Why do you buy Nintendo and not Playstation?

Originally Posted by e_alert

Nintendo has better games. And even if it didn't, PlayStation and Xbox are just too damned expensive.


Metroid isn't first-party.

False. Retro Stuidos is wholly owned by Nintendo. Retro Stuios is Nintendo. They're not the same Nintendo that brings us Mario and Zelda, but they're still Nintendo. Intelligent Systems is a division of Nintendo responsible for the 2D games. I believe Intelligent Systems used to be called R&D1 or something. I'm sure most people don't realize this, but the people who bring you Mario and Zelda are not the same people who bring you Metroid--Miyamoto did not create Metroid--even though, due to his managerial role, he probably oversees its production these days.

Even Metroid Hunters is a first party game. It's made by NST (a fairly weak American based division of Nintendo--Wave Race, 1080 Snowboarding, God knows what else).

I don't have enough money for the new XBOX or PS3, and I'm not really interested in most of their games anyway, especially the turn-based ones. I'm more into Zelda than anything else. But mostly it all comes down to money. And loading times.

I buy Nintendo because im my opinion it is just the best Gaming Comapny out thier. Ps2 and Xbox are entertainment systems and that doesnt appeal to me. If your Ps2 or Xbox breaks down (Ps2's have the highest break down rate of the three) Then not only have you lost your games, but your DVD player and possibly your CD player. I've been Nintendo since i was 4 and they have always known what the public wanted. Its a general fact that Nintendo is loved by the gaming nation known as Japan.

In January this year, 21.000 GameCubes were sold, while only 17,000 Xbox 360's were... Thats a console thats 3 years old (I think) beating one thats brand new, and considering alot of people consider Nintendo Games to be "Kiddy" or "Crap because thier not all about blowing everything up in sight" or because you cant "Nick a Car, Kill someone and pick up a prostitue" Appartnyl Nintendo is bad?? Why?? Oh So Nintendos bad because you can't splash blood all over your screen?? Nintendo has done plenty in that area.

Im not saying Games like GTA are bad and Ps2's are excellent for Sports games, Not argument thier, But Nintendo is my History, and i stick with Nintendo because in 15 years they havn't let me down once, So i've got no reason to go looking for something else.

Originally Posted by Mr. Wonderful

All other arguements are a bit of a folly.

I wasn't arguing. This thread is asking "why" and I was explaining why I chose Nintendo, not doing comparisons and trying to force other people to agree with me.

Besides, I grew up with Nintendo and it's the truth. I don't see any reason why I should change to another console (that's how I have felt for the last several years), although lately, I've beginning to want to switch to something like PS3 for a wider selection of games. But like you said on the other thread, I should just want for all three systems to come out fully and test them to see which one is better for me.

I buy Nintendo for its trademark first-party series, and Sony for its Square-Enix games.

I think I like Nintendo because they've always seemed to know who they were, artistically anywho. Microsoft has only just begun to embrace their gamers' niche (they're still the newbie), and Sony seems to be in a panic with a huge identity crisis.

Oddly enough, from talking to a few Xbox guys in person, it seems that Microsoft actually holds Nintendo in very high regard. This explains quite a bit about the Xbox 360 if you think about it. The connection wasn't lost on my fiance either as we played Kameo. I think it's pretty obvious what is inspiring Microsoft right now, and frankly, I can only think that's a good thing, especially after they told me that they prefer the competition remain around, mostly for the sake of art. (Yes, games are art.)

What about Sony you ask? What does Microsoft think of Sony? Sony confuses them. They don't know what Sony's deal is. If you ask me, Sony doesn't know what Sony's deal is either. They're so worried about beating Microsoft in the hardware arena, that they seem to have forgotten what the console is for. *cough*games*cough*

They used to have exclusive "flagship" titles a plenty, almost all 3rd party. I had a playstation back in the day, mostly for playing Silent Hill, Spyro, and other games that, at the time, were Playstation exclusive.

There are very few games that are Playstation exclusive that I'd actually want to play these days. They can be counted on the fingers of my hand. (.hack and Kingdom Hearts) Konami, Square, all sorts of companies seem to have given up the whole exclusivity deal in favor of putting out more copies of their games. Now, Lara's on Xbox, Spyro's on everything, Silent Hill is on Xbox, PC, and even Gameboy color, Xbox has some amazing RPG titles (KOTOR anyone?), and we even have Mario DDR.

Meanwhile, Microsoft, seeming to see Nintendo's point of view, gathers for themselves companies such as Bungie and Rare and obtains a cast of characters of their own, giving their company some heart in a world where companies are viewed as having none. Will we see Super Smash Conker? Maybe not. But I think we can see from the priorities of the companies who's good, and who's better.

Sony still relies almost completely on 3rd Party support. (Everquest doesn't count.)

I honestly think Sony will not win the console war. May take a decade or two. It's a simple case of putting all your eggs in the same basket.

Well I got both but my ps1 and ps2 broke. Then I got a gamecube and I also have an Xbox

Originally Posted by Maldrea theZora

And loading times.

How many times do I have to say this? Niether the PS2 or Xbox has any loading times. It is the exact same as the Gamecube.

