FarrahMoan said:

Says:

xperience319 said:

Awww! That's so audacious of you, dude! But, seriously. When do you think they will begin to phase out the 60 GBs, completely? "AND", when they do, where do you think they will be available. other than store establishments?

LOL sorry couldn't resist the sony jab hehehe...

as far as im aware the 60GB is currently being phased out in stores to make way for the 40GB&80GB. The 40GB is the ONLY model available in some country so if i were you and needed a PS2-backwards comp. PS3, id suggest shopping now before you're left with only 40GB's.

Sony's plan is to phase out the entire PS2-line so that falls onto the PS3 as well.

As far as availability goes, you should have no trouble finding them on ebay going for less than a Wii now. Happy shopping!

xperience319 said:

But, see. Here's my problem with the ones that are about as cheap as the Wii. There always seems to be an exception to the rule with those. It's like, there's always something about them that isn't functioning correctly (According to the description of its condition.). What I don't understand about that is the fact that it just doesn't make sense to sell them if they aren't working, correctly.

It makes sense to the seller to sell them if they aint working!

this seems like a decent re-furb option: http://cgi.ebay.com/Sony-...dZViewItem

or this with a 30day warranty: http://cgi.ebay.com/Sony-...dZViewItem

both pretty reasonable prices.

Or just keep your PS2 and get a Wii/360?

xperience319 said:

I kind of have faith in the success of the PS3. Those consoles were kind of higher than I thought. $350 at the least would be an ideal price. But, for right now, I want to hold off for "ANY" of their current games and wait until next year when the Sony "BOOM" era begins. For right now, I guess you could say that I want to have my cake and eat it, too. Meaning, I want to play my PS2 video games, but I also want to wait it out for the PS3 games of next year by buying it, now, instead of later. I also want the ELITE X-Box 360. But, the Wii can wait (I like what I am seeing so far. But, I want to get the "OTHER TWO" purchases out of the way. I want to experience the Current Generation of Gaming, as a whole.).
[Edited 11/20/07 18:16pm]

FarrahMoan said:

WOWS, you have more faith than the pope! Brave!

As far as i know their aint gonna be a "Sony boom" next year. Wii is just way too far ahead in sales, and sale forecasts are increasing as time goes on, which has almost never happened in the video game world.

PS3 is so far behind its got almost zero chance of a "boom" anymore. Its a nice 3rd place console to have anyhow if you like Gran Turismo.

xperience319 said:

Yeah, I know what you mean. And, I keep telling people that PS3 is not the best console of right now. But, they keep coming back at me with "BELLS AND WHISTLES" remarks like,

"Look at the PS3. It's made of mechanic material. We're talking industrial components to make the beauty that is. X-Box 360 is made out of what? Plastic material? Get real. Plus, PS3 has Blu-Ray. Blu-Ray is better than HD-DVD. It's getting more love in the media."

Bla-bla-bla-blah!!! That's all I hear. At least I can admit that the PS3 is not doing so well, at this point and that the X-Box 360 is in second-place. Not to mention, the Sony Fanboys keep mentioning to me how bad the first effort in the video game market of hardware consoling of Microsoft was (X-Box indeed did suck. But, the 360 is looking to be so much better, so far.).

The Wii is in first place. But, I think the Wii can wait it out for now with me. I just see a bright future for Sony if they can stop making stupid decisions.
[Edited 11/20/07 18:45pm]

FarrahMoan said:

Can i see this future you speak of?

seriously, so many blunders, so many avoidable blunders in a row have crippled the ps3 so hard, i don't recall such horrific video game crash, maybe sega with the DC (which is still more fun than a PS2 imo!!!!).

I work in the industry, and lemme tell u, consumers, developers & retailers are all ditching it already.

xperience319 said:

Wel, we'll see. But, as for now. I want the ELITE and 60 GB PS3. Hopefully, I can get one or the other if not both. I'm happy for Nintendo, I'll tell you that much. Gamecube sucks so much ass, I tell ya! But, they look to be climbing back up. Oh, and I have another question for you.

