PDA

View Full Version : Discussion: Is it time for the Xbox 720 to arrive?



Zeus
04-12-2011, 04:19 PM
The Xbox 360 is quite some way into its life-cycle, but the big question is has it gone too far? Maxconsole would be interested in hearing your thoughts on whether the Xbox 360 should continue to live a long and prosperous life or if it is time for the Xbox 720 to arrive?

wewii
04-12-2011, 04:27 PM
Once Gears of War 3 becomes too played out after several months - 1 year... then Yes - RIP 360

But I still like the graphics, still pretty sweet

But I don't care about the Kinect. :cool: Wii is good enough.

p1nky
04-12-2011, 04:34 PM
Seriously, wtf is up with this "post to forum" ****?

And yes, it is OVEDUE, this stuff is SIX years old and it doesn't look like anything is gonna be announced this year, so the earliest is an announcement at E3 2012 and shipping at the end of 2012, when the 360 is SEVEN years old, I think it is really time for an update. A 2012 console shouldn't struggle doing 1080p, it should be able to do 1080p at 60fps at photo realistic gfx.
Also it's time to move away from the motion controller madness, back to what gaming used to be.

osnoozeo
04-12-2011, 04:46 PM
yea time for an upgrade, and not a system that i will have to replace 5-6x either! i remember buying 120gig elite when it first come out, at 500bucks, that sucker is finally dead, i fixed it a few times over the yrs, but its finally kicked the bucket, lets hope they learned from there past mistakes, and maybe they will be stupid enough to use pc dvd drives, in there systems again!

Gizmo2k
04-12-2011, 04:47 PM
No.

1) Looking at some of the quality games that are still hitting the 360, there's no need for a new bit of kit.
2) New xbox == higher game prices at the start. This is rip off Britain after all. I already grumble paying more than 35 for a game now.
3) M$ is leaning on digital distribution more and more. No. 80% of the UK has the shittest 'broadband' man can imagine.
4) If they're going disc based, it'd have to be BluRay (no chance - they'd have to pay Sony for EVERY copy sold, game and hardware), so it'd be propriety M$. God no, not another format. This new DVD format they're trialing for the 360 just now might be an indication of what their plans are.
5) There's still a big back log of games I just can't seem to start already!

EnglishRob
04-12-2011, 04:48 PM
I was thinking something along these lines earlier when I saw an announcement on the AMD UK Facebook page about their latest and greatest video card. Now I'm not a PC gamer (not anymore anyway, unless you count things like the Lucas Arts point and click adventures from the 90's and other games from that sort of period). I tend to do my gaming on a console.

Personally I'm happy with what I have (Wii, DS Lite, XBOX 360 Elite and PS3 80GB) and there's plenty of games I haven't tried yet (Gears of War for instance) and I dare say the current gen consoles would keep me busy for the next few years considering the amount of time I get to play (with all three consoles plugged into our main telly I have to schedule my gaming around the rest of the family, that is at least until I can convince the wife to buy me a nice 24" LCD monitor for my birthday) :-)

But on the other hand I'm sure there are plenty of gamers out there who look at their PC counterparts and want something new.

So I'd say yeah, might be about time, at least for the early adopters (although with reference to the age of the XBOX360, the Neo Geo lasted for something like 12 years so maybe Microsoft might try this especially with the release of Kinect last year).

Rob

Jish
04-12-2011, 05:00 PM
No.

I don't feel like paying $500+ for another console right now, when this one seems to be doing fine graphically. As long as they continue to make good games and not shovelware, I think this generation can go on for a few more years. In a few years 1080p will be more accessible and most games will be able to support it, but there really is no reason to add to the processing power expense (new console) to fully incorporate it.

DunnyUK
04-12-2011, 05:08 PM
I don't think it's time yet, might as well wait until Sony make a move since it's still outperforming the PS3 on a technical level.

