Write a new post CHAO BBS

Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/08 11:52:26
Which one do you like/think is better: PSP, Nintendo DS, Nintendo DS Lite, Gameboy Advance SP.

DS was ok until they came out with PSP. It's the absolute best now. My GBA SP was stolen in the 8th grade and that was the last I had anything to do with GBA.

Nope.


Dark Celestial Dragon ID:011103 2006/06/10 05:56:27
I think I pick Nintendo DS, because you can play all the older games with it, plus you don't need a particular head phone piece, as you did with GBA SP.


EDIT: And also, it has Kirby Canvas Curse, which was awesome. That includes the music. Also the fact that the DS feels like a console controller, which is easy to hold. And it has a customizable (sp?) menu.

Re: Handheld Question


Josh ID:014255 2006/06/08 12:05:08
nintendo DS i hate Sony completely but back to the subject


PEOPLE THIS IS A CHAO BBS NOT ANYTHING ELSE STICK TO CHAT ABOUT CHAOS NOT OTHER SUBJECTS IF YOU WANT TO GO TALK BOUT OTHER THINGS FIND ANOTHER BBS!!!

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/08 12:24:01
Umm...That rule has been disregarded for a long time now. No one cares anymore.

Re: Handheld Question


Tourniquet ID:015115 2006/06/08 12:55:01
Guess what!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v231/EmpressV2/Noonecares.jpg

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Celestial Dragon ID:011103 2006/06/08 13:13:39
Déjanos en paz.

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/08 13:53:42
¡Nunca volver!

Re: Handheld Question


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/09 10:32:51
Shut up...If you haven't noticed, Sonic Team doesn't give a damn what we talk about anymore...if you don't want to hear our random chatter, YOU go to another BBS.

Re: Handheld Question


Jon166 ID:017050 2006/06/08 13:54:31
PSP has no good games, and it all around is a rip off of Nintendo's handheld cartridge systems.
GBA SP is no better than the DS, because it plays just GBA games. It does hook up to GCN games, though. That's the only good part.
DS is cool, with nice games, plus it plays GBA games and has free Wi-Fi. It will also wirelessly hook up to the Wii.
DS Lite sounds nice, just being a smaller and brighter version of the DS. Nothing else.

I sold my GBA SP for a DS. I wouldn't get a DS Lite because it is so small I would lose it. I would, however, get a PSP if I had plenty of money, so that I could stab the screen, pound it with a hammer, and throw it into a volcano. >:O

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/08 15:14:15
What's with you guys and Sony. They are not a bad company. They are the leading console makers and they introduced the console CD game to the world, so they didn't copy Nintendo's cartridge system. PSP has plenty of games and also UDM discs, which are movies. Nintendo DS doesn't have that. Before you go hating something, why don't you take a look at what it has to offer.

Re: Handheld Question


Kirby ID:013661 2006/06/08 20:30:09
http://boards.gamefaqs.com/gfaqs/genmessage.php?board=927750&topic=28487724

DELETED

ID:015115 2006/06/09 01:44:50
This article has been deleted.

Someone has forgotten the Sega CD...


Gigazubyte ID:015441 2006/06/09 06:12:50
I don't like Sony because I see them, more than any other company in the business(though they're hardly the only ones) steal ideas from their competitors and screw over their customers. Like the way they refused to change the screen on the PSP to keep the button from sticking and didn't offer so much as an apology. I like a lot of the games on the playstation, but guess what. All the decent ones are made by third parties and slapped with the sony lable.

Re: Someone has forgotten the Sega CD...


Jon166 ID:017050 2006/06/09 10:35:28
My gosh, I thought of that last sentance 3 seconds before I read it... :|

Re: Handheld Question


Tourniquet ID:015115 2006/06/09 06:23:18
Oops. >_>;
All business use some crushing tactics, but Sony's been going way too far. It seems like they not only want to control the gaming industry, but the entire electronics industry as well.
Sony really doesn't give a shit if something goes wrong. Remember our "beloved" PS2? Sony really screwed some family friends over with that. They had one of the defective shitty PS2s, yet when they talked to a Sony representative, they basically said "Too bad" and they had to get a new one WITH THEIR OWN MONEY.
If you make defective shit, you'd better damn compensate people that have a dud of a unit. Which Sony does not.
PS2 has some good games, sure, but none of them belong to Sony. They belong to Square Enix, Squaresoft, RARE, and some other 3rd party developers. So let me ask this. If games such as Final Fantasy and other good titles were moved to Nintendo or the Xbox, would you still be a PS fan? Or would you say "fuck this" and get another platform?
What a lot of people don't seem to realize is that Sony releases the same shitty games over and over again and just slaps on a new box cover and has some slight tweaks to the game.
Man, we need companies like that gone. Bring on SEGA and Nintendo! Hell, Yuji Naka was considering starting his own company, I'm all for it now. Maybe we can get some overly awesome Sonic games.
Sony doesn't do shit. So far they've copied off of SEGA and Nintendo for their products.
Be glad for the competion, your PS3 would be $1000 higher if it weren't for the Revolution and Xbox360.

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 08:07:56
I admit that Sony had made some business mistakes, but you can't brand a company bad by that. As for the games leaving the PS, I could say the same for Mario or LoZ, for that matter. What if they left? Would you stick with Nintendo then? Also Sony and Sega are affiliates now so they arent copying Sega(my comma nor period key is working now)

Re: Handheld Question


Tourniquet ID:015115 2006/06/09 08:25:56
How not so? >_>; A company isn't bad if it uses propaganda and underhanded business tactics to you? Of course, ends justify the means.
Sega is neither here nor there, they make games for any company.
Zelda and Mario are trademarks of Nintendo themself. Know why you don't see them on other consoles? Because they are made and used by Nintendo. Know why some FF games have appeared on other consoles? Because they are NOT made by Sony. So you can't really put those two together. Nintendo would collapse before they gave away Mario and Link. There would never be a shift unless Nintendo became a third party developer. At which point, I wouldn't be able to buy a Nintendo counsole. I'd naturally have to shift to another. Even you can't argue that. Name one Nintendo character in one game that's actively been a part of a game for another company.

