Friday, November 25, 2005

Think Outside the XBox

In my December issue of PC World magazine (which, I must say, is an awesome magazine that I must recommend), there is an article called Next-Generation Game Consoles. This article is in need of some serious correcting.

First of all, the article claims that "many experts give the early nod to the Sony PlayStation 3, which is due to arrive in the spring." Says who? He never says who is giving this information, and another thing: define expert. I could say I'm an expert. On neurology. Prove me wrong.

Then he says that the PS3 "will have a hard time fending off the Xbox 360." What about the Revolution? Oh wait. That isn't a "serious" game system. It's designed with kids in mind. But I digress.

Then he says a particularly degrading thing: "Nintendo looks certain to continue bringing up the rear." Since when have they brought up the rear? Aren't they the ones who came up with Mario Brothers? With Metroid? Not to mention a host of other immensely successful titles. And wasn't the DS out months before the PSP?

Then he drills the designers of the Revolution for not including HDTV. He says that "at press time... Nintendo had not yet announced support for HDTV gaming." Duh. Not everyone has HDTV ya know. Not everyone is a total couch potato like yourself. Besides, even if it did have HD, what does that do to increase gameplay enjoyability? Zip.

He also includes screenshots of not one, but two titles for the XBox. What about the other two systems? He also mentions that the Revolution will only be 15 times more powerful than the GameCube, while the XBox 360 is 35 times more powerful. So what? If the games suck, who cares how powerful the game system is? Why do people buy game systems? To have the best one on their street? To shoot zombies? As a status symbol?

Short answer: no. They buy them to be entertained. If the system has the most powerful processor on the planet, but it's boring to play, what's the point?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home