With big exclusive titles like Gears of War 3, Mass Effect 3, Forza 4, Halo and Metal Gear Solid still on the way then MS would be stupid to announce a new console.

wiggim
04-12-2011, 05:22 PM
Yes

There has been major advances in computing to visually enhance the audio/video past its 1080p possibility.. wait, no there hasn't.

Why exactly do we need a 'new' 360? because MS don't have enough space on DVD-DL for the new 1080p games being developed.

If one does come out within the next 30 months expect a very slow adaption rate.. People are still OK with the PS2 and its games/graphics!

We are however, due for a Wii v2, thats HD, and does better things - and has games people ACTUALLY wanna play.

chrisprocter01
04-12-2011, 06:00 PM
erm yes and no

Generally speaking No the console is great and the games on it look great and aren't too taxing on the system, and don't need to be scaled down too much from PC games.......

but that leads me on nicely to the fact new PC games and ones in development are much better graphically than current 360 games (which are at their peek performance) i don't want to see skyrim come out with terrible textures for the 360 when the pc version will look massively better

so a new console in 18-24 months would be best

Xenogears V
04-12-2011, 06:28 PM
Once Gears of War 3 becomes too played out after several months - 1 year... then Yes - RIP 360

But I still like the graphics, still pretty sweet

But I don't care about the Kinect. :cool: Wii is good enough.

Yeah. don't forget MGS: RISING. It came out 2012. then for sure another year life.

danight
04-12-2011, 06:35 PM
nope.

It can still do pretty much anything ps3 can do, even 3-d. Most cases of multiplatform it does it better.

Kinect is to new, devs need time to learn it.
kinect is to new and consumers need time to decide to buy it.
Price can still come down on the high end bundle.
3rd party games rock on it andthey are happy so let them keep cranking out games.

Sad but the biggest truth of the matter is. There is way to many platforms out there if you include next gen consoles, and not enough devs to support them all. Systems have to die.
wii, wii 2, xbox 360, xbox 720, ps3, ps4, maybe even ps2, psp, ds, 3ds, ngp, the mobile markets and thats taking for granted apple or google doesnt enter the game industry and release a gaming device like ipad gaming.

Way to many consoles and new consoles would only get rushed port jobs of current consoles games, so they can release on all platforms. It makes no sense for microsoft to rush a new xbox to the market when its selling like wild in its prime areas.
xbox 360, and kinect are both profitable on ever unit sold. xbox live brings in tons of cash.

Just makes no sense to rush a new xbox out just to say "here it is".

p1nky
04-12-2011, 06:45 PM
"rush to market" <- this is longest we had to last with a console generation, the first xbox only latest 4 years and there were massivley more interesting games. what is it with people wanting this poor, shavelware casual gamer driven console generation dragged out even further. it is already unbearable and the time is more than overdue to cross the finish line with this giant heap of shovelware this generation has brought out.
what kind of logic is that. tons of shovelware but hey let's wait a few years more, maybe the great motion control games will finally, finally come.

"It can still do pretty much anything ps3 can do" <- ROFLMAO, the PS3 is even WORSE than the 360 technologically. hey my 1985 renault can still go faster than the 1986 fiat, that's proof that it's up to date LOL

wiggim
04-12-2011, 07:05 PM
"rush to market" <- this is longest we had to last with a console generation, the first xbox only latest 4 years and there were massivley more interesting games. what is it with people wanting this poor, shavelware casual gamer driven console generation dragged out even further. it is already unbearable and the time is more than overdue to cross the finish line with this giant heap of shovelware this generation has brought out.
what kind of logic is that. tons of shovelware but hey let's wait a few years more, maybe the great motion control games will finally, finally come.

