Wasn't it "all about the games", anyway? Isn't that why both Xbox and GameCube are struggling for second place?

Clearly both systems are alot more capable than PS2 (if not just for easier programming), yet, the mainstream populace seems to think "power" isn't a big issue at all. Once again, SCEA rules with an iron fist, and dated hardware. How novel.;)

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

Well, Shadow... it's not all about the Games, it's about timing, pricing, hardware features, and games equally. If you really want to debate with me on this one let me know.

I didn't make myself clear...and people are just too picky on message boards :nono:

In arguements amongst 'fanboys', graphics seems to be the biggest weapon. What I meant is that people will have nothing to argue over next gen other than GAME QUALITY. I'm sure people will find another way to bitch at eachother, but meh

There is no debate. Gamers don't buy games because of hardware features, or timing. Pricing isn't even as important considering most will buy a high-quality game for $45 than a crappy one for $15.

I bought my Xbox for Halo, the promise of XboxLive, and Malice, truthfully. All of which are related to games themselves (more or less the XboxLive title I want is Halo 2, and maybe CVS2, but eh). I didn't buy my Xbox just to buy a seperate remote to play DVD's, and I didn't even buy my PS2 for that. While the DVD features are great (even on the Panasonic Q), media playback is really a SECONDARY function of a console, and will always be that way.

Hell, I bought a GCN for damn-good Nintendo games, and KI3 (which I'll now have to get on Xbox if it resurfaces). True, all three consoles have their own advantages over one another hardwarewise, but think about it- PS2 having a very rough ISA isn't going to stop me from playing Metal Gear Solid 2, or GTA VC. GCN having smaller disc capacity isn't gonna stop me from playing thru Resident Evil 4. And Xbox's weaker texture layering damn-sure isn't gonna stop me from buying Halo 2 or Perfect Dark 2/0.

I dunno how you see it, but that's how I see it- and it's been that way since the beginning of the industry itself. If not, people would've never gotten pre-32 bit consoles, and just spent all their quarters on [insert more advanced arcade machine here].

And that's all I've got to say on that subject.

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

Yes there is, there is very much a debate :)

And, your lil $15 vs $45 thing is't valid because I'm talking about what ships consoles, now what ships games. As far as price-effectiveness goes, i's a HUGE factor in if you would buy a console or not. If Xbox didn't have a built in HD, costed $100 more, and had a $50 memory card, you are saying the game quality of Halo would still make you go out and buy one?

Tell that to consumers in Japan when Ps2 launched... The DVD player has value, and gives both systems an edge over GCN. If you live in a house without a DVD player, and you have no money (in other words, your parents buy al the games) , the system your parents will most easily buy into is the Ps2. For your parents the DVD player maybe the primary function,for you the games may have been, but either way you look at itthe DVD player is a factor in the systems value, and a reason to buy one.

It all depends on the person...

Of course the hardware isn't going to effect you or change your mind when buying a new game... A good game is a good game, period. But, like I said before, timing, priceing, and hardware value DOES effect if you are going to buy a system or Not.

Timing: The most obvious... if DC was released fall of 2001, it the exact same shape it was fall of 99, with the same $200 price tag, you wouldn't buy it... because the hardware is serverely outdated, not because the games are weak. If you would buy it, you must be smokin somthing.

Hardware Value and Priceing: it makes a difference... right now, $$$ for $$$ the most valuable system is winning. You have a Psx ($50) DVD Player ($100)... then that leaves what price for the Ps2 game player? While on the other end you have GCN $150... all games. Then Xbox... $230 for a DVD player and the system.

but the question is... are we argueing about how you personally chose your console, or how america is buying.

Personally, I'm like you, games first, then hardware... but that ain't how the plublic choses. The only people who really matter here are the peeps who buy one, and ONLY one console... what makes them chose that certain one over the others? Well, what advantages does Ps2 have? That the's only explanation.

im sorry to say but to me it is all about the games i dont really care about any off the other extras the system has

In a word, YES. As a matter of fact, I've spent more than that on a console and one game (3DO and SSFII Turbo-$499, Neo Geo Silver and Magician Lord, $649, Sega Saturn and Shinobi, $449). What good is an HD if I don't NEED it to play games (only to save some, barring Blinx)? Your point is no more valid than mine.Since you brought in the Japan equation, every last one of those people looking for the better experience could've also gotten a Panasonic Q with better DVD playback/options than both Xbox and PS2. If this was still the case, the "better hardware features" would've made the Q an easy favorite in Japan, and it might have even come stateside. Instead, both the Q and Xbox are suffering in sales there- hardly an advantage.

