360 or PS3?

[stevelabny]

The DS has a lot of games, and at least one in every major genre. Its a great portable device and probably the best system right now. Even if I do have some control problems occasionally because I have problems holding it and reaching the buttons.

The PSP looks pretty, but has had horrible games. God of War will be tempting and Echochrome looks like Sony is finally buying a clue. Maybe someday there will be 5 good games and the system will be worth buying.

I am a huge Nintendo fan, when everyone jumped off the Nintendo bandwagon duringthe 64's lifespan, I was proclaiming the 64 the best system ever (It still is). The Gamecube was a disappointment, and the Wii has innovation and fun on its side... but tons of games full of minigames. Twilight Princess was ok, Super Paper Mario was a disaster compared to its predecessors, and Wario Ware and Mario Party also aren't as good as previous incarnations.

But with MP3, Mario Galaxy and in theory, SSBB coming out this year... I'm still giving Nintendo more money. Even if Galaxy is bad, it will still be one of the best games this year.

i JUST got a ps2 because during its entire lifespan there were very few games that appealed to me. God of War, Okami, Shadow of the Colossus all came along later in the lifespan and I'll take my time sampling them and some of the ps2 platformers now for a lot less money.

So far the ps3 has nothing I want to play, and Heavenly Sword looks like it might be a decent God of War clone. Uncharted looked nice, but further video showed it as too much shooter, not enough adventure game. Ratchet and Clank 4 might be worth getting ...after I played the first 3.

Microsoft has followed up the pretty lame lineup for the original Xbox (Bioware's games, Halo and nothing of interest...and I'm still not sold on Halo after hating it at an Xbox launch party and never bothering to buy an Xbox) but this years 360 lineup looks absolutely amazing. The multi-platform games all look tons better on the XBox, Bioshock looks great, and Mass Effect is going to be a system seller even moreso than Halo 3. Plus, XBox Live seems to be providing fun that the other two are only dreaming of.

As far as I'm concerned, Nintendo owns me on their past glory and franchises, and Microsoft has a very intriguing lineup for the immediate futute.

 

[TwistedBishop]

The PSP looks pretty, but has had horrible games. God of War will be tempting and Echochrome looks like Sony is finally buying a clue. Maybe someday there will be 5 good games and the system will be worth buying.

Sometimes I wonder if people actually believe this, or if they just repeat it because it's "common knowledge". The PSP had a bad launch that it seems destined to never live down. Rumor and fact diverge wildly at this point.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Sometimes I wonder if people actually believe this, or if they just repeat it because it's "common knowledge". The PSP had a bad launch that it seems destined to never live down. Rumor and fact diverge wildly at this point.

The PSP is for sony fanboi's and anime freaks that have no taste!

Or, something like that.

 

[WizarDru]

Sometimes I wonder if people actually believe this, or if they just repeat it because it's "common knowledge". The PSP had a bad launch that it seems destined to never live down. Rumor and fact diverge wildly at this point.

Three of my players own PSPs. They all desperately wanted games to play on it, after the first blush of Wipeout faded. They have yet to find a game that justifies the device. One of them uses it as his MP3 player and purchased a DS for games. Another one put it on a shelf and purchased a DS and plays it constantly. One still holds out hope, but is disappointed with each new game. Out of six players, five of them have DSes.

The PSP has good games. However, there are some driving flaws with most of the PSP's library:

1) Many games are ports or rehashes of existing games. This means that many of the games that ARE good are games that people have already played on the PS1/PS2. Few people are going to pay for a slight updating of Valkyrie Profile Lenneth or Riveira: The Promised Land if they played it all the way through on the PS1, especially if the new version doesn't really add anything to the formula.

2) Many games are not customized to work as a portable game. If I have to play 10 minutes to reach a save point in a portable game, you've failed. Most of the DS's catalog are games that can be played in quick, short bursts. The FFIII remake, for example, has a Quicksave option that was never in the original.

3) The PSP's engineering is confused. The 'nub' is a poor controller, in the opinions of those I know. The lack of a second one is also a problem. The PSPs battery life could be better. It's size and fragility are a factor.

4) Sony doesn't support the PSP well. In the runup to the launch of the PS3, the PSP was left to languish in the cold. It needed God of War PSP or Monster Hunter 2 a year earlier and lot more hyped. It needs more Loco Rocos, and fewer Alien Syndromes.

Simply put, most of the catalog on the PSP, according to my friends, feels like an afterthought. Games are brought out more as an obligation or a low-effort port than as a real title that puts other versions to shame. There's no question to my mind that a game properly adapted to the PSP can outshine a DS game in many ways...but the market has spoken and devs just aren't extending the effort. The PSP is the gamecube of this generation.

 

[TwistedBishop]

1) Many games are ports or rehashes of existing games. This means that many of the games that ARE good are games that people have already played on the PS1/PS2. Few people are going to pay for a slight updating of Valkyrie Profile Lenneth or Riveira: The Promised Land if they played it all the way through on the PS1, especially if the new version doesn't really add anything to the formula.

