Personally, I think that the Playstation 3 will be the best. It is more than twice as powerful as the Xbox360, and will have GT5.

Gunna have to go with PS3, cuz I havnt seen anything good come out of nintendo since they crapped out with the GC.

Yeah, and I don't see why they are acting so secretive about the Revolution. It's not like it'll be better even than the Xbox 360. Now the Playstation 3, that was worth hiding.

What's so bad about the Gamecube? It has good graphics! It has good games!

I added an option. I don't like game consoles-that's what I would do if I had one of these.

Yay! Go linux! Boo the microsoft cronies!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anyway, a linux console would be cool.

well the PS3 has a functionality of being able to install OSes on it, so you'd buy that then, i guess. Now youd beat me on Folding at Home...

xbox 360, of course! xbox totally dominated ps2 (in my opinion) so why dont you think it will do it again.

Because Nintendo kicks them to the Moon, and back, and back, and back.

What are you talking about?! The PS2 sold more than eight times as good as the Xbox! And now, the Playstation 3 is more than twice as powerful as the Xbox360, and it uses standard 2.5" hard drives, and uses next-generation media.

That was his opinion, not based on any fact. He obviously preffered the xbox, for no particular reason, so dont turn it into an argument.

I was just wondering what he was thinking, which is why I asked. Anyway, the PS2 pwnz the Xbox cuz it has GT4.

A crappy game doesnt make its platform any better. the DS has splinter cell, but apparently that doesnt make it good enough in your eyes.

But that's just one good game. And besides, the graphics on the DS are N64 level at best.

Since when do we care about graphics? The only point where I'd complain is where it hurts my eyes or I can't see something critical to the game, like where my person is facing. And that is why you shouldn't buy cheap jedi games for old consoles and play them on a small tv.

Well, graphics are important cuz sometimes it is easier to have better graphics than to strain your eyes trying to make out what something is.

Isn't that what I just said? I'm planning a huge project that will use sprite-based graphics. Sprite-based! And it'll rock too.

You said, "Since when do we care about graphics?" Which sounded like you did not care about them.

I mean that the graphics don't matter all that much for me, unless they're really bad to the point where it hurts the eyes or interferes with gameplay, or they're really good to the point where it's really pretty to look at (this type of thing typically only happens in cutscenes).

And a systems graphics will never be THAT bad, its all game based. There are an immense number of games for systems such as the Sega Genisis that have graphics that are just fine for figuring out what everything is.

GT4 is the first video game ever to support 1080i.

Ha, I used to have a sega genesis, and I loved it. Which, once again, proves that graphics aren't bad.

The Sega Dreamcast was also good, but unfortunately, Nintendo had taken over most of the market at that time. Good thing SCEI made a comeback with the Playstation 2.

The playstation 2 has a horrible controller.

The Dualshock controller is perhaps the best gaming controller ever invented. Its design has remained virtually unchanged for more than a decade. It is so good in fact, that the United States military has designed many of their remote controls after the Dualshock controller.

wow. ye of little information. betchya thought i was gon huh? nope. i'm still here. still trying to make you be quiet already. i uess this means we'll start arguing again. i'll start with these statements.

i don't know why you care about graphics. after all, the playstation 2 has the worst graphics of this generation. just stating facts, not oppinions. second, nintendo didn't drive sega out of the home console buisiness, sony did with the ps2. i think you need to check your info a little better before you start dissing people again.

True, in terms of clock speeds the Playstation 2 had a slower GPU than the Xbox and the Gamecube. But the Emotion Engine has more raw processing power (floating point calculations). Also, most Playstation 2 games make better of use of the capabilities, as evident from Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. And I'll admit, SCEI had a part in driving out Sega, but Nintendo was also a part of it. And I'm not dissing people, I'm telling the facts. I can't do anything about it if you're a Nintendo-fanboy.

the dreamcast wasn't really that good of a console... and ps2's controllers suck... and the ps3 ones look even worse. xbox had the best controllers before they started making controller s. now no console has good controllers.

except for the gamecube. Their controllers are pretty sweet.

I cant wait to get my hands on one. They are most definitly pretty sweet.

...is that sarcasm?

gamecube controllers aren't very comfortable...

If it isnt obvious that I was sarcastic, then I wasnt. (Note that this rule doesnt apply to myscrnnm as he cant tell the difference anyways)

I cant stand the GC's or the Xbox's controllers.

how can u not stand the xbox controllers... i was able to be one of the best people in unreal championship (xbox version of unreal tournament) on xbox live. xbox's buttons are easy to reach (that really helps in as fast of a game as unreal).

Its so unintuitive. I've probobly put in over 30 hours on Xbox's that I dont own and I still cant find a good position to hold it in.