What do you say to those people who say that the only reason that the Wii is selling is because of its price? Do you agree or disagree? I, for one, don't know. I mean, it kind of makes sense, doesn't it. But, is there more to the Wii than meets the eye? As for the Sega Dreamcast, they were enjoying success until PS2 premiered. Once it did, it was bye-bye for Sega (Well, at least the Dreamcast.).

I, for one, am kind of saddened by that truth because I feel that Dreamcast could have easily "AT LEAST" been in second place during the syndication of Last-Generation due to the horrid competition that Sony had. I think that Dreamcast could have given them a run for their money, if they hadn't decided to drop out early. I heard the same thing happened when the PS1 had premiered. I heard that the promotion of the Saturn was "BADLY" handled. Explain "THAT" one for me.

FarrahMoan said:

I meant the upcoming 80 GB

Honestly, I haven't heard much about a 80 GB PS3.

bboy87 said:

Xbox Live has pretty much the same thing, and personally i think they upload a lot more games than the Shop Channel on Wii....ive been rather disappointed with the slow rate of games coming out on the Shop Channel, where as im constantly getting a good stream of 3 - 4 games if not more per week on Xbox live

FarrahMoan said:

The Wii is successful for several reasons:
1.Game quality
2.The age range- While Sony and Microsoft has basically made their systems and games towards the 17 and up audience, Nintendo has games that people of ALL ages can play and enjoy
3.More games-Nintendo has already released PILES of games for the Wii. 360 comes in second and PS3 comes in last.

The Dreamcast was a GREAT system, but the promotion was sub par compared to the PS2 in America. In Japan, the Dreamcast did very well. In fact, Dreamcast games were still coming out in 2004 and 2005 in Asia.

The Saturn, on the other hand, was BAD Look at the graphics compared to the PSX or even the N64 , not to mention many of the games were terrible.
They also rushed it out too soon.

Did you guys know the PSX was originally going to be a Nintendo system?

kcwm said:

what kind of games are on Xbox Live?

bboy87 said:

No, I didn't know that. Weird.....

bboy87 said:

Most likely, if they originated on the X-Box, it doesn't matter. Their most likely going to suck (As the first X-Box before the 360 did, as a whole.). Unless we are talking about games like Max Payne and Halo (Which were hard to come by on an initial X-Box.).

FarrahMoan said:

Gamestop sells 95% of the XBox games for around $3.99-14.99 these days

bboy87 said:

I'm sure they do. That's because of how bad they were in the first (With the exception of Max Payne and Halo.).

FarrahMoan said:

We got Mx Payne for about $2.99

FarrahMoan said:

True the system was badly handled. 3rd parties had no reason to develop for it since the PS2 was the cash-cow for that gen. However i still had a great time with it, 4 player-madness was kind on 'cube. the Metroid games were phenomenal and still some of the highest reviewed games ever. All the resident evils on one console was sweet too.

I also liked F-Zero GX (best f-zero imo), Eternal Darkness, MGS: Twin Snakes, Pikmin , and then all the zelda/mario stuff. So not to say sukked ass, just depends how u saw it.

Also the GBA compatibility = WIN

FarrahMoan said:

Those people be WRONG as hell. Just a quick glance over ebay shows how much second hand Wii's are selling for, far above rrp. The console is a phenomenon, unlike anything before it.

Just spend a little while in a game store and watch how many wii enquireies they receive. And then watch as parents try to bribe sales people to get one. So no, price is not the driving force behind the sales. Its what the console does and what it represents.

FarrahMoan said:

One of the saddest days in the gaming world. Dreamcast had some seriously good games that still hold up well today when comparing to PS2/Xbox/GC. What it didnt have was a DVD drive. And at that time people were looking for a cheap DVD player, and PS2 just happened to play games as well!

However, if you do a bit of searching around (google etc), you can find stories of Sony paying for shelf-space at the expense of Sega, who couldn't counter that. There was quite a bit of "behind-the-scenes" sabotage going on at PS2 launch time that affected SEGA badly.

FarrahMoan said:

Well Sony's "horrid" competition were faced with a console that already had a userbase of 50million, and then they had to not only make a better system, but also court 3rd parties away from Sony. And lets face it, they had very little success with that. So its not as easy as saying the competition was horrid, it just couldnt compete.