Many games on any handheld system are ports or remakes. I look at the quality original stuff that the DS has (the Castlevania games, New Super Mario Bros, Trauma Center, Nintendogs, etc) versus the quality original titles the PSP has (Ratchet, Daxter, Metal Gear Ops, Lumines, etc) and there isn't a huge divide in quantity. You have a lot of developers pouring out DS games, sure, much like a lot of developers made PS2 games. But, again much like the PS2's library glut, how many of them are actually worth playing?

2) Many games are not customized to work as a portable game. If I have to play 10 minutes to reach a save point in a portable game, you've failed. Most of the DS's catalog are games that can be played in quick, short bursts. The FFIII remake, for example, has a Quicksave option that was never in the original.

This point gets brought up a lot, despite the fact that it's not true. The PSP has a sleep function that toggles instantly and consumes a tiny amount of power. Being alble to quickly start and stop a game isn't an issue. Infact, it might even be easier to flip a switch and instantly be back in the game.

3) The PSP's engineering is confused. The 'nub' is a poor controller, in the opinions of those I know. The lack of a second one is also a problem. The PSPs battery life could be better. It's size and fragility are a factor.

Sure, it's got design problems. Is it a dealbreaker? Not really. Good games have come out and are coming out that make use of the system.

4) Sony doesn't support the PSP well. In the runup to the launch of the PS3, the PSP was left to languish in the cold. It needed God of War PSP or Monster Hunter 2 a year earlier and lot more hyped. It needs more Loco Rocos, and fewer Alien Syndromes.

I agree that it needed the sort of support it's seeing this year back in 2006. Like I said before, it had a bad launch and took too long to get developers making quality stuff, instead of treating it simply as yet another multiplatform release. But judging the console based on how it used to be isn't very fair.

 

[Arnwyn]

How is this not a present for the console?

You do know I was speaking for myself, right? Right?

Of course, including a couple of 'future' products (which, go figure, was exactly what I said) in your post doesn't help one's credibility much, either. But in any case, the amount of mini-games vs. everything else in the DS library gives my post enough evidence to make my point pretty clear.

 

[WizarDru]

Many games on any handheld system are ports or remakes. I look at the quality original stuff that the DS has (the Castlevania games, New Super Mario Bros, Trauma Center, Nintendogs, etc) versus the quality original titles the PSP has (Ratchet, Daxter, Metal Gear Ops, Lumines, etc) and there isn't a huge divide in quantity.

The PSP has some great games...I don't think that was really at issue. One of the complaints two of my friends had wasn't that the games were remakes, but that they were fairly exact ports of games they'd played just one or two years ago. Prince of Persia is great...but if you're just giving me a version adapted to run on the PSP and not really taking any advantage of the PSP's unique strengths, I'm not really going to buy it, even if it's great. And that's one of the weaknesses of the PSP's library...lots of games that the core audience already has. The best selling PSP games are all members of a series, but they're original versions for the PSP, not just ports of existing games (namely Tekken, Monster Hunter 1/2 and Wipeout Pure). All of them take advantage of the PSP's strengths: superior graphics, nicer screen, better wifi connection, etc. Insulting conversions like the Parappa the Rapper game don't win many friends.

This point gets brought up a lot, despite the fact that it's not true. The PSP has a sleep function that toggles instantly and consumes a tiny amount of power. Being alble to quickly start and stop a game isn't an issue. Infact, it might even be easier to flip a switch and instantly be back in the game.

Except that's not entirely what I'm talking about. Both systems have a low-power, quick-off mode (although with the PSPs shorter battery life, this is more problematic for my friends). But that style of play isn't reflected in the actual games. Some folks don't sit down to play five minutes of Syphon Filter or GRAW 2...the game isn't really meant to be played in short bursts like that. The PSP's library is full of games that are designed for playing in longer sittings...which is fine. But that makes the games less attractive for anything other than longer play periods. Does the PSP have games that ARE conducive to short term play? It does, and it's getting more all the time. But these games are arriving much later in it's life, and they probably would have helped a lot more if they'd appeared even a year ago.

But judging the console based on how it used to be isn't very fair.

I'm not judging it so much as pointing out that renewed efforts this far down the road are too little, too late. The PSP hasn't failed, but it's destined to be an also-ran of this generation. When your competitor's top game has probably sold more copies than you've sold of your entire library (or perhaps their top two), then while you may remain profitable, you're taking a back-seat this generation. Hence the reference to the gamecube.

 

[Anti-Sean]

Etrian Odyssey is already out and is very much a throwback to the Wizardry and Bard's Tale style (including the insane difficulty). You have to draw your own maps too.

I have no interest in it myself (my hat of CRPGs know no limit) but I've consistently heard excellent, excellent things about Etrian Odyssey from fans of the genre.