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 11:06:47
I'm through with this. You have your opinion, I have mine. It's an opinionated poll anyway, not a debate. We can have one of those later.

Re: Handheld Question


Tourniquet ID:015115 2006/06/09 12:31:28
None of that was opinion. It was fact. Do you not have any research done of the 3 companies? It isn't like Nintendo and SEGA haven't done wrong in the past. All I'm saying is that I think Nintendo is the best company because they put a lot of effort into designing their systems and games.

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 13:31:41
>All I'm saying is that I think Nintendo is the best company because they put a lot of effort into designing their systems and games.

By saying 'I think' makes that statement an opinion. I happen "to think" that Sony is the best company. You know why they have so many third party developers? It's because you make more money that way. That's Nintendo's mistake there, not having enough. As for imitating, the wii will have DVD/CD playback. Sound familiar? Yes, PS and Xbox had it first. Nintendo sees where the money is and goes for it. All businesses do that, and I don't hate Nintendo for it.

Re: Handheld Question


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/09 14:22:01
Don't try to outsmart her...she'll just come back and kick your ass...you have to be one of two people to have a chance of beating her:
1) Maddox
just because
2) Me
because I am Victor, the Stupidly Courageous

So yeah...just back off before you piss her off.

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 14:58:08
As I've said before, I'm not afraid to make her mad. As a matter-of-fact, it's a goal of mine, though I don't think she'll get mad over something like this. It's not even about her disliking Sony anymore, it's the principle.

Re: Handheld Question


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/09 15:00:24
Hehe...you're walking on thin ice...this isn't a good game to play...I don't think you'll like the result.

Re: Handheld Question


Tourniquet ID:015115 2006/06/09 14:41:50
It is my opinion to think Nintendo is the best company. However, it is not opinion that Sony has the most money and will do anything to drive MS and Nintendo out of the gaming industry, including the use of propaganda and their big influence in the electronics industry.
Why Sony has more third party developers than Nintendo? Simple. It's because they can shell out the most money for them. It isn't about how good your gaming system is to them, it's about how much money you have.
DVD/CD player, huh? Whoopty-fuckin-doo. I tip my hat off to Sony, for coming up with such meticulous plan for marketing.(As a side note, I'm also fairly certain that the DVD/CD player are separate components on the Wii, which you can buy if you like.) To be honest, Sony's got a piss poor chance in the market if they're relying on that extra shit to bring them up. Who gives a damn if it has DVD and CD playing capabilities...I've already got a CD player, and a DVD player, so those give me no more incentive to buy any of the game systems. It's just extra shit. Why pay 200-300 extra dollars for a gaming system with those features, when you can buy a DVD player for about 30 bucks? In fact, I'm fairly certain there is probably a DVD player floating around your house somewhere. As for a CD player, no one gives a damn anymore, more people are using Ipods now. And if not, you probably still have a CD player. Who really needs it? It sounds good at first glance to have all those features, until you realize you have everything else in your house somewhere. What're you going to do, sell your DVD player on Ebay to defray the cost? Yeah, nice shave of a dollar off the other mandatory $500 for the PS3, because that's all you're gonna get for it.
Say, you mentioned the Xbox could play DVDs as well? Might not they have copied off of Sony? I don't see you bringing that up. Microsoft took the idea from SEGA about using online gaming too. They've been taking ideas from each other for a long time it seems.

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 14:55:03
Of course they want to drive their competitors out of business. They stand to make more money that way. No, company makes game just for the thrill or fun, they do it for money. The DVD/CD player is a good idea. Most people still owned a VCR, before Sony came out with the PS2, which can play games, dvds, and cds. It was good at the time, and still is now. A system that plays games, dvds, and cds instead of buying all three components, which will cost as much as the one system itself. Not everyone can afford a computer let alone an Ipod(which, of course, I own). Yes, Xbox copied that from the PS2, which is one of the main reasons I hate Microsoft so much, but they aren't apart of this. It's about Sony and Nintendo, which I have to mention that Nintendo is in third place in the gaming industry. Hell, even Microsoft knows a better way to run their company than Nintendo does. They are in second for a reason. That brings me to Sony, which is currently, and always have been in first. It's a reason they are, you just don't see the light. Your hatred for Sony is some obvious personal vendetta you have because you got treated wrong. Suck it up, it's called life.

Re: Handheld Question


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/09 15:03:54
Gamecube cost + DVD player cost + CD player cost < PS2 cost, and Gamecube has more good games than PS2. PS2 has Final Fantasy and Kingdom Hearts. Gamecube has Smash Bros., Pikmin, Mario, Legend of Zelda, etc.

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 15:21:52
You're getting into it too? Ok.

>Gamecube cost + DVD player cost + CD player cost < PS2 cost

Not so. PS2 with all 3 components is $129.00. A Gamecube+the cheapest dvd player+the cheapest cd player=$150.00. You do the math.

As for the games. They may have more, but they are just long running sequels or spinoffs to their exclusive characters. To name a few Mario, Zelda, StarFox, Metroid, and F-zero. The PS2 also has better graphics than the GC and more ports for expansion. It has more RAM and hardware capabilities.

Re: Handheld Question


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/09 15:26:51
Pikmin. Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles. Best graphics I've seen on any of the gaming systems by far, on the GAMECUBE.

My dad works (well, worked), in the gaming industry...he knows infinitely more about it than you do...Gamecube had the best processor and graphics potential.

And, at last check, PS2 cost over $150, and that wasn't that long ago...besides, if the platform itself doesn't cost more, the games do, thus tiping the scale again, making PS2 more expensive. And before you say anything about buying CDs and DVDs for the players, you'd have to do the same to use the one in the PS2.

