on the time and location or progress in game u would unlock better technology and ufos that can stop asteroids or travel through the sea and stuff. They would show up in dif. locations. The goal could be to shoot icbms and nukes etc. down. I don't know its a complex idea. But it would start simple like just an area 51 flightsim. Their would be like world races involved to like germany, russia and america as dif timzones or nazi, soviet and united nations. The occult would def be involved in the game as a theme.

Hello everyone, I decided to post a quick history of controllers section here. The controllers I post are voted best and reason why.
Rather than doing an indepth controller article in my blog, which I mentioned about controllers now and again, i decided to make a quick reference
here on the message boards. From top to buttom are reasons:

• 1st Place~ Nes/sms/wii-best controller, simple light and easy to use. *c-l-a-s-s-i-c-s* are always the most durable.

• 2nd- SNes=best button smasher controller/no flaws/A '3do' rip off! ;p
• 3rd- n64 - last good controller and best unique design. Ground breaking, cheap joystick&accesories though (js too long). Def. best grip.
• 4rth- The Dreamcast controller - last good non-complex controller, Too heavy though. The Saturn knights controller come reality. Best rumble feature and accesories as well.
• 5th- Saturn/genesis (6-button) - best breakable or cheap/cheaply made controller+simple design and fun
• 6th- The Xbox controller (small) - first good complex controller/best js accuracy/buttons too close together, slippery like its predessecer.
• 7th- pc - gravis gamepad, wireless, microsoft sidewinder etc. All around good for certain games or to try.
• 8th- gamecube - best wireless, best feel (has robotic feel), comfortable, playable for certain games
• 9th- Playstation - best complex controller/best js grip/weird in palm area
• 10nth- xbox 360 - best long-term wireless, too heavy and complex though (js alignment too high or too far apart), best rumble feature as well
• 11th- jaguar - ...no

There you have it, nintendo knows its controllers with sega coming up second, then microsoft and sony. These designs are all imho still on next gen systems.

Dreamcast advantages: 1.2 GDRom@12x transfer rate (800mb/s), 66mhz sound, 8 megs vram, AA, sh-4 arcade cpu, online, HD/component/vga compatible, wider pipeline via direct cd-to-data transfer rate, accesories (rumblepack, vmus) , 32 bit color, 64-bit sound...and its sega's last system!

disadvantages: 2x bumpmapping, 200mhzcpu/100mhz gpu, 1.4gflops, ATI PowerVr, third parties, wince o/s

Gamecube advantages: 8x bump mapping AA, pps, gpu@162mhz cpu 480mhz, 8gflops, ram advantages, ATI graphics, hardware (cordless controllers), 64 bit sound as well..and well its nintendo

disadvantages: PowerPC, 1.5 optical disc@81mb/s, 48khz, component only, no vram, 24 mb only system ram (lack of real ram, slow dram), online, lots of bandwith used for memory, 24-bit color, loadtime and space, ports

IMO:P Dreamcast, graphically gamecube wins though. Reaspn: Starwars Rogue squadron on dreamcast is highly unlikely.

loved it ever since Dreamcast released online and Pc gaming was strong.

if you have 40 inch hdtv set it to 1080p, it will reduce black level and not be as sharp, that is if you consider ps3 good graphics quality. You want that signal.

minor note: Usually glare, dark levels, aliasing and bump-mapping loss is less than 40 inch noticable. You know the 'unreal' effect from ut technology or close wall effects will be loss ala batman's threading on his chest muscles in batman arkham asylum on a smaller or native plasma hd television. 720p is then reccomended.

From my experience, here is a list of televisions I have tested with xbox 360:

Vizio 720p native HD under 36 inch - best res at 720p. True HD. Better textures, more noticable upclose bump-mapping textures appear. Sharper. Works with 1080p to reduce AA levels except lacks in sharpness and visible textures. 480p reduced component signal and 1080p standard or default is noticably reduced.

Sanyo 480p native HDMI tube - diamond cathode tube, false HD, best res at 1080i. 480p equivalent (sharp, strong signal). Blurred 720p signal (not sharp).

Sony 1080p native HD 50 inch - seems to be best at 1080p because of reduced black levels or what I call the 'bland effect' as compared to the use of ps3's cpu (# of gflops make its cpu much more powerful eg larger environments for HD). Reduced sharpness. Less Aliasing problems as well. True HD. No texture difference in scaling.

Usually the formentioned is most common, albeit it really depends on your setup and what tv *plasma* you have.

::Minor update cus im bored. The Vizio was infact a Proscan by General electronics (consumer electronics&gm or something) but all hd tvs at 24 inch or less act the same way with 720p eg sharper gra[phics and picture. You can get sony, vizio or watever and infact it will most likely be the same tv with the same functions. However i rec these tvs for xbox 360 since its in 720p. Ps3 can be good for 1080p tvs or 32inch and up but the graphics are simply considered when playing the type of game. FPS usually is better on ps3 because of the enhanced environments due to ram, but if you like games like arkham asylum, or arcade+racing with all the textures on the cape and roads etc. visible go for xbox 360. Besides who uses pc monitors these days anyways? I don't even use it for my PC gamebooster advanced sys care o/s. There is a stand-by mode which always works better than any console and its almost always auto-maintenance. Sure its only a 64bit cpu without a videocard installed, but with everything optimized i can run cs source at 60+ fps give or take the 1gig of ram. Thats why i have 360 on a seperate ethernet cord. Its for actual games. I go for stable over an over-hauled pc or console anyday. Thats why i only own pc, ps3 and dreamcast. That makes the double hd connecter come to use.

My Online Experience with Consoles in HD

Besides I'm one of those sad fanboys with a modem subscription and online access to the now defunct dreamcast system (over 200 games as well). I play xbox 360 by myself, but if a friend were to come over, wed play 2 player pc games like mugen, or dreamcast 4 player. I never use my xbox 360 for multiplayer party games. Its merely their for visual experience, which my pc would do if i upgraded it instead of bought the 360. But since 360 has netflix, youtube, better online exp etc now i went there. I would still play dreamcast if the games were online more than 360 though. Besides, Why play perfect dark zero online if youre not good at it? Why play pc games online if u dont have the hardware? When you have grawl and overg to fufill your experience it takes over but something's missing. Quake III, AFO, PSO and UT on the Dreamcast. I suck at 360 online unless its like graw...but my pc is great though. Almost acts like a console all in its own.

Other

Why you ask did i abandon the past? WHy no systems like nes, snes etc. Because well they can be emulated on dc and pc...well not mine because its 64bit..maybe my work pc upstairs but thats like 1ghz speed 512 ram very slow. Besides Ps3 lacks what I needed, a PC gaming type setup eg red alert style without the hardware issues or incompatiblities. For strategy and reastic sim gamers like me whom don't play games all the time.

One qualm i have, PS3 SONY...u need more flightsims, like actual overg type sims on ps3 that act like flightsims. The lack of my knowledge for any puts me in dismay. The hardware is there but no sequal to aerowings or watever can be found, sadly...i mean com' on, even a new franchise would work...UFO area 51 flightsim anybody?:cool: