# I'm buying the Nintendo Wii for one reason and one reason only.



## Vince (May 11, 2006)

Teaser trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Bepxb4I2Yw


----------



## bostjan (May 11, 2006)

hmm... not working...


----------



## Naren (May 11, 2006)

"The video you have requested is not available.

If you have recently uploaded this video, you may need to wait a few minutes for the video to process."

I can't get over that ridiculous name. Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii


----------



## Toshiro (May 11, 2006)

The controller scares me. Really. I have enough remotes around the house.


----------



## WayneCustom7 (May 11, 2006)

I'm sort of keeping an eye out for it during this year's E3, and there are two games that were mentioned, Tennis and Baseball, where yu get to use the Wiimote to swing and hit the ball...man I like that!


----------



## Toshiro (May 11, 2006)

$20 says that link was a new Starwars game with remote control Lightsabers.


----------



## D-EJ915 (May 11, 2006)

Toshiro said:


> $20 says that link was a new Starwars game with remote control Lightsabers.


That would be so awesome \m/

and yeah the vid's not working,


----------



## WayneCustom7 (May 11, 2006)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-342177443540976097&q=e3

This one works, but it's over 1 hour long...still man the uses for the new Wiimote...COOOLL!


----------



## Chris (May 11, 2006)

Vince's link had better have something to do with Madden 2007, or I'm kicking him in the balls.


----------



## Regor (May 11, 2006)

Did they change the name of the 'Revolution'? WTF is the Wii?


----------



## Chris (May 11, 2006)

Regor said:


> Did they change the name of the 'Revolution'? WTF is the Wii?



Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/weeee.php


----------



## WayneCustom7 (May 11, 2006)

Wiimote control...very clever!


----------



## Mastodon (May 13, 2006)

My goodness that video google one is of terrible video quality.


----------



## D-EJ915 (May 13, 2006)

Mastodon said:


> My goodness that video google one is of terrible video quality.


It's horrendous but you could still tell what was going on.


----------



## Metal Ken (May 13, 2006)

Regor said:


> Did they change the name of the 'Revolution'? WTF is the Wii?



this explains it all:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/04/28


----------



## zimbloth (May 14, 2006)

Frankly, I think the name sucks too, but if it has good games, that's all that matters. I really liked the GameCube, Nintendo is behind the times a lot but they make quality games. That being said, I think for most genres, PCs are so ahead of the curve in gaming quality. The fact people can still tolerate PS2's 1998 graphics baffles me.


----------



## Dive-Baum (May 14, 2006)

I read about a demo in Newsweek. Nintendo is going after another crowd with the new deck. They want people who have never played a video game 
b4. Very unique concept. I have only read good things. It will take some getting used to but lets fact it...it was wierd when the first controller came out with more than 2 buttons at first. I have had some sort of console since 1978 when Pong came out. This one looks to be a winner. If Starwars has a light sabre action to it, I may not leave the TV for a few weeks.

One more reason to play the new Nintendo---ZELDA. The new one looks incredible. I think Microsoft jumped the gun somewhat in getting the 360 out so soon. When the new decks come out, the 360 will be 3rd best. Although I have read that the PS3 is more difficult to program for.


----------



## Naren (May 14, 2006)

zimbloth said:


> That being said, I think for most genres, PCs are so ahead of the curve in gaming quality. The fact people can still tolerate PS2's 1998 graphics baffles me.



I strongly disagree. It baffles me that you think that. The graphics on the PS2 completely depend on the game, anyway. For example, I have Silent Hill 2 which came out in 2001 and I have Final Fantasy XII which came out in 2006 (I have beat both games). The graphics are COMPLETELY different. Silent Hill 2 has good graphics for 2001, but very poor graphics by modern standards. Final Fantasy XII has better graphics than any Xbox 360 game or any computer game I can think of. I've also bought PS2 games that had graphics just as good as CGI movies.

Besides, in my opinion, PS2 has more good games than any current system (if we're talking about old systems, I think the Super Nintendo had the most good games).