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 15:36:19
The newer model of the PS2, the thin one, is $129.00. It has better graphics than the gamecube;just read here.

http://library.thinkquest.org/26212/playstation_2_potential.htm

As for the gaming industry, my dad works at EA for game designing. I think he knows a little bit more than your dad about graphics. He actually designs the characters and background you see in games.

Re: Handheld Question


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/09 15:40:07
Hehe...if it weren't for the work my dad did, companies like EA wouldn't be around. He designed the tools that all those gaming companies use to make the games...he's a bit higher up in his knowledge.

And as to the thing about the new PS2:
If Nintendo cared, they'd make a new Gamecube with a better processor and graphics, but it's not needed, as the original has good enough graphics...the fact that Sony went back to update the PS2 proves that it was originally by far worse.

Besides, the Revolution (I fucking HATE the name "Wii") will kick much more ass than PS3, for an even more kick ass price...that's all that really matters at this point.

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 16:01:16
Nintendo couldn't make a new GC, because it would cost too much money to make. They spent all their time and money on the DS and Wii. Sony, having advanced in the electronics world, has made things other than games. That's why they have the money to remake it. It was made, not for better graphics, which are better than they seem to be but television and computers can handle thier true graphics, they made it to be easier to carry around, and believe me, I take my PS2 around alot. The only thing the Wii has on PS3 is the price. Other than that, Sony has it beaten to a pulp. The graphics are of movie porportion. I was at E3, when they showed Metal Gear Solid 4. I thought I was watching a movie instead of a game.

Re: Handheld Question


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/09 16:04:15
"of than games."?
Fix your spelling, then come back and try to prove your point.

All that aside, just no. They've got graphics like a computer now. Yay. Problems with graphics like that:
1) the machine will overheat much easier.
2) if I wanted graphics like that, I'd play on my computer.
3) games like that probably won't be released any time soon...I don't think they'd like to deal with costumers complaining when they melt the insides of the thing cause it doesn't have adequate cooling in the first release.

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 16:10:42
Don't point out grammer errors when you know what I meant. It just makes you look immature. Games like that are being released right now. Have you seen Xbox 360 games? Why would you want to play it on your computer when you can control it better with a controller, and don't go saying I can buy one for it, because a PS2 comes with one. As for the overheating, I'm sure they've thought of that and made a device for it. That MGS4 game will be released this year with the PS3. They had playable demos for PS3 there that looked like movies. Face it, PS is all around better than GC.

Re: Handheld Question


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/09 16:17:14
Hehe...die hard PS fans make me laugh...with how small the PS3 is now, there's no way it'll have adequate cooling for graphics of that calibur. How do I know? For my computer to run like that, it needs a heatsink over the processor, with a fan over that, a fan for the power supply, and a fan to remove any other hot air in the thing. That is the basic setup, correct? There is no way something that small can hold the proper cooling devices, unless they have a liquid cooling system, which would be way too expensive to put in there, and they'd be better off just making the thing bigger to put in the fans.

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 16:46:21
Oh really? Well what makes me laugh are people who hold a personal vendetta with Sony for no aparent reason. They are the best. How long has Nintendo been around, about 20 years? Sony has taken over after being here for a little about 10 years. I'm sure for $500-$600, they will not overheat. If it does overheat, it's because someone plays it for over 8 hours straight. Really. Who plays a game for 8 hours straight?¿ We shall continue this later, because my computer it acting up and it's late.

Re: Handheld Question


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/09 16:52:47
You get a good video card for half of that. For a good enough processor, I'd guess at least $100...That's $350 right there. Nevermind RAM, motherboard, and other necessary equipment.

Your pretend technical knowledge is making me want to break your pretend spine...

DELETED

ID:018081 2006/06/10 06:53:16
This article has been deleted.

Ok, scratch the size thing...


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/10 07:15:15
I was talking to my dad about PS3 and Revolution...

The PS3's size hasn't been acurately displayed on any websites that claim to have pictures of it...the thing will be huge...as in, original XBox huge. And the power supply is seperate from the rest of the thing, and it's huge as well.

Not only that, but with the cost of all the parts (the DVD player in the thing alone costs close to $500), Sony will be losing about $400-$500 per system (DVD + Motherboard + RAM + Processor, etc is about $1000).

Nintendo, on the other hand, will be making profit right from the start, and have money to spare to make good games. Before you argue about how PS3 will have better games, tell me something: Do games have to have good graphics to be good?
Look at how many old Sonic game fans are out there, and old Mario game fans (Super Mario World is by far the best game ever), and old Zelda game fans are out there. You don't need good graphics to have a good game.

Re: Ok, scratch the size thing...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/10 07:22:55
Ok, Sony's profit is in quantity. They will make millions off of the PS3 and the games that follow, which will reinburse their $400-$500. Yes, games are all about graphics. Why do you think games come out with better graphics each time. Ok, let's take the old Sonic fanatics(I'm one of them) and the Mario fanatics(also one), and compare them with the other percentage of gamers. They probably make up about 5% of the gaming world, so I don't think they really matter.

Re: Ok, scratch the size thing...


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/10 07:36:07
They'll make up for it with sales? I think not. Most of the people who wanted to buy a PS3 aren't going to because it's so damn expensive. They're going to lose lots of money, and have no where near as many sales as needed to even BEGIN to balance it out. And I can guarantee you that they won't stop making them if sales are low.

And, I don't know about you, but I play games for how FUN they are...not how good the graphics are. Graphics are nice, but if the gameplay sucks, there's no point in playing it. Take Viewtiful Joe for example...the graphics suck, but the game is insanely fun, which makes up for it. Gamers go for fun, not graphics.