"It can still do pretty much anything ps3 can do" <- ROFLMAO, the PS3 is even WORSE than the 360 technologically. hey my 1985 renault can still go faster than the 1986 fiat, that's proof that it's up to date LOL

The PS3s main advantage is optical media storage, 1Gbps network interface, Cell processing power (shitty ram & graphics tho) and everything the 360 slim incorporated (optical out, wireless, etc) as for which one is better, Sits personal opinion. The PS3 is slow in my eyes and took forever to get 'mainstream' Sony had to basically redesign the unit to start making money and push sales...
-no rumble cause sixaxis is impossible (what game uses sixaxis anyone?)
-in-game XMB took like 3 years to get working
-updates recently became 'patches' where a smaller than 160MB file could be downloaded from slow sony servers
-games require installation because, not sure why. 2x bluray reads just as fast as 12x DVD-ROM.
-move, thats a perfect example of 'we copy while others innovate' mocking the kinect and wii features.
-trophies introduced mid-cycle and screwed up gamers.
-many more hardware screwups (ylod, corrupted HDD/game saves, inability in some FW for controllers to work, inability to upgrade HDD in some firmwares, etc)

they DO have cloud based game saving now though.. thats a toe in the right direction.

The 360 is hands down the best system for software, which is games, which is what everyone uses their console for..
Its fast, never wait for updates more than 3-5 minutes, and games boot instantly. If not the update to play the game is on the disc and takes only a few moments to write to the NAND... I remember the day I bought the warhawk for PS3 (maybe wrong title, online only game) I spent 75 minutes updating to the latest firmware, then another 40 minutes installing the required game data, then another 15 minutes for the game to download and apply its needed updates. This is ridiculous! I wanna play NOW, not in 2.5 hours!

Anyway. Each system to their own..
Even though I currently have purchased over 14 xbox 360's (rrod, no video, many other problems) opposed to 2 PS3 units (both still working), the 360 wins in my eyes for the experience. no one in their right mind would purchase 14 consoles and have 2 working 3 years later and say it was junk

mattias800
04-12-2011, 07:36 PM
I always want new stuff, so from that perspective I say yes.
From a more sensible perspective though, I'd say they will start talking about it in 12-18 months, for a release in 18-24 months.

danight
04-12-2011, 08:23 PM
"rush to market" <- this is longest we had to last with a console generation, the first xbox only latest 4 years and there were massivley more interesting games. what is it with people wanting this poor, shavelware casual gamer driven console generation dragged out even further. it is already unbearable and the time is more than overdue to cross the finish line with this giant heap of shovelware this generation has brought out.
what kind of logic is that. tons of shovelware but hey let's wait a few years more, maybe the great motion control games will finally, finally come.

"It can still do pretty much anything ps3 can do" <- ROFLMAO, the PS3 is even WORSE than the 360 technologically. hey my 1985 renault can still go faster than the 1986 fiat, that's proof that it's up to date LOL


rush to market i mean tech hasnt increased enough to warrant a new gen system. For those that dont know xbox orig ment dx box as in direct x. When dx 11 gets worked out then maybe talk a new console, but right now dx9 is fine.

As far as what was ment about ps3. I ment gaming wise xbox still has the best online network (yes psn is leaps and bounds better than when it launched, but its still not as good as live).
Game wise multi platform games still run best on xbox 360 etc etc

then add in fact that xbox 360 is whooping its last years sales and is doing great sales wise in its main target areas (everything outside of japan in which case it still sucks).

But over all the xbox 360 is aged and is behind the pc market. But the pc highest selling games outside of MMO`s is still cod and xbox 360 has a great relationship with activision and it gets dlc first. It also has the most players and sells the most copies.

It makes no sense atm... for microsoft to announce a new system. Now does it make sense for sony. Maybe nintendo since wii has slowed down some. But even with the slow down its highly profitable for them.

Any company who rushes to the dance for next gen, might find the competition waiting to +1 them. Meaning future proofing a next gen system could be as simple as adding more ram than the competition or better gpu.

msanchez
04-12-2011, 10:31 PM
I will never understand why console gamers want consoles to be on par with PCs. This will never be the case, I would personally just rather all games get a PC port if consoles are only going to last 5 years.