And I work as a translator for a gaming company, so I'm quite familiar with gaming, game systems, and games themselves (I've owned 14 gaming systems by now. And, as a sidenote, just about everyone at my company has been making fun of the new name, "Wii", since it was announced). I used to be a huge computer gamer (I've owned over 200 computer games by now). I hate how people underestimate the PS2 and act like it's some system from 5 years ago. The technology for games at the beginning of PS2 to now has completely changed. PS3 is coming out in November (ridiculously expensive price of something like 70,000 yen), but I probably won't buy it until the price it's around 30,000-40,000 yen. So, I probably won't get it until next year. Maybe next Spring.


----------



## Toshiro (May 14, 2006)

Yeah, $600US for the PS3. Sucks. But then, consider the upgrades you have to put into a PC to get good gaming results, and it's not so bad. I need to pop for a new ATI card and another gig of ram here soon.


----------



## Naren (May 14, 2006)

Toshiro said:


> Yeah, $600US for the PS3. Sucks. But then, consider the upgrades you have to put into a PC to get good gaming results, and it's not so bad. I need to pop for a new ATI card and another gig of ram here soon.



That's true, but I have never bought any upgrades for my computer except in 1996 I upgraded my CPU from 166 mhz to 200 mhz (because there was a game I wanted to play that required something like 180mhz or better and I couldn't play it with my 166mhz cpu). And in 1997 I changed my CD-ROM drive to a DVD-ROM drive. But I used that more for movies than for the DVD-ROM games that I had. But, console games kill computer games when it comes to reliability. Computer games crash all the time or run choppy/slow because of hardware problems. Etc. etc.

When I first heard that the PS3 was gonna be 70,000 yen, I thought I must have misheard. I was sure it was gonna be 40,000-50,000 yen when it first came out. It was way way more expensive than I had imagined.


----------



## DelfinoPie (May 14, 2006)

I'm sticking with my pc, none of the new consoles really take my eye...I think later on down the line I'll buy a 360 for the sake of Halo 3, but other than that meh, I don't care enough.

I recently bought another gig of ram for my computer, and a new graphics card so I'm sorted for atleast another month or so lmao...


----------



## zimbloth (May 14, 2006)

Naren said:


> I strongly disagree. It baffles me that you think that. The graphics on the PS2 completely depend on the game, anyway. For example, I have Silent Hill 2 which came out in 2001 and I have Final Fantasy XII which came out in 2006 (I have beat both games). The graphics are COMPLETELY different. Silent Hill 2 has good graphics for 2001, but very poor graphics by modern standards. Final Fantasy XII has better graphics than any Xbox 360 game or any computer game I can think of. I've also bought PS2 games that had graphics just as good as CGI movies.
> 
> Besides, in my opinion, PS2 has more good games than any current system (if we're talking about old systems, I think the Super Nintendo had the most good games).
> 
> And I work as a translator for a gaming company, so I'm quite familiar with gaming, game systems, and games themselves (I've owned 14 gaming systems by now. And, as a sidenote, just about everyone at my company has been making fun of the new name, "Wii", since it was announced). I used to be a huge computer gamer (I've owned over 200 computer games by now). I hate how people underestimate the PS2 and act like it's some system from 5 years ago. The technology for games at the beginning of PS2 to now has completely changed. PS3 is coming out in November (ridiculously expensive price of something like 70,000 yen), but I probably won't buy it until the price it's around 30,000-40,000 yen. So, I probably won't get it until next year. Maybe next Spring.



Naren there's absolutely nothing to disagree about. You can't dispute that it has 8 year old hardware in there. It has graphical limitations. Even the nicest looking PS2 game looks old and dated compared to most computer games (assuming you have a decent video card). To say otherwise is downright dillusional and insane. You're talking about 8 year old video cards, processors, low resolutions... I mean come on man. You're really reaching now. I know some developers can maximize the systems potential better than others, but there are still limits. 

As for the best games being on PS2, that's of course subjective.