Re: Ok, scratch the size thing...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/10 07:49:27
Yes, they will make up for it in sales. People are already pre-ordering them months in advance. A gamestop near me has actually sold out of their incoming stock. As for the graphics, I know they don't make the game, but it adds a little extra to it. The games will be fun, as the demos were at E3. I've actually played the Wii also, and the gameplay to LoZ:TP is fun also. I'm not getting a PS3 when it comes out, but rest assure I'll be getting one. And have you ever thought of the time difference from now to launch. They can lower the price if their fans keep bashing it, but they know that the 1 million copies will all sell out. The PS3 fan knows what to expect from the games because of experience with the others. They've produced in the past and will continue to produce.

Re: Ok, scratch the size thing...


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/10 07:59:27
All right...I think it is time for Math 101 with Proffesor Victor.
Now, if a PS3 costs $500, and they sell 1,000,000, it would stand to reason that they'd make $500,000,000.
If it takes $1,000 to make one PS3, and they sell 1,000,000, it would stand to reason that they'd lose $1,000,000,000.
If they lose more than they make, logically they aren't making any money.

Re: Ok, scratch the size thing...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/10 09:46:23
You forgot the games and other accessories with it. Also to use the web browser, which is another good aspect of PS3, you have to subscribe. That adds more money to the profit.

Re: Ok, scratch the size thing...


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/10 09:52:01
I'm talking purely about the system. If you want to bring games into it, if they keep the theme going, each game will start out at $50. That'll take 10 games for them to break even. Nevermind the cost of the game itself.

Re: Ok, scratch the size thing...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/10 10:22:17
It's not going to be about purely the system. If it was, why do they make the games and accessories. They do it for the money. You get extra money that way.

Re: Ok, scratch the size thing...


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/10 11:41:13
As I said before, if you're going to bring that stuff into it, I'll figure out the cost of each little thing, and the cost to make it...don't bring it up.

Re: Handheld Question


Jon166 ID:017050 2006/06/10 16:15:36
I hated Microsoft more than Sony before reading about Sony's evil ways. :|

Re: Handheld Question


Jon166 ID:017050 2006/06/10 16:09:49
So in other words, Sony made more money by half-baking the system the first time through? And if you notice, the Gamecube has a handle so you can easily carry it around.

Actually, no. The PS2 can only manage 30 frames per second...


Gigazubyte ID:015441 2006/06/11 01:56:03
while the Gamecube does 60. Which is why Sonic heroes didn't have better graphics. They didn't feel like making a seperate engine for the systems with a faster framerate.

DELETED

ID:015115 2006/06/09 16:26:06
This article has been deleted.

Re: Handheld Question


Tourniquet ID:015115 2006/06/09 16:39:55
I don't even want to give you an answer so much as I
want to give you a hatchet wound to your face. There
were so many levels of ignorance in that post I feel
almost overwhelmed. Let me ask you, you know what
happens if Nintendo does go out of business? You'd
be paying more like $700 for the PS3 instead of
$500. And didn't I just say it was all about the
money? I'm pretty sure I did, so I'll say it again-
it's all about the money. That's the only reason
Sony does so well, because it controls a majority of
the third party developers. Same with Microsoft.
You're in it for games, right? Neither of them make
their own games. So in reality, I don't really see
how you could have much of a loyalty to them. None
of the games are theirs.
No one had a DVD player when the PS2 was first
released? That's true, the PS2 was able to play DVDs
when the players cost too much to buy. It was a good
idea you say? Sure. Nevermind there was a high
chance that you'd get a defective unit of the PS2
when it was first released, it was definitly a good
investment of the consumer. I'm sure DVDs were
flying off the shelf with an offer like that. Of
course, now you can buy a DVD player for 30 bucks
and DVDs cost much less. A CD player costs $20,
right? So let's review.
PS3- includes DVD/CD function and gaming system.
$500.
Wii- regular gaming system. $250.
Ordinary DVD player- Plays DVDs AND CDs. $30.
But for the fun of it... CD player- plays CDs. $20.

TOTAL
PS3- $500
Wii + CD player + DVD player- $300

A wise investment indeed. I'm sure the comsumer
will be rolling in cash back from a wise purchase. Hilarious.


Seriously, why the hell are you going to pay an
extra $200 for the PS3, when you can get everything
it offers for LESS? You're paying an awful lot of
money for something that's not going to benefit you.
No one needs that other crap with the PS2. You think
it was because of the PS2 that people started to
watch DVDs? No, it's when companies like Hitachi and
Samsung pulled their heads out of their asses and
reduced the cost of a DVD player by a few hundred
dollars that people watched them more. DVDs didn't
reach record sales because the PS2 was released.
I also vaguely recall you talking about a new PS2 at
some point: thinner, lighter, and supposedly more
effecient in processors and such. Nevermind that a
thin frame and stronger processor will result in
severe overheating and damage to the system, it was
Sony's greatest console. Well if you need to make a
new system of basically the same elements, chances
are good that the previous platform wasn't that
great to begin with.
Oho, so Microsoft isn't a part of this? Do you have
some "bad experience" with them? And here you were
telling me not to judge SONY on something like that.
You hypocrite. -_-;
Nintendo is 3rd place in the markets? I commend you
for stating the bloody obviously about the game
systems' rankings. But I may as well cover it.
Simply put, the reason Nintendo is the last in the
industry is because they have the least amount of
money. You don't realize that neither the Xbox nor
PS would last too long if they were game only
companies. They have money to SPARE, they do not
only make games! They can buy off whatever 3rd party
developer they want. The technology used for Sony is
rather poor, and it was the slowest and graphically
disadvantaged to the other systems.
So, I "don't see the light", do I? See the light
about what, exactly? You fanboyism of Sony? Sony's
supposed "greatness" in the gaming industry? Please.
Sony charges ridiculously high prices for their
systems that aren't even that great. You think with
all the electronics they make they'd be able to make
a decent platform for once.

It got truncated, so...


