[Bespetna]

This review is by my an I have done about 1 years searching and came up with this. I did not go into full detail on everything.

Review on all next-gen systems
I have been gathering info for over a year and this is my review. I would say it is what you chould choose by.
________________________________
Wii-
Discription- Ninttendo clearly knows that it is not able to beat xbox or sony so they did there own thing. They created the Wii witch is a new way of playing video games that everyone likes.

Ratings
________
Display-5/10
Games-7/10
online-6/10
System-8/10
Hardcore gaming-No
Price-9/10

Goods- It is expremly interactive with people. The price is unbeatable and is extremly well done.
Bads-There arn't alote of good games. Also Nintendo just keeps making expantions for there old titles and have nothing good new. It is also the only system w/o HD option.


PS3
----------------------------
Discription-Sony's new next-gen councle. Is extremly powerful and is extremly populer.

Display-9/10
Games-7/10
online-7/10
System-9/10
Hardcore-Yes
Price-7/10

Good- Nice graphics and it is extremly powerful. They realy put alot of things into the system
Bads- Online isn't the best but it does have internet browser. The games just simply suck and people are mostly focused on the system and not the games.

Xbox360
------------------
Discription- Increadable gaming. Truly the mid of all the systems.

Display-8.5/10
Games-9/10
online-9/10
System-8/10
Hardcore-Yes

Goods-I would recomend this system to everyone. It has a great price and nice game play. The games are wonderful and they are truly the bast. Microsoft clearly know what they are doing when they made this sytem.

Bads- Alot of the 1st launch systems where poorly made. Also alote of people lost there money with them. You need to buy a seperate 200$ xbox DVD player to play your movies on HDTV.

[Goto]

Heh, well it's not too difficult to see where the bias in that review is. I'd just like to point out that reviewing the three systems when one has been out over a year and the other two are newly released is a bit silly. You're basing quite a lot of the review off the games that are currently available, and there's no possible way that Nintendo or Sony could match the quantity of 360 releases in such a short amount of time. I haven't been following the PS3 release schedules very much, but there are some excellent games scheduled for the Wii in 07, including those aimed at hardcore gamers. The launch titles for the 360 were pretty weak, as most launches are, so don't judge things quite yet.

Discription- Ninttendo clearly knows that it is not able to beat xbox or sony so they did there own thing.

Statements like that lead me to believe you really missed the point of the Wii, and the direction that Nintendo has been going for years. If all three major players are focusing on graphics and processing power, systems will just keep getting more powerful and more expensive. Games will take much longer to make, and will become much more expensive to produce (and likely, to buy). For that reason, developers will not be willing to risk that money taking chances, and so we'll be seeing clone after clone of the current style of games, with very little innovation at all. Why bother creating something new when you can just make another generic FPS? Nintendo isn't trying to 'win', just create some new experiences and attract enough of a following of both casual and hardcore gamers that they can make some money while they're at it. If you're obssessed with the latest graphics the system probably isn't for you, but it certainly doesn't lose any points to the other systems on gameplay simply because it's less powerful.


Furthermore, the Wii's online system sounded fairly decent to me. The PS3 was possibly a little weaker in that department, but given that the 360 is the only system trying to charge money for its online services, I'd say it'd lose some points right there. You left off your 'price' score for 360, where it's clearly behind the Wii. And if you're not going to be using the entire scale of 1 to 10, it seems a little odd making it out of 10. Your lowest result was a 5, and you gave the mammothly expensive Ps3 a 7/10 for price.


Sorry if I sound harsh or anything, but figured I'd add in my opinions to your research.

[Neraphym]

Microsoft has better games than Playstation and Nintendo? What world do you live in? I have played all three systems extensively and Microsoft only has one or two great games only available only for itself. Nintendo has Metroid, Mario, Zelda, etc., Playstation has Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Armored Core, God of War and so on. When it comes to great games, Microsoft was the only system that left me wanting. You're right about the other specs, though.

The Wii is interesting. It played out to be a lot better than what I thought it was going to be. Because of the great games, cheap price, and unique play style, I'd recommend the Wii first for those on a budget. If PS3 didn't cost a billion dollars, I'd take it over the pack. The 360 is last on my list, but only because I don't own any X-Box games (I borrowed an rented).