----------



## Metal Ken (May 14, 2006)

Low resolutions? We're talking about televisions here. whats they best you get on your standard midgrade TV, 640x480?


----------



## Dive-Baum (May 14, 2006)

Metal Ken said:


> Low resolutions? We're talking about televisions here. whats they best you get on your standard midgrade TV, 640x480?




Not if you have an HDTV...trust me when I tell you, Gaming on a Large screen DLP LCD is incredible. These new generation of games (360, PS3 etc )
are made for HDTV. It is simply amazing. My TV blows away a monitor any day. Not to mention it's 55 inches. The prices are coming down quite a bit also. I heard that 2 major HDTV companies are building new plants in the US (leave it to foriegn companies to build in the US) I priced them for the last 3 years and I finally bought one as my old 36" blew up after Hannukah just when I pluged in my 360...oh and my 360 died a few hours later (I invented cuss words that night)


----------



## Metal Ken (May 14, 2006)

Yeah but this is the most recent development. No systems really have HDtv features right now except the 360, right? 

Everything up to this point is stuck at around 640x480. 
I think one of the more common formats of HDtv is around 1280x720. Computers have been pushing 1200x600 for some time now, and probably has continued to rise. TV's are generally, in my experience (correct me if i'm wrong, here, again), lower res than monitors. I'm sure the newest monitors can outperform HDtv. Point is comparing resolution on a PS2 compared to a PC is pointless, because the medium invovled. there's no NEED for a Ps2 to display 1600x1200 resolution cause the format it was designed for can't even support it.


----------



## D-EJ915 (May 14, 2006)

IBM has had a monitor for several years which is over 2500 pixels high. It's not for quick speed or anything but it looks amazing and requires 4 power bricks and 2 DVI ports to fulfill its ridiculous power and pixel requirements haha. (versus 1080 in the highest HDTV, LOL) and my 17" sony widescreen monitor displays HDTV material (720P, w00t) so I don't even have to get a HDTV haha, my 40" sony downstairs does too  I <3 my widescreen 

That being said, HDTVs running HD material really is an amazing experience, that's for sure.


----------



## Naren (May 15, 2006)

Like Ken and D-EJ915 have said, computer monitors have much much higher resolution capabilities than TVs, which is one reason why I always watch DVDs on my computer and not my TV (although I have a pretty cool flat-screen TV).



zimbloth said:


> Naren there's absolutely nothing to disagree about. You can't dispute that it has 8 year old hardware in there. It has graphical limitations. Even the nicest looking PS2 game looks old and dated compared to most computer games (assuming you have a decent video card). To say otherwise is downright dillusional and insane. You're talking about 8 year old video cards, processors, low resolutions... I mean come on man. You're really reaching now. I know some developers can maximize the systems potential better than others, but there are still limits.
> 
> As for the best games being on PS2, that's of course subjective.



There is something to disagree about. The PS2 clearly does not have 8 year old graphics. If you think so, you are only lying to yourself. Fans would not put up with playing the exact same graphics with no improvement for 8 years. Obviously there are limitations to what it can do, which is why there is even a reason for a PS3 to come out, but those limitations have not even been reached yet. Each progressive game I see coming out on the PS2 has better graphics than half a year ago. If you think "even the nicest looking PS2 game looks old and dated compared to most computer games" proves that you don't even play PS2 games (and I play both PC and PS2 games quite a bit). If you did, you would realize that some of the best graphics are on current PS2 games. I usually beat 2-3 PS2 games a month and I'm always amazed at how breathtaking the graphics are on the newer games I buy. The fact that they could get graphics to go 20x 30x, 50x better on the same system within this period of time is just crazy. Looking at pixelated PS2 games from 2000 with unrealistics looking characters and then crystal-clear PS2 games from 2006 that looks better than some of the latest CGI films, you can't say that it's "just 8 year old technology."