True, alot of people bought a PS2 as a DVD player, at first, mainly because the launch was so lackluster (c'mon, THREE games?). Also, like you and I knew, many folks got that PS2 because they knew there would soon be a plethera of titles for it just as its precursor the PSX. Nice point you're making, but the fact of the matter is only people in Japan would have this issue then (many people in the US and elsewhere have had DVD players since 2000). Even now there are more affordable DVD players in japan for less than $99, and if this was an issue, a GameCube and a real DVD player is just as cheap as a PS2 or Xbox, and was even cheaper before the system pricecuts this year.Yes it does, but you are going against this very ideal by saying price has more to do with things, when it's really totally random as a factor.

Get this- not everyone buys a console as a DVD player, but everyone buys a console for games.;)I never said those wouldn't affect whether someone would purchase a console or not- I said it wasn't what it was all about, which it isn't; those only play a small role, whereas the games themselves hoist the majority of the decision.Actually I'd buy it, and I wouldn't be alone. Why? What was before DC? N64? PSX? Dreamcast was a great leap over those two, and was well worth the money for the expansive list of games (and hacks) developed for it.

Even compared to the PS2, the graphics are very crisp, and the DC even has a cleaner antialiasing scheme...

BTW, GCN and Xbox aren't exactly new technology, either- both consoles have parts in them dating back as far as 1999.Once again, I never said it didn't make a difference, I said it wasn't all about pricing.

If you could get an Xbox the way it is now, for 100 bucks, would you get one? Hell yes. But what if the Xbox, at that price, had not a single game that interested you in the least? Would you buy an Xbox for 130 just to use it as a DVD player?It's whether or not a console is all about the games- you are way off track here.I'll just close with this: PS2 has games. Lots of games, and a head start with a few very good games. Guess what, Game, that's THE MAIN REASON why they bought their consoles, end of story.

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

Yea but it's sad to say the market is not made up of only Gamers like you! Many people did buy the Xbox cuss it has more power now that may not be right but they did it and they are still doing it. If power really was nothing no one would have got a PS2 over the Dreamcast (lets face it Dreamcast had far better games then PS2).

Power = Hype = Sales.

Then why is PS2 still outselling Xbox by a huge difference?

Umm cuss they have more hype by a long way! and always have. who plays the most add on TV oh look it Sony by a long (look at your TV play list for last year). Who has more units out there Oh look it's Sony more unit sold = more hype. You don't seem to under stand what 10 years in film has done for sony! It has made them the master of all that is hype and not even Microsoft comes close.

Ask almost any one on the street what come into there head when you say Games console and they will almost all say PSone ,PS2 or Sony! and that comes from hype, Alot of people got a PS2 just cuss they had a PSone again thats hype they did not know if the PS2 was any good they just got one (I know I got one just cuss of the hype). hype hype hype hpye hype it can make almost any thing sell.

heh heh

I purchased a Sega saturn too... that's the last time I spend that much on a console.

As for Panisonic Q... do you remember me saying a little thing called timing?

Err, timing yet again.... Timing and price are equal factors... in 2012 if sombody released a console with DVD playback on it, it wouldn't effect sales half as much as it did Ps2 at launch... Why? Ps2 was released at a time where DVDs were blowing up.

No, not true... I have plently of little cousins who have Ps2s... why? Well they want the games. But who bought the system? Not them... thier parents did. Why? The DVD player.

Now, that kills your point alone... like I said before, for some the DVD player is the main fuction of the system, AND the reason why they purchased one.

And people wonder why Nintendo is losing thier main market :rolleyes:

Kids don't buy consoles, parents do, if Nintendo were to make games to appeal to kids, why not make the console appeal to the parents as much as Ps2?

There are many people in the world who flopped out $200-$300 to please thier kids AND buy a DVD player. Not EVERY person in the world buys a system with the intent of playing games... well, not anymore.

I said if it were released fall 2001, along side GCN and Xbox, priced at $200, and with the same launch games it had in 1999.... you would buy it? You need a drug test.

:lol:

yeah yeah, the fact is Madden 2001 looked better than any DC game EVER released... and it was technically superior to any DC game ever released... and it was a launch title.

I'm not trying to hear all that BS about AA, the fact is Ps2 games looked and animated better, period.

If the games look better, the games look better, period. That's the only judge of power. I could care less about on paper, it's all about on screen.

Invalid...

here's the quote from me again:

"it's about timing, pricing, hardware features, and games equally"

The poin't I'm trying to make is that if any one of those four categories is insanely off track, people won't buy the console. Name a console that has failed and it was leading any generation in all four of these categories.

Hell, the n00b Xbox is passing up GCN because GCN is more of track in these four ways than Xbox.

no, it isn't... :)

1) Timing: Ps2 came out a year before competition, and DC completly dropped out of the race by the 5th month of Ps2's life. You may not believe it, but there were people in the world who purchased a Ps2 instead of waiting because they couldn't wait. If GCN and Xbox were out earlier in Ps2's life, they could have stolen more initial sales than they are stealing now.