FarrahMoan said:

Ok so what happend was SEGA was losing so much money from Dreamcast that they had no option but to end its cycle early and pull out.

As for the Saturn, it actually outsold PS1 for a long while in Japan, until Sony got the Final Fantasy series away from Nintendo. Upon release it destroyed the competition.

Sega America never wanted to launch the Saturn at all, they said it wasent a good idea, but Sega Japan forced its release, an early release infact, catching 3rd party devs by surprise and consumers off guard.

So very little early promo took place, little awareness and few launch games. It didnt even feature a Sonic game of its own.

Sony also applied the same "behind the scenes tactics" to the Saturn as they did with the Dreamcast.

Only Nintendo could withstand that assault, and ONLY nintendo have remained highly profitable for the entire time they have been making games.

Do a little digging and see what Sony has actually done to the industry.

xperience319 said:

I hear a lot of bad about Sony. But, I don't know. I mean, I for one, think that Sega "REALLY" should have stuck to making video game consoles rather than video games, themselves (Because they suck at making video games.). I miss Sega, quite frankly. Before Sony jumped up into the scene, it was all about Nintendo and Sega. They were the two driving forces of video game entertainment for me. But, then came Sony.

I fell in love with PS1.....for the one month I had it. Yeah, it hadn't lasted too long for me. And, quite frankly, I don't know why. But, to me, it had seemed like Sony were more willing to move on to 3-D styling rather than the rest of its competition.

When it came to this exact same subject, someone told me that Sega were at fault for not hyping as good as Sony did. But, could there possibly be more behind Sega's Failure than meets the eye.

bboy87 said:

Okay. Now, I'm having a hard time understanding your point. Are you telling me that "YOU" didn't like Max Payne "OR" Halo? Because, those had to be the lifesavers to the X-Box. I mean, the one reason that "EVERYTHING" is so cheap from the X-Box, now, is because the bad outweighed the good, if you ask me.

FarrahMoan said:

3D? You do know that "real 3D" console gaming started at Mario64? Nintendo pioneered 3D ALLOT more than Sony ever dreamed of. And chances are the somebody else made that game on Sony, and not Sony themselves.

True Sega dropped the ball allot of times, but had it been just sega vs. nintendo they would have still been here today. But thats competition huh!

Also yes its true that Playstation 1 started out as a Nintendo console...strange but true.

FarrahMoan said:

No, I was just saying that Gamestops are selling Max Payne for $2.99. That's all

bboy87 said:

That's a rather cool price, if I don't say so myself....

bboy87 said:

The Xbox Live Marketplace is basically the same as the Wiis Shop Channel, but they dont put up extra random little applications like Nintendo do, its purely games. Old skool games at that, eg Double Dragon, Streets Of Rage, the 1989 Ninja Turtles Arcade Game! just to name a few. Sure there isnt the Nintendo oldies on there, but theres still some classics.....and the majority have ONLINE! components to them! Which the Wii virtual console games dont

AND they have made adjustments to the graphics for a lot of them, making them Hi-Def and the like which Nintendo doesnt do again

To put it simply its the Virtual Console of the 360

kcwm said:

Does the X-Box Live Marketplace cost money after you buy the X-Box 360.

FarrahMoan said:

Sure does! Xbox live has a yearly subscription fee + the price of any game you download.

Wii just charges for the games u download.

xperience319 said:

That sucks.....

well it does suck, but when you break it down it really isnt THAT expensive, its breaks down to be less than $1 per day for the year subscription, and depending on where you purchase the download points cards from...assuming you dont pay by plastic than you can get games for a lot cheaper than the Virtual Console ones, which i think are too expensive, considering they have done jack all in terms up making them more appealing to get, which Microsoft have done with the Marketplace, the little things like Hi-Def, Online play and to an extent the Gamer Points (although they are useless unless you want an E-Penis) make it worth your money!

Now let me put it simply how many of you who bought Street Fighter on Virtual Console wanted to play that online? Well on the 360 version YOU CAN!