Tourniquet ID:015115 2006/06/09 16:33:34
Ah, at last, the thing I've been willing to get
to...

>"Your hatred for Sony is some obvious personal
vendetta you have because you got treated wrong.
Suck it up, it's called life."

Now what is this? You're saying I hate Sony because
they "screwed me over"? They've done nothing of the
sort. Not one shitty product of Sony has entered
this household. Not to say I haven't stories about
just how shitty their products are, but I don't need
them for anything. I have nothing personal against
Sony, I hate them because of their shitty platforms
and their uncanny ability to sucker people into
buying the same game (possibly with a few tweaks)
plastered in new box art. It's incredible. Never
have I seen so many idiots suck up the same thing
over and over again.
Yep, I'm definitly the one that needs to "suck it
up". Nevermind that you're the one crying like a
pussy whenever something of the PS is insulted, it's
definitly me that needs to get a backbone. I KNOW
Nintendo has had its faults, and I STATED that in my
previous post. They are not perfect angels in the
world, which seems to be what you'd like to think
I'm thinking. I know they're in it for the money as
well. Which company fucking isn't? What I intended
to make a point of was that Sony delivers such low
blows to the other competitors. I don't care how
good you think Sony is, be glad Nintendo and
Microsoft exist. If they didn't, I highly doubt you
would love your Sony anymore, you know, with the
price being $2000 and all.
I suggest you think before you speak, it's pretty
obvious from your posts you're a little lacking in
the way of supporting any of the claims you make
about the systems. Your fanboyism is depressing,
especially considering the system. I love how fans
don't realize they're supporting an epitome of
disillusionment. It makes me want to give you a
pretend punch to your pretend jaw for your pretend
loyalty and knowledge of Sony. Incredible.

Re: It got truncated, so...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 18:00:24
Are you arguing or writing a book? Where to begin....

>I don't even want to give you an answer so much as I
want to give you a hatchet wound to your face.

I'll disregard this as your anger.

>There were so many levels of ignorance in that post I feel
almost overwhelmed.

I see no ignorance I just see the truth. You can’t point out one shred of ignorance in there.

>Let me ask you, you know what
happens if Nintendo does go out of business? You'd
be paying more like $700 for the PS3 instead of
$500.

I can say the same for Nintendo. You would have paid more for the GC and the Wii if Sony wasn’t around, so don’t come to me with that, because it’s easily dismissed.

>And didn't I just say it was all about the
money? I'm pretty sure I did, so I'll say it again-
it's all about the money. That's the only reason
Sony does so well, because it controls a majority of
the third party developers.

You said it was all about money with Sony. I was stating that all the companies are in it for the money.

>I don't really see
how you could have much of a loyalty to them. None
of the games are theirs.

This is about the consoles, not the games. Without the console, the games wouldn’t really matter much now would it?¿

>PS3- includes DVD/CD function and gaming system.
$500.
Wii- regular gaming system. $250.
Ordinary DVD player- Plays DVDs AND CDs. $30.
But for the fun of it... CD player- plays CDs. $20.

Why the hell did you bring the PS3 and the Wii into this? I have previously stated that I’m not getting a PS3, but am getting a Wii. Also, as I’ve stated before, I have nothing against them. They are the makers of SSB, but that’s the only GOOD thing I give to them.

>Seriously, why the hell are you going to pay an
extra $200 for the PS3, when you can get everything
it offers for LESS?

Seriously, can you read or are you too fucking conceited to try?¿ I’m not going to get a PS3. This isn’t even about that. It’s about Sony and the PS2, you know, the one before 3.

>You think
it was because of the PS2 that people started to
watch DVDs? No, it's when companies like Hitachi and
Samsung pulled their heads out of their asses and
reduced the cost of a DVD player by a few hundred
dollars that people watched them more

Sony makes DVD players themselves. I’m not talking about the PS2, I’m saying the actual player that plays DVDs. They just introduced the first gaming/DVD viewing system to the world. That’s also something better about them. They make other things besides consoles.

>Oho, so Microsoft isn't a part of this? Do you have
some "bad experience" with them? And here you were
telling me not to judge SONY on something like that.
You hypocrite. -_-;

I don’t have bad experience with them. I’ve never owned an Xbox nor even know much about them. None of their products ever reached within 100 ft. of my home. I just don’t like them. It’s not being a hypocrite, it’s a personal vendetta and yes I admit it, which is something you should do.

>Nintendo is 3rd place in the markets? I commend you
for stating the bloody obviously about the game
systems' rankings. But I may as well cover it.
Simply put, the reason Nintendo is the last in the
industry is because they have the least amount of
money. You don't realize that neither the Xbox nor
PS would last too long if they were game only
companies. They have money to SPARE, they do not
only make games

OMFG, that’s the whole point I’ve been making. You bring it out like you thought of it. I’ve said the same shit before.

Here's the rest, got truncated...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 18:02:17
>Now what is this? You're saying I hate Sony because
they "screwed me over"? They've done nothing of the
sort. Not one shitty product of Sony has entered
this household. Not to say I haven't stories about
just how shitty their products are, but I don't need
them for anything.

Now you’re lying. In a recent conversation about the same exact fucking thing, you said and it’s quoted.

“I hate Sony because they've ripped me off, and have been nothing short of inactive in assisting me the numerous times things have broken or I had questions. Goddamnit, this one time they made it sound like I was trying to rip them off.
I hate Microsoft, but it is the lesser of the two evils. Not to mention that Microsoft made this little thing called "Windows", that we all know and love. Otherwise we'd have to use Macs and that would suck.”

It’s on beginner page 237 if you think I made it up.

>I hate them because of their shitty platforms
and their uncanny ability to sucker people into
buying the same game (possibly with a few tweaks)
plastered in new box art.