I will agree that this gen needs to either dispense with the motion crap, or just end... RIGHT NOW! Motion games will never be anything more than a gimmick with current tech... and let me not even get into the whole 3D garbage.

I'd also rather consoles return to being video game consoles instead of PC/Media Hubs/All in one pieces of kit... well at least sony should, first fail with the psp was the fact that nobody knew what the thing was for 2 years (multimedia device or gaming device), and what happened with the ps3 and it's "extra" features is even more disturbing. We all should have other devices to do any important extra our consoles can do, so let's just do away with all the distractions and make consoles about gaming again. As far as I'm concerned I don't need picture viewer, music player, video player, etc, etc.

switchg3ar
04-13-2011, 01:20 AM
Of course people are going to say "ya it's time for a new console" while upgrading the hardware would be nice I don't think it's possible with the current economic situation that we are currently in. If most console users don't know any better why upgrade? It's also better for Microsoft if they can hold onto the existing console. R&D is very expensive and look how it hurt Sony last round.

yusky03
04-13-2011, 03:35 AM
Yes! I am tired of people asking me to fix there Xboxes!

Asgaro
04-13-2011, 03:49 AM
Guys, just buy a PS3 and you're all set and done.
Remember you also get a BluRay player, and built-in HDD, and free multiplayer.

I think it's about 300 euros right now, so you can't go wrong with it! :)

MrNasty
04-13-2011, 04:21 AM
No there is still plenty of life in the 360. Dont want a next gen Xbox till at least 2015.

tech3475
04-13-2011, 04:40 AM
I think the 360 needs new games more so than new hardware.

mmattys30
04-13-2011, 06:08 AM
yes we need a 720 but only when they have sorted the cooling out on it

iTz FiNaL
04-13-2011, 06:58 AM
Guys, just buy a PS3 and you're all set and done.
Remember you also get a BluRay player, and built-in HDD, and free multiplayer.

I think it's about 300 euros right now, so you can't go wrong with it! :)

The 360 has a HDD aswell, the overall online experience on PS3 is very subpar and the fact that it has Blu Ray is redundant. Very few games need multiple discs on the 360 and most of them are not even that popular.

Just because the PS3 is more powerful does not mean it is better.

John Crichton
04-13-2011, 07:21 AM
Guys, just buy a PS3 and you're all set and done.
Remember you also get a BluRay player, and built-in HDD, and free multiplayer.

please, don't waste your ps3 drive with blu-ray movies.
you get better and cheaper standalone blu-ray players everywhere.

player1
04-13-2011, 08:30 AM
No.

1) Looking at some of the quality games that are still hitting the 360, there's no need for a new bit of kit.
2) New xbox == higher game prices at the start. This is rip off Britain after all. I already grumble paying more than 35 for a game now.
3) M$ is leaning on digital distribution more and more. No. 80% of the UK has the shittest 'broadband' man can imagine.
4) If they're going disc based, it'd have to be BluRay (no chance - they'd have to pay Sony for EVERY copy sold, game and hardware), so it'd be propriety M$. God no, not another format. This new DVD format they're trialing for the 360 just now might be an indication of what their plans are.
5) There's still a big back log of games I just can't seem to start already!

Maybe they could just sell the games/films encrypted on USB sticks ?

msanchez
04-13-2011, 09:13 AM
Guys, just buy a PS3 and you're all set and done.
Remember you also get a BluRay player, and built-in HDD, and free multiplayer.

I think it's about 300 euros right now, so you can't go wrong with it! :)

I think I just threw up a little in my mouth... I hope either sony is paying you, or you are being sarcastic... I lose faith in humanity a bit more everyday.