If you wanna talk about old hardware technology, look at any of Nintendo's hand held systems. They had technology to make a Game Boy Advance in 1996 or earlier. Remember Sega Gamegear? That came out when gameboy continued to be in black and white with poor graphics and no back light. Gameboy DS? How can people "put up" with that 7, 8, 9, 10 year old technology? Nintendo has always been the furthest behind the times when it comes to graphics. I used to own a PSP which destroys any of Nintendo's handheld graphical systems. I will agree that a computer has the most capabilities for graphics, but oftentimes doesn't use them.

Of course best games is subjective. I will agree that Xbox 360 has more graphics capabilities than PS2 (although I've seen better looking PS2 games than a lot of the Xbox 360 games), but Xbox 360 doesn't have any games that look appealing to me. And PS3 will be coming out soon, which will be a much better system (mainly Microsoft's fault for releasing the Xbox 360 so soon, giving both Sony and Nintendo time to improve their own systems, while looking at what the competition's system is like). But, I'd rather play a PS1 than a Xbox 360 if the PS1's games were better than the Xbox 360's. I'd rather play an SNES than play a computer loaded with games that I didn't care for but had amazing graphics. Just my opinion and my personal taste, though.


----------



## zimbloth (May 15, 2006)

Dude I'm not going to argue about this anymore. PS2's graphics are not close to what PC games are putting out there. Nor should it. It's old. Have you ever played Half-Life 2 with the graphics all the way up at 1600x1200 resolution? I'm sorry but no matter what you say, no one can convince me a PS2 can do that. Also, whenever a game comes out that's available for both PS2/Xbox/GameCube, the PS2 version ALWAYS looks the worst.

I get your point that over time PS2's games have looked better and better, but it still has its limits.


----------



## Metal Ken (May 15, 2006)

zimbloth said:


> I'm sorry but no matter what you say, no one can convince me a PS2 can do that.



yeah, the reason why it (or any console -360) cant do that is cause it doesnt NEED to. There's no TV Than can display that, except the most high end HDtv's right now.


----------



## WayneCustom7 (May 15, 2006)

Here are some of the Wii's specs:


> Revolution (Wii) Final Specs
> Controls: Intuitive control for anyone using the physical motion of the main Wii Remote, which resembles a television remote control. Up to four Wii Remotes can be connected at once using wireless Bluetooth technology. The wireless signal can be detected within 10 meters of the console. Both the Wii Remote and Nunchuk controllers include a three-axis motion sensor. The Wii Remote also includes a speaker, rumble feature and expansion port, and can be used as a pointer within 5 meters of the screen. The Wii Remote has a power switch, plus pad, A, B, Minus, Home, 1 and 2 buttons. The Nunchuk controller includes an analog control stick and C and Z buttons.
> 
> The Look: Wii features a compact design that will make it a natural addition to any television setup. It can be displayed either vertically or horizontally.
> ...


----------



## zimbloth (May 17, 2006)

Metal Ken said:


> yeah, the reason why it (or any console -360) cant do that is cause it doesnt NEED to. There's no TV Than can display that, except the most high end HDtv's right now.



It's not just about resolution man. Even if it was, that still doesn't give credence to his point that somehow 8 year old PS2 technology is just as good as current PCs. That's just dillusional. I don't know why anyone even argues about this. Like PS2 all you want, but don't live in a fantasy land. I like PS2. I like NES. I like lots of systems, but I'm not going to be foolish enough to claim that the graphics aren't dated on those. PS2 graphics look nice, but still dated even compared to other old systems like GC or Xbox, nevertheless PC games like Doom 3 or Half-Life 2.


----------



## Metal Ken (May 17, 2006)

Who'se living in fantasy land? you're comparing apples and oranges, thats the point im trying to make.


----------



## zimbloth (May 17, 2006)

Metal Ken said:


> Who'se living in fantasy land? you're comparing apples and oranges, thats the point im trying to make.



I was talking to the japan guy. He said the graphics in the latest PS2 games were as good as newer PC games, I just think that's a possibility.


----------



## Naren (May 17, 2006)

zimbloth said:


> I was talking to the japan guy. He said the graphics in the latest PS2 games were as good as newer PC games, I just think that's a possibility.