One word, Mario. To better explain, DS has a new game which is a perfect example of tweaks that you speak of. I think you’ve heard of it, it’s called New Super Mario Bros. Seems like you should hate Nintendo also if you hate Sony for the same reason.

>Nevermind that you're the one crying like a
pussy whenever something of the PS is insulted, it's
definitly me that needs to get a backbone.

Now that’s too fucking far right there. I’m merely one fan of PS that’s stating the reasons why he likes the system franchise so much. No ones crying, you just make it seem that way because you’re conceited and acting like a bitch.

>I don't care how
good you think Sony is, be glad Nintendo and
Microsoft exist. If they didn't, I highly doubt you
would love your Sony anymore, you know, with the
price being $2000 and all.

Don’t you think the price of the GC and the Wii would be much higher if PS and Xbox weren’t around? Don’t say stuff that can be easily turned around on you.

>it's pretty
obvious from your posts you're a little lacking in
the way of supporting any of the claims you make
about the systems.

I supported each thing I said. It’s you that’s lacking support in the claims about Sony. For all I know, you could be making things up about them ripping you off just because you’re biased. You may be mad just because they’ve taking over the gaming world from your beloved Nintendo.

>suggest you think before you speak, Your fanboyism is depressing,
especially considering the system.

Fanboyism? I’ll just shrug this off. Sony has done a lot for the gaming world. Even you have to admit that. I much rather be called a PS enthusiast than a fan boy. It’s much more to the factual notion of it.

Re: Here's the rest, got truncated...


Kirby ID:013661 2006/06/10 03:37:09
Heh, this is just like how gamefaqs is everyday....

Re: Here's the rest, got truncated...


Tourniquet ID:015115 2006/06/10 07:18:16
I never said they didn't, they did screw me over with that, and I did hate them for it at the time. They didn't offer to fix a DVD player of mine. About a week after I posted that, my ROWA DVD player broke, and that company didn't help me at all either. So I haven't hated them for that reason since. Guess I should've said that before... All electronics companies seem to swindle your pocket change. >_> You seem to think that people's opinions are unable to be changed.
I have never played the New Super Mario brothers. But lets see, there's supposedly 3D graphics, new items, and such. I'm not talking about games that were purposely released like the old NES games and such, I'm talking mainly about some of those sports games on Sony. My cousin has a PS2 with several sports games... I forget the names of what exactly it was, but they were giving you the exact same thing every time. I asked him what was different about the games, and he didn't really give me a straight answer.
No, don't even lie to me like that. You don't like Sony, you like the games Sony makes, don't you? The PS2 was the most mediocre system of its time. As for the PS3, I'm sure you've been going on about the new "movie-quality" graphics and such. Let me ask you, are uber movie-quality graphics going to make a game for the PS3 suck any less? I hate to break it to you, but for all the fancy trailers in the world, it means nothing unless the game is going to play well. Look how many people like the original Sonic games. For all the pretty scenes in SH and ShadowTH, it didn't mean shit when it came to the gameplay, did it? Also, do you even know how damn big the PS3 is going to be with graphics like that? TVs have been big for a reason, they need many fans to prevent from overheating. I don't know how you're going to be able to tote such a big system. But they can't afford to make it any smaller, lest it turn into a steaming pile of melted metal from the many volts of electricity going through it. Also reminding me that having a PS3 is probably going to increase your electric bill quite a bit. Speaking of money, Sony's going to be losing a lot of it. Do you have any idea how expensive it is to make a PS3? That graphics card is not a pretty price, and putting a DVD player in to support it is probably about the cost of the system itself. Sony's going to be losing thousands of dollars making these systems. And a company generally doesn't like to lose money. Combine that with how many people will stray from the PS3 already because of its price, and that's not going to be a good outcome for them. I'm not saying that out of malice, I'm saying it as a fact.
I don't mind the Xbox, I generally think Microsoft at least knows what they're doing. Aside from the fact that they like to keep tabs on their customers, they've made a decent system. Not that Microsoft's business tactics aren't any more deplorable than Sony's, and they lose money off the Xbox as well, but they were the first to be able to create successfully the first of the next gen. systems. What I really want is for SEGA or Yuji Naka's possible new company to enter the markets.
"I'm just mad because they're taking the gaming world from my beloved Nintendo"? Not for nothing, but I don't believe I've told you to make a conversion to the Nintendo systems. If I was mad about that, I'd say so. I've come to realize a system's ranking means next to nothing when it comes to systems themselves. A true gamer knows who makes the games. You think Sony made Metal Gear 4 or whatever you were talking about? They didn't. Actually, I wonder now how they can be called gaming companies when they don't make games. Sony and Microsoft make the systems, yet when it comes to games, they're basically taking credit for the work of the actual game companies. =/
I want to address your last statement. What exactly in your mind HAS Sony done for the gaming world? I'm curious as to what you mean.

Re: Here's the rest, got truncated...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/10 09:44:02
No, don't even lie to me like that. You don't like Sony, you like the games Sony makes, don't you? The PS2 was the most mediocre system of its time.

Why would I have to lie. I don’t hate Sony, nor do I like them because they are a company. Of course I like the things they make. I know they don’t make their own fucking games. They make the device that plays them. They don’t use third parties for that.

>I hate to break it to you, but for all the fancy trailers in the world, it means nothing unless the game is going to play well. Look how many people like the original Sonic games.

The games do play well. I’ve played the demos at E3. The graphics make the game better. That’s why each game that comes out have better graphics. I’m sure that even you know that the people that like the old Sonic games make a very low percentage of gamers, therefore they don’t really matter in this.

>Also, do you even know how damn big the PS3 is going to be with graphics like that? TVs have been big for a reason, they need many fans to prevent from overheating. I don't know how you're going to be able to tote such a big system.

Newsflash! The Wii will have the same damn “movie-quality” graphics you speak of. I’ve seen the play station 3. It’s not that big, and why would you want to tote it around a lot. The only gaming systems I tote around are my GC for SSBM and my thin PS2 for Madden. I wouldn’t dare take a PS3 with me to get stolen.