[Bespetna]

Heh, well it's not too difficult to see where the bias in that review is. I'd just like to point out that reviewing the three systems when one has been out over a year and the other two are newly released is a bit silly. You're basing quite a lot of the review off the games that are currently available, and there's no possible way that Nintendo or Sony could match the quantity of 360 releases in such a short amount of time. I haven't been following the PS3 release schedules very much, but there are some excellent games scheduled for the Wii in 07, including those aimed at hardcore gamers. The launch titles for the 360 were pretty weak, as most launches are, so don't judge things quite yet.

Discription- Ninttendo clearly knows that it is not able to beat xbox or sony so they did there own thing.

Statements like that lead me to believe you really missed the point of the Wii, and the direction that Nintendo has been going for years. If all three major players are focusing on graphics and processing power, systems will just keep getting more powerful and more expensive. Games will take much longer to make, and will become much more expensive to produce (and likely, to buy). For that reason, developers will not be willing to risk that money taking chances, and so we'll be seeing clone after clone of the current style of games, with very little innovation at all. Why bother creating something new when you can just make another generic FPS? Nintendo isn't trying to 'win', just create some new experiences and attract enough of a following of both casual and hardcore gamers that they can make some money while they're at it. If you're obssessed with the latest graphics the system probably isn't for you, but it certainly doesn't lose any points to the other systems on gameplay simply because it's less powerful.


Furthermore, the Wii's online system sounded fairly decent to me. The PS3 was possibly a little weaker in that department, but given that the 360 is the only system trying to charge money for its online services, I'd say it'd lose some points right there. You left off your 'price' score for 360, where it's clearly behind the Wii. And if you're not going to be using the entire scale of 1 to 10, it seems a little odd making it out of 10. Your lowest result was a 5, and you gave the mammothly expensive Ps3 a 7/10 for price.


Sorry if I sound harsh or anything, but figured I'd add in my opinions to your research.

Ok, first of all I know that the 360 has already been out for a yr but that just prooves it to be better then the Wii and the PS3 agin. Did you know the xbox team spent mopre money then ps3 and Wii combined? With that in there hands they had the same knolage of the Wii and PS3 a yr earlyer. Also you would think that with the Wii's and PS3's delayed launches that they would atleast have some good games out. But I was clearly wronge on them. Wii is still makingh tons of games featuring its now LOW SELLLING famouse carrecter mario. It just keeps making everything a huge story and doesn't whant to creat anything new.

Also when you say xbox live does charge money for its game play, do you actuly know how much they charge? They only charge 50$ a yr wich is nothing compaired to what you can get with xbox live. Also come on, one perscription to WoW (15$ a moneth) is more then 10$ a month then xbox live. And with xbox live you get unlimited gameplay and unlimeted games. Yes, I know PS3 and the Wii have online features, but they arnt the best online features. they are basicly the same as the PS2 features exept PS3 has a web browser (yay more things to screw it up).

Also yes I am clearly with the xbox360 becouse I think its the best choice.

[Bespetna]

Microsoft has better games than Playstation and Nintendo? What world do you live in? I have played all three systems extensively and Microsoft only has one or two great games only available only for itself. Nintendo has Metroid, Mario, Zelda, etc., Playstation has Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Armored Core, God of War and so on. When it comes to great games, Microsoft was the only system that left me wanting. You're right about the other specs, though.

The Wii is interesting. It played out to be a lot better than what I thought it was going to be. Because of the great games, cheap price, and unique play style, I'd recommend the Wii first for those on a budget. If PS3 didn't cost a billion dollars, I'd take it over the pack. The 360 is last on my list, but only because I don't own any X-Box games (I borrowed an rented).

You may wanna look threw your game list agin. Xbox team has bought tons of new titles that is only for them. Trust me man there are tons of new fantastic games for the 360. I also myself choose better over more games. This is just my opinion.

Also did you know intense video games/1st player shooters work best with xbox360 :/. Even 3rd party games work best with the 360.

Also you guys should know the more you argue with my review the more I will change it.

[Troll]

Xbox Fanboy ftw, dude, its been out for a year, how the flipping hell do you know that its better than the Wii/ps3 . I mean really, come on dude, wait before you speak.

[ticktockclok]

Wow, you're biased.

How does the xbox's being out for a year prove that its better? Once more consoles arrive, the prices will begin to fall. The lineup of games for the PS3 is way better than the xbox's will ever be. Before new year's dozens will be out, and in the future- whoa. Its potential is way better than the xbox.

The Wii is much better than the xbox. If it weren't for Halo, the xbox would be dead. Zelda, the free Wii Sports, and that sweet controller! Not to mention its price! Twilight Princess is the best launch title in history and is being called the greatest Zelda game ever.

Both the PS3 and Xbox made the mistake of having a "Core" and a "Premium" system- it just isolates some gamers.

