Chocolate Pi
Senior member
There are PCs, and then, there are consoles.
Console and PC fanboys got along reasonably well for along time. Consoles were cheaper, PCs were more advanced, and that was that. Practically isolated markets!
We see the trend's roots, in retrospect. CD player functionality, then DVD playback. Suddenly we have the Xbox! Consoles impersonating PCs, consoles claiming to be superior to PCs, "convergence" becoming the byword of the industry! Today, the Xbox 360 and PC are so intent of becoming the multi-media hub and graphical powerhouse of the home that fanboy wars across the Internet have grown to bi-directional sieges. Microsoft and Sony have PR people that actually will tell anyone stupid enough to listen that their consoles are vastly more powerful than PCs. They try to woo ignorant customers with higher defintions and online play, things PC gaming has had for decades. Microsoft and Sony are even ramping up the costs of their systems, to get that must closer to PCs and ahead of the other.
Then there is Nintendo.
Even though little is known about the Revolution, the design goals and concepts are evident: Simple. Inexpensive. Small. Portable. Different. Fun. Now that Microsoft and Sony are positioning themselves in the PC/Console hybrid middleground, Nintendo is left alone with the only "pure" console.
PC elitists, tainted by console vs. PC arguments in the past, may insist that PC is superior and thus the closer consoles are to PCs the better the consoles are. This is silly; if you have a PC, which is so wonderful, what benefit do you gain from consoles imitating PCs to some degree? Clearly the ultimate combination is not 1 1/2 PC and 1/2 console, but rather 1 PC and 1 console.
I suppose for people without a good PC, the 360 or PS3 is a cost-effective solution. However, for those of us with good PCs or the capacity to purchase/build them, those systems suddenly seem very silly. For example, if I want to play a game in immersive high definition, why bother with a console at all? Why settle for 1280x720 when you can play 1920x1200 or higher? When I play a console, it isn't because I want graphics. If Nintendo wants to make their console much cheaper and "just 480p", that rocks! I could care less about the console reslution, and I can spend the extra money on a PC video card upgrade or maybe GAMES! I can see why people without a decent PC might fuss about this, but that does not apply to me, nor most people on this board, I assume.
Next, online. Have you played Mario Kart DS? It goes for a different direction of online. Simple, seemless, no lobbies or needless bulk. It is online as it should be done, FOR CONSOLES. (DS's online service will be the same as the Revolution's.) The ability to network Xboxes is nice, but that's not what consoles need. What console's really need is WIRELESS networking. Consoles should be succeed in areas that PCs fail: spontaneous, easy to move and quick to set up networks that supports lots of players. Consoles should be cheap, small, with minimal extra stuff and allow many players. The Revolution succeeds wonderfully at this, allowing it to do what the PC doesn't.
Finally, it has the superiority of a PC's input. A 3D mouse! We all see that the mouse and keyboard is much better than any other input method for many types of games, and the Revolution is the first console that not only uses a mouse-like as a primary input, but even takes it a step farther. All this while mirroring design concepts of the platform at large: Intuitive, simple, and fun.
Many have proposed that the Revolution is the ultimate second console, a perfect companion for the PS3 or 360 that will offer several unique and innovative exclusive games for free. I disagree, I think it is even more of a perfect match for the gaming PC. Together they are perfect compliments, that allow the player to select from immersive, intense and competitive games with great depth, or relaxing, fresh and original games that no one has ever seen before. With the Revolution assumibly costing much less than the other consoles, I again state that the user will have more cash for PC upgrades.
Most importantly though, they are each, in their own way, the ultimate FPS platform. 😛
Console and PC fanboys got along reasonably well for along time. Consoles were cheaper, PCs were more advanced, and that was that. Practically isolated markets!
We see the trend's roots, in retrospect. CD player functionality, then DVD playback. Suddenly we have the Xbox! Consoles impersonating PCs, consoles claiming to be superior to PCs, "convergence" becoming the byword of the industry! Today, the Xbox 360 and PC are so intent of becoming the multi-media hub and graphical powerhouse of the home that fanboy wars across the Internet have grown to bi-directional sieges. Microsoft and Sony have PR people that actually will tell anyone stupid enough to listen that their consoles are vastly more powerful than PCs. They try to woo ignorant customers with higher defintions and online play, things PC gaming has had for decades. Microsoft and Sony are even ramping up the costs of their systems, to get that must closer to PCs and ahead of the other.
Then there is Nintendo.
Even though little is known about the Revolution, the design goals and concepts are evident: Simple. Inexpensive. Small. Portable. Different. Fun. Now that Microsoft and Sony are positioning themselves in the PC/Console hybrid middleground, Nintendo is left alone with the only "pure" console.
PC elitists, tainted by console vs. PC arguments in the past, may insist that PC is superior and thus the closer consoles are to PCs the better the consoles are. This is silly; if you have a PC, which is so wonderful, what benefit do you gain from consoles imitating PCs to some degree? Clearly the ultimate combination is not 1 1/2 PC and 1/2 console, but rather 1 PC and 1 console.
I suppose for people without a good PC, the 360 or PS3 is a cost-effective solution. However, for those of us with good PCs or the capacity to purchase/build them, those systems suddenly seem very silly. For example, if I want to play a game in immersive high definition, why bother with a console at all? Why settle for 1280x720 when you can play 1920x1200 or higher? When I play a console, it isn't because I want graphics. If Nintendo wants to make their console much cheaper and "just 480p", that rocks! I could care less about the console reslution, and I can spend the extra money on a PC video card upgrade or maybe GAMES! I can see why people without a decent PC might fuss about this, but that does not apply to me, nor most people on this board, I assume.
Next, online. Have you played Mario Kart DS? It goes for a different direction of online. Simple, seemless, no lobbies or needless bulk. It is online as it should be done, FOR CONSOLES. (DS's online service will be the same as the Revolution's.) The ability to network Xboxes is nice, but that's not what consoles need. What console's really need is WIRELESS networking. Consoles should be succeed in areas that PCs fail: spontaneous, easy to move and quick to set up networks that supports lots of players. Consoles should be cheap, small, with minimal extra stuff and allow many players. The Revolution succeeds wonderfully at this, allowing it to do what the PC doesn't.
Finally, it has the superiority of a PC's input. A 3D mouse! We all see that the mouse and keyboard is much better than any other input method for many types of games, and the Revolution is the first console that not only uses a mouse-like as a primary input, but even takes it a step farther. All this while mirroring design concepts of the platform at large: Intuitive, simple, and fun.
Many have proposed that the Revolution is the ultimate second console, a perfect companion for the PS3 or 360 that will offer several unique and innovative exclusive games for free. I disagree, I think it is even more of a perfect match for the gaming PC. Together they are perfect compliments, that allow the player to select from immersive, intense and competitive games with great depth, or relaxing, fresh and original games that no one has ever seen before. With the Revolution assumibly costing much less than the other consoles, I again state that the user will have more cash for PC upgrades.
Most importantly though, they are each, in their own way, the ultimate FPS platform. 😛