HugeGorrila
04-13-2011, 10:06 AM
The same question over and over and over. :mad:

1. Stop being such a graphics whore! The graphics are more than good enough (xbox/ps3).

2. The next console will not look any better with the current technology available.

3. We don't need a bunch of crappy ports

4. Who cares if PC games look better. PC's can cost thousands of dollars and need constant upgrades.

5. PC games only look slightly better than console games.

macca247
04-13-2011, 11:16 AM
only if M$ build a proper game console and not just a cobbled together media pc that cooks itself i mean have you looked inside one?, also is it possible to say anything good about the PS3 without just being called a fanboy? Think you neeed to change the name of this website to SonyHaters.com or is it getting all its funding from M$. As for consoles being near to pc's graphically all i can say is Crysis 2

rovian
04-13-2011, 12:24 PM
The same question over and over and over. :mad:

1. Stop being such a graphics whore! The graphics are more than good enough (xbox/ps3).

2. The next console will not look any better with the current technology available.

3. We don't need a bunch of crappy ports

4. Who cares if PC games look better. PC's can cost thousands of dollars and need constant upgrades.

5. PC games only look slightly better than console games.

The same question from your perspective of course..

1. Stop being a graphics whore? what made you join the next generation games/consoles if it's not the graphics? how hypocritical indeed..

2. You're wrong, if you can't even notice a difference between 720p vs 1080p then you should go check your eyes, because on PC games it's all about the heavy textures and high resolutions, I bet that you don't even own an HDTV anyways..

3. No comment..

4. Millions of PC users cares, if you personally don't care, stay playing at your outdated console.. and no, you don't need a thousands of dollars to be able to play most games at max, 500-600$ PC will pretty much play you anything you want..

5. This is possibly the most retarded/stupidest point I've ever read in my life, but here is my advice to you.. you better up finish school first, then get yourself some good job and buy some decent PC before posting something retarded as that..

Because seriously, only consoles fanboys would thought or say such a thing.. congratulation for pointing out the most retarded post for people to read.

msanchez
04-13-2011, 12:36 PM
...also is it possible to say anything good about the PS3 without just being called a fanboy? Think you neeed to change the name of this website to SonyHaters.com or is it getting all its funding from M$...

Oh there's good things to be said of the ps3 machine itself, there's of course many bad things to be said too. Still, it's one thing to point out good things about the ps3, and quite a different one to say good things about sony.

As far as funding goes... according to the accusations thrown out I guess it changes on a weekly basis, since before the site was being accused of being pro-sony when all the negative 3DS was being posted. Though I think it's more logical to assume overall the site is unbiased. Me? Oh no I hate sony, no doubt about that.


The same question from your perspective of course..

1. Stop being a graphics whore? what made you join the next generation games/consoles if it's not the graphics? how hypocritical indeed..

2. You're wrong, if you can't even notice a difference between 720p vs 1080p then you should go check your eyes, because on PC games it's all about the heavy textures and high resolutions, I bet that you don't even own an HDTV anyways..

3. No comment..

4. Millions of PC users cares, if you personally don't care, stay playing at your outdated console.. and no, you don't need a thousands of dollars to be able to play most games at max, 500-600$ PC will pretty much play you anything you want..

5. This is possibly the most retarded/stupidest point I've ever read in my life, but here is my advice to you.. you better up finish school first, then get yourself some good job and buy some decent PC before posting something retarded as that..

Because seriously, only consoles fanboys would thought or say such a thing.. congratulation for pointing out the most retarded post for people to read.

1. ... Uh... do you see any ps2 games being released these days? graphics had nothing to do with why a lot of us upgraded. The only reason I won't buy a wii is because I'm not a fan of it's games; they are not all bad, but there's simply not enough games I like to justify buying one, gfx had nothing to do with it.

2. I could notice a difference... not impressed, and certainly not worth the upgrade in my opinion.

4. Than those millions of PC users should just game on their PCs, or ask developers to port all their games to the PC as well.

5. Somewhat agree, it's true that you can build a PC that will seriously drawf any console in the gfx department, but again not all of us consider it a worthwhile investment.

rovian
04-13-2011, 01:38 PM
1. ... Uh... do you see any ps2 games being released these days? graphics had nothing to do with why a lot of us upgraded. The only reason I won't buy a wii is because I'm not a fan of it's games; they are not all bad, but there's simply not enough games I like to justify buying one, gfx had nothing to do with it.