I'll rank them in this order: Wii, PS3, Xbox 360. I don't have any yet, but the only one I plan on getting is the Wii. Maybe the PS3 in a few years after a severe price drop, but I wouldn't buy the Xbox 360 for over $100. Its too average, too plain; it doesn't have anything to stand out. If it wasn't for the fact that Halo is with the Xbox/Microsoft exclusively, the console would be dead.

[Neraphym]

If all you care about are first person shooters, get a PC. They are fun games to play, but that is only one genre. XBox 360 probably will feature the best FPS games, but if you are looking for variety, PS3 and Wii take the cake.

Xbox team has bought tons of new titles that is only for them. Trust me man there are tons of new fantastic games for the 360.

Name 3 that aren't FPS's. I listed mine.

[Bespetna]

If all you care about are first person shooters, get a PC. They are fun games to play, but that is only one genre. XBox 360 probably will feature the best FPS games, but if you are looking for variety, PS3 and Wii take the cake.

Xbox team has bought tons of new titles that is only for them. Trust me man there are tons of new fantastic games for the 360.

Name 3 that aren't FPS's. I listed mine.

Dance Dance Revolution UNIVERSE
Gears of War
Pocketbike Racer
Big Bumpin',
Sneak King

[Neraphym]

Well, I thought GoW was a fps, but meh. DDR is available for everything, and I haven't even heard of the other three.

[ticktockclok]

DDR is everywhere. Gears of War is good, but is just another shoot 'em up. Its a 3rd person shooter though.

The other three are pathetic, maybe Big Bumpin' is borderline mediocre.

[©allum]

*Watches Bill Gates hand Bes a wad of twenties under the table*

[Res]

Heh, well it's not too difficult to see where the bias in that review is. I'd just like to point out that reviewing the three systems when one has been out over a year and the other two are newly released is a bit silly. You're basing quite a lot of the review off the games that are currently available, and there's no possible way that Nintendo or Sony could match the quantity of 360 releases in such a short amount of time. I haven't been following the PS3 release schedules very much, but there are some excellent games scheduled for the Wii in 07, including those aimed at hardcore gamers. The launch titles for the 360 were pretty weak, as most launches are, so don't judge things quite yet.

Discription- Ninttendo clearly knows that it is not able to beat xbox or sony so they did there own thing.

Statements like that lead me to believe you really missed the point of the Wii, and the direction that Nintendo has been going for years. If all three major players are focusing on graphics and processing power, systems will just keep getting more powerful and more expensive. Games will take much longer to make, and will become much more expensive to produce (and likely, to buy). For that reason, developers will not be willing to risk that money taking chances, and so we'll be seeing clone after clone of the current style of games, with very little innovation at all. Why bother creating something new when you can just make another generic FPS? Nintendo isn't trying to 'win', just create some new experiences and attract enough of a following of both casual and hardcore gamers that they can make some money while they're at it. If you're obssessed with the latest graphics the system probably isn't for you, but it certainly doesn't lose any points to the other systems on gameplay simply because it's less powerful.


Furthermore, the Wii's online system sounded fairly decent to me. The PS3 was possibly a little weaker in that department, but given that the 360 is the only system trying to charge money for its online services, I'd say it'd lose some points right there. You left off your 'price' score for 360, where it's clearly behind the Wii. And if you're not going to be using the entire scale of 1 to 10, it seems a little odd making it out of 10. Your lowest result was a 5, and you gave the mammothly expensive Ps3 a 7/10 for price.


Sorry if I sound harsh or anything, but figured I'd add in my opinions to your research.

Ok, first of all I know that the 360 has already been out for a yr but that just prooves it to be better then the Wii and the PS3 agin. Did you know the xbox team spent mopre money then ps3 and Wii combined? With that in there hands they had the same knolage of the Wii and PS3 a yr earlyer. Also you would think that with the Wii's and PS3's delayed launches that they would atleast have some good games out. But I was clearly wronge on them. Wii is still makingh tons of games featuring its now LOW SELLLING famouse carrecter mario. It just keeps making everything a huge story and doesn't whant to creat anything new.

Also when you say xbox live does charge money for its game play, do you actuly know how much they charge? They only charge 50$ a yr wich is nothing compaired to what you can get with xbox live. Also come on, one perscription to WoW (15$ a moneth) is more then 10$ a month then xbox live. And with xbox live you get unlimited gameplay and unlimeted games. Yes, I know PS3 and the Wii have online features, but they arnt the best online features. they are basicly the same as the PS2 features exept PS3 has a web browser (yay more things to screw it up).