 

[WizarDru]

I have no interest in it myself (my hat of CRPGs know no limit) but I've consistently heard excellent, excellent things about Etrian Odyssey from fans of the genre.

It's OK. A little more bare-bones than I expected, honestly. The graphics are VERY nice, but the gameplay is a little repetitive and the learning curve is DRASTIC. I got my party up to 20th level and made it to the second tier, but wasn't as enthused about it as I expected I would be.

We've reached a point where there are now different console RPGs to suit different tastes.

Final Fanatasy III is your classic CRPG.
Etrian Odyssey is Wizardry, with some interesting enhancements.
Children of Mana is a classic arcade/action RPG, more like a 'cute' Diablo.

And that doesn't count the two that came out this week: another Mana game and Luminous Arc, which is a strategic turn-based RPG like Final Fantasy Tactics.

The PSP is due to get Jeanne d'Arc in a couple of weeks, as well as Dragoneer's Aria. A ton of console RPGs are dropping in the next month or so.

..heck, a ton of games, period.

 

[TwistedBishop]

The PSP has some great games...I don't think that was really at issue. One of the complaints two of my friends had wasn't that the games were remakes, but that they were fairly exact ports of games they'd played just one or two years ago.

That seems more like a problem that the PSP used to have, rather than one it does currently. The multiplatform port glut still goes on, just like the DS, but the shovelware of older PS1/2 titles to the system has largely been corrected with a heathly original release schedule, and even stuff that did see publication previously are getting very nice makeovers for the system.

The best example of this is Castlevania: Dracula X Chronicles. It's a remake of a Castlevania game (called Rondo of Blood), except they've completely remade the game with beautiful new 3D art, AND thrown in the original version AND thrown in the direct sequel Symphony of the Night. Even a lot of older games that don't get as lavish treatment are still very fine adaptions to the system (such as the Final Fantasy remakes or Megaman Powered Up, both with all new graphics and bonus content).

Except that's not entirely what I'm talking about. Both systems have a low-power, quick-off mode (although with the PSPs shorter battery life, this is more problematic for my friends).

Not exactly. The DS consumes more power with the lid closed, since all it can do is power off the LCD screens. The PSP can enter fully into a sleep mode due to the memory stick.

Some folks don't sit down to play five minutes of Syphon Filter or GRAW 2...the game isn't really meant to be played in short bursts like that. The PSP's library is full of games that are designed for playing in longer sittings...which is fine. But that makes the games less attractive for anything other than longer play periods. Does the PSP have games that ARE conducive to short term play? It does, and it's getting more all the time. But these games are arriving much later in it's life, and they probably would have helped a lot more if they'd appeared even a year ago.

It's interesting that diversity is used as a negative to the system's library. Sure, it doesn't have as many short-burst gaming experiences as the DS does, but as you say it does have them, along with providing more meaty games in the process. That should be a good thing honestly. It also seems odd to say you can't play a longer game in short bursts, anymore than you can't read a novel unless you devote hours to it. The way I see it, if I'm on a lunchbreak and playing New Super Mario Bros. or Syphon Filter or reading a few pages of a book, I'm having fun no matter what.

I'm not judging it so much as pointing out that renewed efforts this far down the road are too little, too late. The PSP hasn't failed, but it's destined to be an also-ran of this generation. <snip>

Hence the reference to the gamecube.

The problem with the Gamecube comparison is what that system did for Nintendo. How was failure judged? Not financially, since it did make Nintendo plenty of money. But it failed to regain lost marketshare suffered from the N64 days, infact losing as large a percentage relative to the N64 as that system did to the SNES. Nintendo was in serious danger of being forced out of the console market.

The PSP didn't come out and destroy Nintendo's handhelds (the way I'm sure Sony execs would have liked) and some things outright failed (like the UMD movie push) but it does have a very strong install base (25 million or so? Around what the Xbox and Gamecube sold during their entire lifecycle). It's achieved that even with all its technical oddities and a vastly higher price tag for most of its life cycle. It has also, much like the Wii has done in the console sector, carved out a niche for itself away from what Nintendo has been doing. By most accounts this should be seen as a success story, especially when you look at how other handhelds have fared in the past. In a lot of ways it can be seen as the Anti-Gamecube infact, giving Sony a strong foot in the door of handheld gaming versus the Gamecube nearly sending Nintendo packing from the console sector.

But yet this concept of being "too little, too late" seems to imply that the PSP must beat the DS in some way in order to be worth owning or playing. My question is, why?

I tend to compare the PSP to the DS only since the latter is universally judged an enjoyable platform to own, rather than to engage in the futility of fanboy platform wars. When someone else claimed the PSP doesn't have even 5 games worth owning -- subjective, certainly, but blatantly false by reviews alone -- that moves it out of a typical "PSP vs. DS" topic and into the one we're currently having about the quality of experience. It's in that regard that I don't understand how marketshare enters into the discussion.