2) Hardware features: Ps2, out the origanal box, simply has more features than GCN and Xbox. DVD Player and PsOne... and if I go any further I get into:

3) Pricing: On Ps2 you don't have to buy the new accessories... and Ps2... and hell, Sony can chose what they want Xbox and GCN to be priced at. Because of the head start... which gets back into timing. Also, for that period, the cheapest next-gen system that you could get that was consoderd "alive" was $300, so it had a great price advantage over the competition ;)

4) Games: Ps2 basically stayed good enough to be purchased for it's first year, with games like Tekken, Madden, GT3, etc... then when competition came, Sony stepped up it's game. :)

To sum it up, Sony's timing gave Sony the lead in sales... Sony's timing also gave SOny more freedom with Pricing because they could sell the system for less and still make a profit While competition. Sony also threw in a DVD player, to make thier system valuable even IF the games were weak. But the games weren't weak, and they only got better and better... so in the end, Sony steals the most sales.

It's not all about games, but games are a key factor. I know people who even purchased a DC because of timing. Like myself and DsH... neither of us feel that DC's lineup was all that great, but what else was there to buy?

Games=big factor, but not the only factor...

1. If a System had no good games for it you wouldn't buy it
2. If a system was priced at $2000 you wouldn't buy it
3. If a system is released at the wrong time, you wouldn't buy it
4. If a system had weak hardware features... (let's say, no memory cards or hard drive, on a CD so you couldn't save the games) you wouldn't buy it...

Let's say a mix of any two of these things would completly turn you off, if there is a mix of two things that wouldn't turn you off, like I said, you must be on crack.

Yep, I agree, if all your friends buy it, there is a better chance of you buying it. Sales are like free advertizing.

Now the question Stu should ask is... why is Xbox outselling GCN in Europe and America. :)

I was going to actually respond to all that crap above, but I realized you were agreeing with what I said in the first place...Games are the MAIN factor, period.TrueFalse; insert PC/Mac here; Phillips/Magnovox CdiFalse; insert 32X/Saturn/Jaguar CD/Neo Geo CD/Xeye/TG-16 hereNot neccessarily...think NES; saving isn't always pertinent- hell, I often go thru GCN games and erase them all and try to play thru without saving; same with PS2. Of course not with Xbox though...;)They may, or they may not- keep in mind this ISN'T EVERYONE, which you were trying to claim at first.

And about your point regarding PS2's DVD, do you assume that EVERYONE bought a PS2 just as a DVD player? Your point is moot- you say the kids WANTED the PS2 for the games, thus the parents now know about it, and bought it instead as a DVD player. Would the PS2 even be known to their parents if the kids didn't want the games? I'm very sure these same parents didn't look at early 1999 demos of Tekken Tag tourney FMV's and drool about how nice a DVD player it would be- hell, that wasn't even announced until well after the initial specs were released in 2000.

Either way, games are the main factor, whether you want to admit it again or not.And on that same token, why isn't it selling at all in Japan, especially with the DVD feature, and why is it barely outselling GCN in US/UK even though TWO free games came with the system, selling some 2+ million units alone last year, against a system with no free game until recently?

Judging by your "timing", "hardware features", and "pricing" hypothesis, Xbox should be tearing the floor up with GameCube, which is hardly the case. ;)

And I reiterate:

Games are the MAIN factor of buying a console, and systems existence to boot.

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

Would you disagree with this?:

"One of the reasons why PS2 is selling so much better than its competition is because most gamers would say that it has the superior game quality."

Also, you make it sound as if just ANYONE could create hype. Positive hype, at least :p. Let me give you an example. Two companies advertise a similar product on TV. One, by nature, will produce more hype than the other. There's a reason for that. Maybe it's because one company had the better advertising campaign. Maybe it's because one company was known for its quality in the past. Maybe it's because people heard good things about the one product, and the commercial peaked their interest. Whatever the case may be, it all boils down to what each company did. If people look at PS2 commercials and say "wow, I gotta have one of those" then Sony has done a terrific job in advertising.

But then, my friend, you must know that hype can only take a product so far. It can give it the kick in the pants it needs to get rolling (PS2 launch, anyone?) but sooner or later the hype dies down if the product is crap. Let's face it...if a company tried to sell small boxes @ $50 per box, they won't be successful. They could have the best advertising campaign in the world, but they won't sell 50 million of them.

In the end, quality reigns supreme...people can think for themselves and form respectable opinions. Nobody's forcing them to buy anything.

You said it was ALL about the games...All = 100%...Everything...you can't change your stance and still take credit for what you previously were arguing about.

It looks like you're agreeing with Justin's 'Games are the biggest factor, but not the only factor' statement. Could one assume that in turn, Justin won the arguement?

If you're going to say 'I didn't mean that (All about the games) entirely literally' then I would understand...because points are made to be exaggerated.

When I said next gen would be 'all about the games' I didn't mean that in a sense of console sales...I meant that it would be the only thing fanboys would be able to argue over (and I could/probably will be wrong)