2. I could notice a difference... not impressed, and certainly not worth the upgrade in my opinion.

4. Than those millions of PC users should just game on their PCs, or ask developers to port all their games to the PC as well.

5. Somewhat agree, it's true that you can build a PC that will seriously drawf any console in the gfx department, but again not all of us consider it a worthwhile investment.

1. To answer if there is still a PS2 games being released or not? yes there is.. of course not as much as before though, but the PS2 didn't die yet and still have some releases from time to time.. and for the Wii answer, it's simply about people preferences.. the Wii may not have the type of games for you to like, but still.. the Wii is the most sold system to date.

2. Of course you'd notice a slightly difference, because you're playing that resolution on consoles.. for example on my PC, there is a huge jump from 1280x720 to 1920x1080.. and here's when the PC plays it's part compared to consoles, it's a huge difference.. that's 921,600 vs 2,073,600 pixels.. you can go up to 8024x1600 resolution with 3 2560x1600 monitors on eyefinity set-up on PC if you want to go extreme, that's a total of 12,838,400 pixels.

4. Of course they should stick to what they have, why would you want them to downgrade to something lower..? there is still a plenty of awesome PC games out there, some developers would only want to port their games on consoles because they'd make more money on there, it's all about the piracy that made the PC gaming looks bad.

5. Again, all depends on your perspective and liking, if you think it's worth it then go for it, PC games are miles better looking/smoother gameplay + a lot of features like DX11 and Physx that consoles can never dream about..


Here is a small feature about Physx from batman AA showing PC vs PC but with Physx on/off.. I played and finished that game maxed out on my PC first, my brother however had the game on PS3, when I played it on (my) PS3 later, I've thrown the controller from the first 15 min of the walkthrough..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GyKCM-Bpuw

Again, despite all that, I have to agree though that consoles has a lot of great games, but only some of these games on consoles that makes me want to have them all, if these games were on my PC, I would sell all of my consoles without hesitating..

msanchez
04-13-2011, 03:09 PM
I'm not trying to say PC gaming isn't better than consoles, just that a jump from one generation to another shouldn't be solely based on a slight improvement in gfx. If I got all the games I wanted on PC I would surely be playing them on there and wouldn't buy a console. Why? because I don't need to brake the bank to make a gaming pc, and I don't need to max out settings either. Last time I played PC games I did it at 800 x 600 while others were already shooting for 720p+ resolutions and it didn't bother me one bit. The only reason was that despite this there comes a point where you need to upgrade and a decent gpu wasn't as affordable as it is these days. Sure you could spend obscene amounts of money on a gpu, but to play the latest games on fair settings it's not necessary.

My point mentioning the wii is not that I don't like the games, it's that despite having the crappies gfx it has sold the most... so apparently most consoles gamers don't care about gfx either.

And lastly I'm not asking PC gamers to come down to console level... what I'm asking is that if they feel they need to have the lattest and greatest, they should simply stick to the PC. What's the point of consoles if a console generation last as long as GPU generation on PC? If consoles are not simple to set up, simple to play on, and have some longevity to them there's really no need for them.

MicroNut
04-13-2011, 03:37 PM
PC and Console games should be developed separately.
Merging and blending then have proven fatal for both the games and devs over the years.
They really are two separate beasts.

The question is will the Devs and the Consumer gain from jumping to the next generation?

Yes and No.
I think they can wait a little bit longer, but eventually the old horse will die one way or the other.

rovian
04-13-2011, 04:08 PM
I'm not trying to say PC gaming isn't better than consoles, just that a jump from one generation to another shouldn't be solely based on a slight improvement in gfx. If I got all the games I wanted on PC I would surely be playing them on there and wouldn't buy a console. Why? because I don't need to brake the bank to make a gaming pc, and I don't need to max out settings either. Last time I played PC games I did it at 800 x 600 while others were already shooting for 720p+ resolutions and it didn't bother me one bit. The only reason was that despite this there comes a point where you need to upgrade and a decent gpu wasn't as affordable as it is these days. Sure you could spend obscene amounts of money on a gpu, but to play the latest games on fair settings it's not necessary.