Also yes I am clearly with the xbox360 becouse I think its the best choice.

OBJECTION!!!!!

I fell out of my chair IRL. I really did. And I was in the middle of a big conversation with Maxi.

No. The fact that the Xbox has been out longer does NOT prove it's better than either alternative system. Now, me personally? I'm an Xbox fan. I really am. However, I'm never going to stoop so low as to say it's superior to other consoles because I dislike others. (Which I don't. They all provide the same chance to throw my life away. <3)

But in your statement that the 360 is older meaning it's better? BS. Pure BS.

The PS3 is designed for more power than a 360. That thing is definitely the definition of power. The 360 may have more games out currently, but ffs dude, give the developers a chance. The thing was released what, not a few weeks ago, and you're already whining that it doesn't have enough good games out?

The PS3 very well has a chance to rival the 360 in terms of gameplay.

The Wii. The Wii makes me laugh, not in a bad way. I'm actually very fond of what their doing in terms of gameplay. Dude, for Gods sakes, the Wii is freaking genious in how you play the game. Zelda? Swing the controller, you swing the sword. Sounds stupid, but it's incredibly innovative.

If you're going to bash them, at LEAST have some information about what on earth you're talking about. I hate console fanboys. While I'm inclined to like the 360, I'm not one to put down every other system because Xbox is my personal preference of gaming time.

Microsoft has better games than Playstation and Nintendo? What world do you live in? I have played all three systems extensively and Microsoft only has one or two great games only available only for itself. Nintendo has Metroid, Mario, Zelda, etc., Playstation has Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Armored Core, God of War and so on. When it comes to great games, Microsoft was the only system that left me wanting. You're right about the other specs, though.

The Wii is interesting. It played out to be a lot better than what I thought it was going to be. Because of the great games, cheap price, and unique play style, I'd recommend the Wii first for those on a budget. If PS3 didn't cost a billion dollars, I'd take it over the pack. The 360 is last on my list, but only because I don't own any X-Box games (I borrowed an rented).

You may wanna look threw your game list agin. Xbox team has bought tons of new titles that is only for them. Trust me man there are tons of new fantastic games for the 360. I also myself choose better over more games. This is just my opinion.

Also did you know intense video games/1st player shooters work best with xbox360 :/. Even 3rd party games work best with the 360.

Also you guys should know the more you argue with my review the more I will change it.

Right. Xbox has more titles because it's BEEN HERE LONGER.

The Wii and PS3 haven't been out long enough to produce enough games to get good PR by sheer heresay. While Dead Rising and Gears of War are games everyone talks about. Give it a year. Developers will find a way to encorporate the PS3s power to make some of the greater games out there.

And I just want to try a Wii because it looks fun to use. Nintendo has always been about fun. Not blood, gore, or violence. They've always (To me) seemed like the system you sit down to play and have a good time. Not be competitive or Xbox Live Halo 2 noob.

[Maxi]

Mike speaks the truth. I was going to point out the whole "Xbox is better because it's been out longer" part, but he beat me to it.

So.. what is there to say.. Well, again, I agree with the people here saying it's biased because you've put something up that's been here a while with things that just came out. It's like me stooping down a few thousand pegs saying "Final Fantasy VII (y'know, the one with CLOUD ((oooohh)) in it) is proven to be so much better than FF XIII 'cause XIII hasn't even been finished yet".

---

In my opinion;

Xbox is technically good, but I hate it with a passion so I'll score it low anyway (whaaat? What'd I say ¬_¬).

If Sony got off their money-grabbing butts (I've seen it in a circus once. Don't ask) and actually applied good sense on top of just having a powerful machine, then they could go places. PS3 could well have a good selection of games in time. If only reviewers would give it time..

Wii is certainly a strong contender. It's graphics may be 'too kiddish' to some, but Nintendo make some of, if not most of the greatest games of all time.

All three have something about them that make them appealing, it's just that some will appeal more to others, and some people will bring out more carefully thought out reviews than others.

[ticktockclok]

I heard someone bought a PS3 and opened it up, and they figured all the parts together to be worth $800-900. They're actually losing money on the PS3s in the hope that they will make more on everything else, especially games. So, I'd have to argue your saying that Sony is "money-grabbing".

My gaming future? I'm getting a broken PS2 for Christmas. I'm going to get one with a disc read error, and try to fix it. There are still so many amazing games on the PS2, so its pretty stupid to forget about it with this new wave of consoles.