>Speaking of money, Sony's going to be losing a lot of it. Do you have any idea how expensive it is to make a PS3? That graphics card is not a pretty price, and putting a DVD player in to support it is probably about the cost of the system itself.

The Wii has basically the same graphics card and also has a DVD component. They will make money in the quantity and the games they sell for it. You say no one will by it, but the are already selling out of pre-orders around the U.S.

>they lose money off the Xbox as well, but they were the first to be able to create successfully the first of the next gen. systems. What I really want is for SEGA or Yuji Naka's possible new company to enter the markets.

You keep bringing up Xbox when they have nothing to do with this. As you may recall, the first shipments of the Xbox 360 core system were recalled because they couldn’t stay together or overheating, so it wasn’t successful. If you ask me, that’s a horrible tactical business move. They should have waited and seen what the PS3 and Wii had to offer. That’s why the PS3 and Wii launch dates were postponed. And you say they know what they’re doing.

> You think Sony made Metal Gear 4 or whatever you were talking about? They didn't. Actually, I wonder now how they can be called gaming companies when they don't make games.

I know they don’t fucking make the games. They make the consoles and have affiliates make their games. They have the money to do that.

I want to know your real problem with this. It obvious that you don't care that I like Sony. Also you don't care for my opinions. So why are you so mad about this? Please inform.

Re: Here's the rest, got truncated...


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/10 09:57:02
Your pretend technical knowledge is showing up again...that and you're contradicting yourself. The Revolution's graphics and processor are nothing on the PS3, therefore it will not be that big, and they don't have to worry as much about cooling.

And, for the record, my dad has friends who have fucking PS3s sitting on desks in front of them. The PS3 will be as big as the original XBox, and the power supply is also big...and the worst part is, it's sperate (not that you buy it seperate, but it's a seperate piece).

Re: Here's the rest, got truncated...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/10 10:25:46
What the hell are you talking about? I never even broke down into the technical things. I never said I knew alot about it, but I know enough. You must not have seen the graphics the Wii has if you say that. It's one of the main reasons I'm getting the Wii.

Re: Here's the rest, got truncated...


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/10 11:45:21
As I have said many times so far, my dad knows infinitely more than you, and I've talked to him about it...the Revolution will be nothing on the PS3, get your facts straight before you argue with people who already know.

Re: Here's the rest, got truncated...


Tourniquet ID:015115 2006/06/11 13:53:39
You seem to base a lot of things off what you hear than what actually happens. =/
Yes. They make the systems. How do you have loyalty to a company that makes mediocre systems? They sound good at first glance, until you stop and think about them.
So meh dear, you think the percentage of people that like Old games are low? That's interesting, because almost every Sonic fan I've talked to has liked the old games more than the new. Same with Mario. And the people that don't have been interested in playing the traditional games, and also like them.
Your pretend knowledge of all this makes to want to give you a pretend slap on the wrist. Maybe listening to too much of Sony's propaganda has made you think you know everything about each of the systems. Newsflash to you- the Wii's graphics processors are nowhere near as powerful's as the PS3's or 360's. And the DVD is a separate component. Nintendo realizes that a majority of gamers have little interest in playing DVDs on their system since they likely have a DVD player already.
How does the Xbox have nothing to do with this? They too are participating in the gaming industry. Xbox 360's crashing? Yes indeed, except for one small thing: in reality, less than 3% of all the consoles made were actually defective. In a world when millions of people are playing games, that number is -really- not that high. Nevermind how many PS2s were defective when reading discs and DVDs and still are now, Microsoft definitly had more problems. The hype makes it seem like far more though, huh? MS released it first because they wanted to get ahead of the other 2 companies. Did I also mention the game "Halo 3" is set on the same date as the release of the PS3? I'd say that's a pretty wise move on their part.
Sony damn well knows their products are full of defects and do absolutly shit to fix it. Tell me, what's worse- losing hundred of thousands of dollars in business because people are boycotting your shitty products, or giving up a few hundred dollars to ensure that your customers stick with you and are happy?
What's my real problem? Nothing I haven't said already. I'm going to go out on a limb here and speculate the people who buy a PS3 will be complaining about problems as well. Why not? History repeats itself.
And you didn't answer my question: what HAS Sony done for the gaming world? Grace us with their shitty platforms? Swindle hundred of thousands of people by brushing you off when your product is defective? No really, I want to know. The ability to play games with CDs? We had that before, it's called the Sega CD. The ability to connect to web? Guess what? We had that before too, it's called the Dreamcast. The incredible advancement of playing movies on CDs? It's called a DVD player, ever hear of it? NEVERMIND THAT THE FIRST DVD PLAYER WAS INVENTED BY TOSHIBA IN THE YEAR 2000, DVD PLAYERS ONLY COME FROM SONY. I honestly don't know what you're going on about with them making the gaming world better, because quite honestly, everything they did has been done by someone else at some point. I also vaguely recall you saying that Nintendo copied Sony's idea to play DVDs as well as games. Nevermind that the first testing of the DVD player went on in Redmond Washington, the site of Nintendo's headquarters, they definitly took it from Sony. And nevermind that Sony bullshitted Nintendo's motion sensor controller and copied the technology afterwards, Nintendo is definitly the hypocritical company. NEVERMIND THAT, ALL GOOD TECHNOLOGY COMES FROM SONY.

Re: Here's the rest, got truncated...


Jon166 ID:017050 2006/06/11 09:30:16
>I’m sure that even you know that the people that like the old Sonic games make a very low percentage of gamers, therefore they don’t really matter in this.

The people who like Sony at Chao BBS *coughonlyyoucough* is a very low percentage, therefore you don't really matter in this. =|

Re: Here's the rest, got truncated...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/11 13:02:49
This isn't about anyone liking Sony here, therefore your reply doesn't really matter in this ¬.¬

Re: Here's the rest, got truncated...