I also cant stand to play FPS's on consoles. Its a lot harder to be accurate unless you use something retarded like auto-aim.

how CAN you play FPS's on PC. It may be slightly more accurate with the mouse but its harder to move, switch weapons, and do pretty much anything

and a lot of games use at least minor autoaim. and trust me, i hit a lot more people in unreal championship that unreal tournament.

Moving is only a matter of moving the mouse to change which way your facing, and using wasd for foreward, strafe left, backwards, and strafe right. Depending on how you set your mouse sensitivity/camera speed, this can be done extremely quicker than with a game pad. Aiming becomes extremely easy with crosshairs acting like a curser. Just point and shoot. Again, the ease of doing this is based on mouse sensitivity, camera speeds, and the game itself. Taking Fable for example. On the Xbox, I cant hardly nail an enemy with an arrow. On the computer its a matter of a few milimeters of mouse movement to a decapitating headshot instant kill.

The GTA series (post 2) has always had an auto aim. On the ps2, click R2 and it locks on to the nearest target. I always turn auto aim off on the PC as its easier to just point and shoot, mow everyone down, instead of retargeting everyone over and over.

Actually, the Dreamcast was like the best platform of its time, but it was shortlived because of bad timing for the release (shortly before the PS2 and Xbox). And Dualshock 2 controllers are perhaps the best-designed in the world. The Dualshock 3 controllers are even better, cuz they are more ergonomic.

The Gamecube controllers are unintuitive and difficult to hold.

I agree.

Me too. The Gamecube controllers suck. But for FPSs, the Xbox controllers are actually even better than the Dualshock controllers. But overall, the Dualshock controllers are the best.

i'm convinced the revolution will be the best after reading this article. i wouldn't even care if the graphics were 10 tears old. it would still rock! i bet in 5, 10 years minimum, every console will have controls like the revolution.

btw, the code name fits

[off topic part edited]

Also, the Playstation 3 is obviously superior to the Revolution. The PS3 features a Cell processor, the Revolution uses a 1.8GHz PowerPC processor. Also, the PS3 supports up to 1080p (YES! THAT'S A P, NOT AN I!!!!!!!!), the highest possible resolution of any consumer display in the world. The Revolution has 12-megabytes of RAM, the PS3 has 256-megabytes. Also, the PS3 uses standard 2.5" HDDs, but with the Revolution, no such luck. The Revolution also uses 6-gigabyte media, but the PS3 on the other hand uses Blu-ray, for up to 200-gigabytes per disc. The PS3 also support up to seven wireless controllers, and has six USB ports. Now, there has been talk about how great the Revolution's controller is. But it is a mere molding of a remote and controller. While I must admit it is innovative like the touch screens of the DS, it will not lure hardcore gamers who prefer to do things the classic way. Also, the PS3 will have GT5, which will be the most sophisticated consumer driving simulator in the world.

I doubt it. You keep on flaunting around this one article, whereas I do research and get my information from a variety of sources. And in 5-10 years, the Revolution controller will become extinct, just like the N64 controller with the three grips.

btw, the code name doesn't fit well at all. But, the PSPs motto, "Welcome to the Portable Entertainment Revolution" fits it nicely indeed.

Portable? Console systems were never meant to be portable. "Revolution" very accuratly defines its innovations in the console gaming world.

What about the Nintendo Gameboy? It is the bestselling mobile gaming platform to date. In this new age of technology, people like to be able to bring their tech around with them.

yes, it is a gaming platform, but it doesnt fall under the console catagory. It is a handheld, a totally different type of platform.

*points* Did you hear that?

Anywho, I think the PS3 will come out on top again, just because it's more powerful.

i don't give a **** about power, or gameplay, or memory, or none of that. only gameplay. and for me, nintendo has come out on top every year. i don't care if the revolution graphics are 10 years old, it looks like it's gonna be FUN!!!

I hope everyone will agree that games are supposed to be fun. Anyone who doesnt think so needs to be forced to play mario and duckhunt for 18 hours a day, for 10 years.

Heh, yeah, these console wars are pretty much useless... since no one gets anywhere, and it's about how much fun you have, which is soley opinionated.

Y'know, my friends, that are supossedly "Nostalga Fans" (Idiots that think graphics didn't matter in the days of NES) advocate the PS3 because it has better graphics. HYPOCRITES =)

xbox 360 will be way better. all the cool games come out for xbox

and power isn't a huge factor in the console world, considering that the ps2 sold a lot more than xbox even though it wasn't nearly as powerful

No, because the Playstation 2 has the lowest clock speed of all the current consoles, but it is still the bestselling gaming platform worldwide.

Wrong, the Playstation 3 will have Gran Turismo 5 and Final Fantasy XII.

It might not be the main factor, but it is a huge factor nonetheless. Because Xbox-fanboys are always dissing the Playstation 2 for being slow.