Not all the games. There are some new PS2 games coming out with 2002 graphics just like there are some new PC games coming out with 1999 graphics. Not all new games are cutting edge. But, I'll actually take it further. Some of the newest PS2 games have better graphics than most PC games. And I'm not talking about resolution. I 100% agree with everything Ken has been saying. Computers will always beat console games on resolution. 

Here's an example of what I'm talking about: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzgS9Djv-wU&search=final fantasy xii

This game is not available in the US yet (I beat it about 1 and a half months ago, so I can testify for the quality of the graphics). The only PC game I can think of that can compete with it in terms of graphics is Oblivion, which destroys 99% of games graphic-wise anyway. And you will note that the above movie was poorly recorded off a television. The actual game is much more vivid and mind-blowing. But I think this movie will give you a good idea of how amazing the graphics are.

If you can tell me that the above movie is 8 year old graphics, then you are insane.


----------



## zimbloth (May 17, 2006)

Well of course there are some PC games with mediocre graphics. I'm just purely talking about the best of what a PS2 can offer compared to what the best modern PCs can offer, and in that case it's not even close. 

Also, resolution is an import aspect too of course. But it's sort of a moot point anyways, because even if PS2 could run 1600x1200, the textures and everything would have to be resampled and it would be Slowdown City with those old-ass processors in the PS2. Plus it doesn't have the same advanced lighting capabiliies as newer video cards.


----------



## Naren (May 17, 2006)

zimbloth said:


> I'm just purely talking about the best of what a PS2 can offer compared to what the best modern PCs can offer, and in that case it's not even close.



That's just your opinion. You say that it's "not even close", but show me no examples of what it's not even close to. I'm assuming this simply based on your bias against PS2, which comes from your belief that a PS2 can do nothing more than it could in 1998. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I am a PC gamer, so I'm not trying to convince you that console games are better than PC games.

I'm not going to argue anymore about this. My main point is that PS2 games are not using 8 year old graphics. 

I'll leave it at that, because I don't see you conceding to me or Ken at all.


----------



## Toshiro (May 17, 2006)

Hey Naren, how does Grandia 3 look? Being firmly a Game Arts fanboy for so long, I want this game but yet the Square logo gives me pause...


----------



## The Dark Wolf (May 17, 2006)

Toshiro said:


> Hey Naren, how does Grandia 3 look? Being firmly a Game Arts fanboy for so long, I want this game but yet the Square logo gives me pause...


Really? I have to admit, I don't know much about Square lately, but they (back in the day, at least) put out some of the best games. At least, so I thought. To me, Square makes me think = fun.


----------



## Toshiro (May 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> Really? I have to admit, I don't know much about Square lately, but they (back in the day, at least) put out some of the best games. At least, so I thought. To me, Square makes me think = fun.



FFVII's graphics gave me a week-long migraine after playing for like 4 hours.  I've always been more into Lunar and Grandia. Grandia 2 was a bit brain-annoying graphics wise though, and ironically I had the PC version.


----------



## Naren (May 17, 2006)

Toshiro said:


> Hey Naren, how does Grandia 3 look? Being firmly a Game Arts fanboy for so long, I want this game but yet the Square logo gives me pause...



Are you trying to insult me, dude? In a secretive friendly type way...?


----------



## Toshiro (May 17, 2006)

Naren said:


> Are you trying to insult me, dude? In a secretive friendly type way...?



Um, no? Just wondering........ Nothing against Square, just not a big fan. After the afore-mentioned FF7 BS I bought Saga Frontier, and that put me and my best friend into a self-imposed boycott of all things Squaresoft for years.


----------



## Naren (May 17, 2006)

Toshiro said:


> Um, no? Just wondering........ Nothing against Square, just not a big fan. After the afore-mentioned FF7 BS I bought Saga Frontier, and that put me and my best friend into a self-imposed boycott of all things Squaresoft for years.



I didn't like Saga Frontier at all, but FF7 is one of my top 5 favorite games of all time.