Tourniquet ID:015115 2006/06/11 13:49:22
XDDDDD
I dunno why, but that sounded really funny for whatever relavance it had. XD

Re: Here's the rest, got truncated...


Jon166 ID:017050 2006/06/11 09:16:14
>All electronics companies seem to swindle your pocket change. >_> You seem to think that people's opinions are unable to be changed.

Just like I said before, Nintendo fixed my Gamecube for free a month past warranty... And fast too. Faster than ordering an in-state GBA game off of eBay first class.

Re: Here's the rest, got truncated...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/11 13:04:04
Ok, what does that have to do with anything? And why are you replying to me?

Re: Handheld Question


Jon166 ID:017050 2006/06/10 16:00:21
YOU KNOW WHAT?!

Playstation can't possibly have always been in first...


Gigazubyte ID:015441 2006/06/11 01:49:49
as it wasn't even in the running until the third generation. And while it's still doing very lucrative business, sony got its ass kicked at E3, and it's getting its ass kicked in the portable market. That's not opinion, that's sales figures. The DS is the fastest selling system ever, bar none.

Re: Playstation can't possibly have always been in first...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/11 13:07:56
Within the first few months of PS2 sales, they've been in first. I never said they've always been in first. The PSone was behind even Sega when it first came out. The only reason they got thier ass kicked at E3 is because they didn't show alot of their products.

Your exact words were...


Gigazubyte ID:015441 2006/06/12 07:21:12
"That brings me to Sony, which is currently, and always have been in first." They were in first after the launch of the PS2 largely because they launched first and they had the DVD player included back when those things were still expensive. And they got their ass kicked because their showing was lackluster and uninspired. They had the shiniest graphics, but that was it. A lame ripoff of the Wii controler that didn't even function particularly well (because even with all their money they couldn't get good enough lawyers to keep the last controller format they stole)Giant Crabs, and Ridge Racer. First impressions are crucial, and Sony just blew theirs majorly.

Re: Your exact words were...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/12 11:12:30
I meant after playstation 2 was first released.

Re: Handheld Question


Jon166 ID:017050 2006/06/10 15:53:24
Maybe Nintendo wanted to use that kind of disk because it is the most efficient size. Large amounts of space, and not too big. They have just as much right to that technology as the other companies, and Sony just made Nintendo pay because they used it first.

That's a valid point, but its the WAY in which sony copies tech that's such a piss off...


Gigazubyte ID:015441 2006/06/11 01:53:24
Nintendo wasn't the first to use motion sensing, but it's blatantly obvious that sony only thought to add that to their controller after they saw what nintendo was doing, AFTER they came out and said it was a dumb idea.

Re: Handheld Question


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/09 12:37:48
You don't know what you're getting yourself into...do you?

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Jon166 ID:017050 2006/06/10 15:46:50
Lol, my Gamecube broke a year and a month after I bought it, past my warranty, but Nintendo fixed it anyway. All for free. :P

Re: Handheld Question


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/11 13:15:34
Umm, yay?

Why isn't the original Advance included?...


Gigazubyte ID:015441 2006/06/09 06:15:37
That was way easier on the thumbs than the SP. But to the point, I prefer Nintendo, and I'm glad to see it kicking the crap out of the PSP in sales.

Re: Why isn't the original Advance included?...


Tourniquet ID:015115 2006/06/09 06:24:51
I never liked the original Advance. It was too big and bulky. Screw that, bring back the GB Pocket design! That's why I liked the SP a lot.

Well you've got delicate feminine hands, and I do not.


Gigazubyte ID:015441 2006/06/09 07:34:26

Re: Why isn't the original Advance included?...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 08:24:19
I didn't think anyone actually still played it or even like it anymore. I guess, if you still like it, you can vote for it.

I like it better than the SP, because it fits my hands better.


Gigazubyte ID:015441 2006/06/11 01:36:12

Re: I like it better than the SP, because it fits my hands better.


Dark Celestial Dragon ID:011103 2006/06/11 06:37:07
Same here. Also why I picked DS as well.

Re: I like it better than the SP, because it fits my hands better.


Jon166 ID:017050 2006/06/11 09:43:19
I just don't like it much because it can't recharge. If you can't recharge it, you gotta buy a boatload of batteries... Well, not as many as you would if it had LCD background light.

Re: I like it better than the SP, because it fits my hands better.


Dark Celestial Dragon ID:011103 2006/06/11 10:21:35
That's why I picked DS.

Re: Handheld Question


Tourniquet ID:015115 2006/06/09 06:27:49
Definitly the SP for me. It's still the one I play most often.
PSP has had a lot of defects in it. Not to mention they just copied the technology of the DS...
Screw Sony. I'm glad Nintendo won the crowds at E3. Hell, I may have been content if Microsoft could win out over Sony. Microsoft as a company sucks, but at least they know what they're doing.

Yay!


Dark Celestial Dragon ID:011103 2006/06/09 08:40:17
I like your away message! :D

THE SMASHING PUMPKINS, FTW!

Re: Yay!


Tourniquet ID:015115 2006/06/09 12:44:08
XD
I had the strangest urge to listen to that song today, just like the urge you get to have orange juice 4 o'clock in the morning.

Re: Handheld Question


Victor ID:018081 2006/06/09 10:35:16
GBA SP.
PSP sucks.
DS can't play the old Gameboy games (for the color and back), so yeah.

...PSP...


..... ID:015000 2006/06/09 11:32:10

Re: ...PSP...


Dark Assassin© ID:016114 2006/06/09 11:41:51
Thank you...atleast one other supporter.

Re: Handheld Question


Kirby ID:013661 2006/06/10 03:27:55
None of them.

CHAO BBS To view new posts, use the R Trigger to display the menu, then select "Reload."