My point mentioning the wii is not that I don't like the games, it's that despite having the crappies gfx it has sold the most... so apparently most consoles gamers don't care about gfx either.

And lastly I'm not asking PC gamers to come down to console level... what I'm asking is that if they feel they need to have the lattest and greatest, they should simply stick to the PC. What's the point of consoles if a console generation last as long as GPU generation on PC? If consoles are not simple to set up, simple to play on, and have some longevity to them there's really no need for them.

I agree with most of what you said, not truly saying you're wrong as well though, kinda the same of what I'm trying to say, if you have the budget and willing to spend on some decent gaming PC to enjoy the best graphics available, then go for it, if not.. then stick to what the consoles delivers in terms of graphics, imo.. graphics can change the experience of the game, at least for me, I'm sure many people would agree, it seems to me though that you don't actually care that much about the graphics, since you played on 800x600 and still enjoying it, but I hate when someone say such a thing like "Who cares?" it's like that he knows everyone in this freaking world and knows about what they think and what they like, that what made me reply to the first guy.. simply because there are people who cares, paying a lot of money trying to have the best hardware available at a time to enjoy the best graphics and smoothest gameplay experience.. hope you understood my point. :)

Asgaro
04-13-2011, 07:19 PM
I think I just threw up a little in my mouth... I hope either sony is paying you, or you are being sarcastic... I lose faith in humanity a bit more everyday.

Lol, no need to get nasty!

I'm not kidding.
How much does 5 years of Xbox Live Gold cost you? When you realize that, then we'll talk.

I know it was a faulty move to set it at 600 at launch, but I don't see what's wrong with a PS3 Slim.

msanchez
04-13-2011, 07:48 PM
I agree with most of what you said, not truly saying you're wrong as well though, kinda the same of what I'm trying to say, if you have the budget and willing to spend on some decent gaming PC to enjoy the best graphics available, then go for it, if not.. then stick to what the consoles delivers in terms of graphics, imo.. graphics can change the experience of the game, at least for me, I'm sure many people would agree, it seems to me though that you don't actually care that much about the graphics, since you played on 800x600 and still enjoying it, but I hate when someone say such a thing like "Who cares?" it's like that he knows everyone in this freaking world and knows about what they think and what they like, that what made me reply to the first guy.. simply because there are people who cares, paying a lot of money trying to have the best hardware available at a time to enjoy the best graphics and smoothest gameplay experience.. hope you understood my point. :)

In total agreement, if you have the money, the knowledge and want to be immersed in your gaming then PC is without a doubt probably your best choice.

I must admit I too have a particular distaste for comments that attempt to group everyone together. As you said, we all have different priorities, mine being story and gameplay, hence the "meh" reaction to graphics.


Lol, no need to get nasty!

I'm not kidding.
How much does 5 years of Xbox Live Gold cost you? When you realize that, then we'll talk.

I know it was a faulty move to set it at 600 at launch, but I don't see what's wrong with a PS3 Slim.

Well you'd have to ask someone that has a 360 and pays for live, but I'm sure I've seen a lot of deals out there. You don't really need to spend retail price.

Just in case, I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with the ps3, phat or slim, HOWEVER, I can't even begin to tell you how many things I think are wrong with sony.

Gage
04-14-2011, 10:47 AM
In my opinion, i have only had the xbox 360 console for about.... 3 years, before hand i had the ps2, before that i only played call of duty on the PC. I made game reviews on pc, then on ps2, now i do on the xbox 360, more commentaries than anything. Every 4 years there has been a new console, playstation to the ps2 to the ps3, then the xbox to the xbox 360, now i think its time for a new console from ms. Be ready in the next year for xbox 720?