I personally never liked any of the Grandia games. They have Grandia III at a used game store near my house for about $10 used, but it doesn't look very interesting (although it looks more interesting than 1 and 2). If anything, I think the Square logo would mean the game's quality just went up 10x, but with a series like Grandia, getting 10x better doesn't mean it's going to be very good of a game (in my opinion).


----------



## The Dark Wolf (May 17, 2006)

Naren said:


> I didn't like Saga Frontier at all, but FF7 is one of my top 5 favorite games of all time.
> 
> I personally never liked any of the Grandia games. They have Grandia III at a used game store near my house for about $10 used, but it doesn't look very interesting (although it looks more interesting than 1 and 2). If anything, I think the Square logo would mean the game's quality just went up 10x, but with a series like Grandia, getting 10x better doesn't mean it's going to be very good of a game (in my opinion).


^ It's all opinion, but I  with this. FF7, FTW! What a terrific game.

Y'know, Toshi, my cuz (Nate's older brother, FTW record, E) got sick as a dog when I got Star Wars for my N64 (Shadows of the Empire). Something about the grpahics fucked'im up. But it never bothered me. *shrug*


----------



## Naren (May 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> Y'know, Toshi, my cuz (Nate's older brother, FTW record, E) got sick as a dog when I got Star Wars for my N64 (Shadows of the Empire). Something about the grpahics fucked'im up. But it never bothered me. *shrug*



I love that game.  Shadows of the Empire is just plain fun.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (May 17, 2006)

Naren said:


> I love that game.  Shadows of the Empire is just plain fun.


Especially after you beat it a few times, then employing the cheats n' exploits!

That game blew me away when it first came out. That and Turok. What fun those were. I actually still have SotE for my 64. I should give it a whirl one day.


----------



## Toshiro (May 17, 2006)

Naren said:


> I didn't like Saga Frontier at all, but FF7 is one of my top 5 favorite games of all time.
> 
> I personally never liked any of the Grandia games. They have Grandia III at a used game store near my house for about $10 used, but it doesn't look very interesting (although it looks more interesting than 1 and 2). If anything, I think the Square logo would mean the game's quality just went up 10x, but with a series like Grandia, getting 10x better doesn't mean it's going to be very good of a game (in my opinion).



See, that's the way I am with the FF games, I don't really like any of them. I'd rather play Lunar, even with it's early 90's graphics.


----------



## Naren (May 17, 2006)

Toshiro said:


> See, that's the way I am with the FF games, I don't really like any of them. I'd rather play Lunar, even with it's early 90's graphics.



Yeah. I never really liked Lunar. For me, I think the most important aspect to any RPG is the storyline and I think all of the Final Fantasies have great storylines (except FF8, which I thought was boring). And I thought Lunar had a somewhat mediocre story. If an RPG doesn't keep me addicted and glued to it, I usually can't say it's "very good." The majority of RPGs I've played by now I would have to rate as "mediocre." Some of them were "bad." Some were "good." Some were "horrid" and some were "amazing." This is, of course, all taste.

My favorite RPG of all time is Morrowind. Any other Morrowind fans on here?


----------



## Toshiro (May 17, 2006)

Naren said:


> Yeah. I never really liked Lunar. For me, I think the most important aspect to any RPG is the storyline and I think all of the Final Fantasies have great storylines (except FF8, which I thought was boring). And I thought Lunar had a somewhat mediocre story.
> 
> My favorite RPG of all time is Morrowind. Any other Morrowind fans on here?



Eh, I like characters. By the end of that game I cared about the toons.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (May 17, 2006)

Well, you know I'm a huge Morrowind fan. What a great game! You can play it and play it. I'm working through the Bloodmoon expansion right now, with my ultra eeeevil vampire (whom nobody seems to like  but fuck'em... he kicks serious ass), although I got a bit distracted by 'Fable - The Lost Chapters'.


