Consider this my first attempt at an editorial :P.
----------------------------------------------
As I've noticed since the next-gen console wars have begun, people have been disputing, bickering about, flaming each other over, and acting irrational on which console will come out on top. Now, I'm all in favor of the Wii, but that doesn't mean I think the other consoles suck. They each have things to offer up to each player, be they a Sheep, Lemming, or Cow. But apparently people don't understand why the console war exists. Three companies, each with an equal chance of coming out on top, are going for supreme domination over the market. The fact is, none of them will reach it, because each console has its flaws that fans don't seem to think are true. Let's take a look, shall we?
Wii (Positive) - Nintendo's console is probably one of the most interesting I've ever seen, and it's also my favorite. It uses motion-sensory in a way never thought possible, to the point where it actually works. You can use the Wii-mote for a multitude of things, including slashing, shooting, aiming, blunting, conducting, driving, etc. (as well as using its built-in mic). It's also the cheapest of the three consoles, but it gives you a lot for a little. It boasts an impressive array of launch titles, and even better games to come in 2007 after the holiday season. Nintendo is intending to market the Wii for all ages, old or young, and even get old gamers to start playing again. Aside from intense gameplay where you feel like you're living the game, the graphics aren't bad, either. Though only confirmed at a little better than the Xbox graphics, I feel like like I'd rather see the Wii graphics than the PS3's.
Wii (Negative) - Now for negative...though they have a lot of launch titles worthy of the crown, it seems like they haven't given up on marketing some titles that really shouldn't exist. Movie games need to be tossed, because I would rather commit suicide than be forced to play Cars and Open Season (I'm not making too big of a deal about this negative point, though...but I see no reason for a Disney invasion). Some people are saying that there can be serious bone stress problems while playing, as you may be tempted to make extreme movements and actually stand up while playing (they recommend you make subtle movements and sit down, because it doesn't take much to get a response from the controller). There's also the graphics debate, the motion-sensing debate ("Are they really revolutionizing the industry?"), and the price being too high and possibly being overwhelmed by the 360. Some are also speculating if it will really get more people of different ages into gaming.
Xbox 360 (Positive) - With an early lead in the console market, Microsoft's powerhouse is taking the industry by storm. The games mostly revolve around shooters, sports, fighting, and racing games, but there are a few impressive titles that are unique to the usual line-up (Kameo, Elder Scrolls IV, etc.). There's also Xbox Live, for online play with others, and Xbox Live Arcade with some pretty solid games, like Geometry Wars. Graphics are vastly improved from the original Xbox, giving a special rendering to make everything appear real. While I haven't played the 360 myself, I'll admit that it looks good enough to the point where I might somtime. For anyone who doesn't have enough money to buy the full package, there's also the Core System, though it doesn't have all of the features of the more expensive one (obviously).
Xbox 360 (Negative) - This one probably has the most problems of the three consoles. It has constant hardware failure, in which you get an error screen or something similar to tell you what's wrong. Then you've got the "three red lights of death", which is both annoying and insulting at the same time (as if the error screen wasn't enough, they give you that). The variety of games is somewhat aimed at mature gamers, which would be good if almost every game wasn't incredibly similar to another (Gears of War, Kameo, and others are exceptions). And if I remember correctly, games cost $60 (or was that the PS3?). I've also heard many complaints about backwards compatibility. Some of the most useless and sucky games from the Xbox were ported over instead of some of the better games, like Psychonauts (last time I checked). Unless they add more games to the list soon, there's no use for backwards compatibility.
Playstation 3 (Positive) - Definitely the biggest powerhouse of them all, and each individual console possibly being powered by a roundhouse kick from Chuck Norris, Sony has made one monster of a machine that mows down the competition. What else can I say about the graphics, other than they make you feel like the game is real and could jump out of the screen and kill you? Like the Xbox, they have a somewhat limited category of games, but it's not to the point of choking on similarities. Their controller also uses motion-sensory technology, but not as actively as the Wii (but it does have a few cool ways of utilizing it). Among the awesomeness of the titles includes some equally awesome gameplay that competes well with the Wii in various ways. Like the others, it also has online connectivity, not to mention a sleek look to compete with the Wii and Xbox 360. Out of the three next-gen consoles, this one has the biggest system specs.
Playstation 3 (Negative) - First, I'll say that the PS3 is in the debate with the Wii over "who stole motion-sensing from who". It honestly doesn't matter to me, but it's something I wish weren't being debated. Seconly, the price is something you can't ignore. It has two versions as well, the lesser costing $500 and the greater costing $600. Many people, myself included, are wondering if the PS3 can survive on these prices, especially with the limited amount of consoles available at launch, which means incredible inflation and wide-spread disappointment. And is sacrificing low-cost aspects worth the improvement in graphics? Somewhat, but not really. I'd rather stick with decent graphics and amazing gameplay (Wii).
Back-to-Back-to-Back Comparison - All three of the next-gens have different specs. Going from least to greatest: Wii, Xbox 360, Playstation 3. This also means different levels of graphics (again, from least to greatest: Wii, Xbox 360, Playstation 3). Though some things they have in common in the online connection, sleek design style, and wireless controllers. However, the wireless took its toll on Sony's rumble feature (for a few reasons, either legal issues or the sensor bar). Different debates about each console are going around (wireless, errors, pricing, blah...), some of which are so stupid and pointless that I don't even know why people care. All of them have many different genres of games, as should be expected, but each is oriented to a different crowd of gamers. And do we have to be reminded of the whole "console availability" issue (inflation during shortage in supplies)? From what I can see, the Xbox 360 didn't start out with too many supplies, and the PS3 looks like it's in for worse, but the Wii might just have enough to please almost everyone. Yeah, the list of comparable things goes on...too long of a list to write about.
----------------------------------------------
So there you have it...my thoughts on this entire thing. Comment if you want...I guess 8).
Log in to comment