----------



## Toshiro (May 17, 2006)

Hah, I have Fable installed and haven't done more than watch the intro... Guild Wars has all my time:


----------



## Naren (May 17, 2006)

Toshiro said:


> Eh, I like characters. By the end of that game I cared about the toons.



I remember a long time ago when I'd play certain games just so I could get the japanimation cut scenes and then I had the realization, "What the hell am I doing? It takes hours and hours of play to get a 1-2 minute cutscene. Why don't I just watch japanimation?" and, after that, I went on a huge binge of watching japanimation for the next few months.



The Dark Wolf said:


> Well, you know I'm a huge Morrowind fan. What a great game! You can play it and play it. I'm working through the Bloodmoon expansion right now, with my ultra eeeevil vampire (whom nobody seems to like  but fuck'em... he kicks serious ass), although I got a bit distracted by 'Fable - The Lost Chapters'.



Heh. Like I told you, I beat Morrowind, Tribunal, and Bloodmoon all within 2 weeks after I bought it. That's a game that you can play forever. I've played as vampires and as a werewolf, but it's just so much of a bother that I decided to play as my normal character who is basically immortal. I made my own invincible weaponry that makes me impossible to kill and insanely powerful. I believe my current game (that I haven't played in over 7 months) has a total of about 160 hours on it. It's like an online game that isn't online. ha ha ha. I have several billion gold worth of equipment (literally) and my stealing skill is at liked 130. My bartering is at 120. All of my skills are at 100 or better. It's crazy.


----------



## Toshiro (May 17, 2006)

Naren said:


> I remember a long time ago when I'd play certain games just so I could get the japanimation cut scenes and then I had the realization, "What the hell am I doing? It takes hours and hours of play to get a 1-2 minute cutscene. Why don't I just watch japanimation?" and, after that, I went on a huge binge of watching japanimation for the next few months.



Can't really call the cut-scenes in the SegaCD version of Lunar 1 animation.... More like stills with music...  Now Lunar 2, that game broke some ground with the full animated scenes on the SegaCD, and it had that killer epilogue too. The 2nd one is mostly where the cult following comes from, but I love the 1st one.

Somewhere I have a VHS tape with all the cut-scenes from the Ghost In The Shell PS1 game, played that game until I wore the disc out.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (May 17, 2006)

Toshiro said:


> Hah, I have Fable installed and haven't done more than watch the intro... Guild Wars has all my time:


Lol, just the opposite of me. I just could never get intoi Guild Wars. I think it's because I hate keyboard/mouse for action games. Only works for strategy for me.


----------



## zimbloth (May 17, 2006)

Naren said:


> That's just your opinion. You say that it's "not even close", but show me no examples of what it's not even close to. I'm assuming this simply based on your bias against PS2, which comes from your belief that a PS2 can do nothing more than it could in 1998. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I am a PC gamer, so I'm not trying to convince you that console games are better than PC games.
> 
> I'm not going to argue anymore about this. My main point is that PS2 games are not using 8 year old graphics.
> 
> I'll leave it at that, because I don't see you conceding to me or Ken at all.



Wow. Dude, you really refuse to even read what I say. I already acknowledged a million times the graphics have gotten better and better over the years for PS2, I merely said that its old technology with TANGIBLE LIMITATIONS. I'm sorry but when it comes to comparing a 1998 system to a 2006 PC, theres no room for ridiculous opinions. This isn't up for debatee, it can be proven and seen clearly by anyone. Jesus, its like arguing that the Sun orbits the Earth. 

Once again, we are in AGREEMENT that PS2 games have looked better and better over the years, as developers have better utilized its capabilities - BUT IT PHYSICALLY BY THE LAWS OF ALL PHYSICS AND REALITY COMPETE WITH COMPUTER SYSTEMS AND VIDEO CARDS AVAILABLE TODAY FOR THE PC. Are there PC games that don't look great? Of course. But when you're comparing the best vs the best - it is CLEARLY inferior. This isn't like a debate about tone. Once again, video cards and graphics can be measured empirically, this isn't just my opinion.

PS: Sega CD rules.


----------