Originally Posted by Mr. Wonderful

How many times do I have to say this? Niether the PS2 or Xbox has any loading times. It is the exact same as the Gamecube.

You're kidding right >_<;

GTA 3 has tons of pesky loading times... and I've played a few others that have those annoying loaing screans with the stupid bar... but the cube has a few of those too...

Originally Posted by Mr. Wonderful

How many times do I have to say this? Niether the PS2 or Xbox has any loading times. It is the exact same as the Gamecube.

I disagree. A friend and I have tested this. We each had versions of Bond: Agent Under Fire. We played it on Xbox and Gamecube. Xbox had slightly improved graphics. The coloring was brighter. Colors blended together more in the Gamecube version, which was pretty sad. However, the Gamecube loaded much, much faster. We felt that this could be due to all of the saves on the guy's hardrive, but regardless, Gamecube loaded faster. Combine that with the fact that greatly reducing loading times is a huge priority for Nintendo, and since you usually buy first party software when you own a Nintendo system, loading is generally much shorter. You're not going to have GTA-esque loading times when you play Nintendo software. Just look at games like Wind Waker and Metroid Prime. I've seen some ridiculous loading times on non-Nintendo systems (GTA and Morrowind come to mind).

Originally Posted by Shiek 84

I disagree. A friend and I have tested this. We each had versions of Bond: Agent Under Fire. We played it on Xbox and Gamecube. Xbox had slightly improved graphics. The coloring was brighter. Colors blended together more in the Gamecube version, which was pretty sad. However, the Gamecube loaded much, much faster. We felt that this could be due to all of the saves on the guy's hardrive, but regardless, Gamecube loaded faster. Combine that with the fact that greatly reducing loading times is a huge priority for Nintendo, and since you usually buy first party software when you own a Nintendo system, loading is generally much shorter. You're not going to have GTA-esque loading times when you play Nintendo software. Just look at games like Wind Waker and Metroid Prime. I've seen some ridiculous loading times on non-Nintendo systems (GTA and Morrowind come to mind).

It's no different though. The GCN uses a different type of media, and just as there are some PS2 and Xbox games with loading times (I have never played any), there are plenty of GCN games with pesky loading times.

Originally Posted by bellingham

PS2 is just too popular

it isnt that its popular, it is that theres too many people interested with shooters,racers and sports which ps2 and xbox have the best of..

In January this year, 21.000 GameCubes were sold, while only 17,000 Xbox 360's were... Thats a console thats 3 years old (I think) beating one thats brand new, and considering alot of people consider Nintendo Games to be "Kiddy" or "Crap because thier not all about blowing everything up in sight" or because you cant "Nick a Car, Kill someone and pick up a prostitue" Appartnyl Nintendo is bad?? Why?? Oh So Nintendos bad because you can't splash blood all over your screen?? Nintendo has done plenty in that area.

stop bringing this up and it was in japan which you forgot to mention, and we all know japan sells playstationg and microsoft products cheap because they are unpopular and they mainly are interested in nintendo..

Originally Posted by Shiek 84

I disagree. A friend and I have tested this. We each had versions of Bond: Agent Under Fire. We played it on Xbox and Gamecube. Xbox had slightly improved graphics. The coloring was brighter. Colors blended together more in the Gamecube version, which was pretty sad. However, the Gamecube loaded much, much faster. We felt that this could be due to all of the saves on the guy's hardrive, but regardless, Gamecube loaded faster.

Higher texture resolutions mean increased load times. Whether the tradeoff is worthwhile is subject to opinion.

Originally Posted by Shiek 84

Combine that with the fact that greatly reducing loading times is a huge priority for Nintendo, and since you usually buy first party software when you own a Nintendo system, loading is generally much shorter.

This is false: If Nintendo had truly cared about load times they'd have opted for a larger disc format. Instead they opted for vanity. There's no other excuse for their choice in the design of GODs.

To elaborate, pound for pound the Xbox and Gamecube manage roughly the same data density and drive speeds. Total read bandwidth for both is capped by the rotation rate times the amount of data over a given stretch of track. This means substantially higher read speeds further away from center, and is partly why Xbox discs are burned from the edge, rather than the center. So holding to the promise of low load times meant forcing the requirement down as TRCs to developers at the cost of quality. It's also a likely culprit for the Revolution's lack of HD support as it puts a discrete cap on output.

Mind you, Nintendo's never evangelized on the issue of load times so much as their fans and haters, both of which doing a good job of spreading urban legends on their own.

Loading times, or lack thereof, depend almost completely on the game and the way it was designed. That is that.

To elaborate, pound for pound the Xbox and Gamecube manage roughly the same data density and drive speeds. Total read bandwidth for both is capped by the rotation rate times the amount of data over a given stretch of track. This means substantially higher read speeds further away from center, and is partly why Xbox discs are burned from the edge, rather than the center. So holding to the promise of low load times meant forcing the requirement down as TRCs to developers at the cost of quality. It's also a likely culprit for the Revolution's lack of HD support as it puts a discrete cap on output.

Mind you, Nintendo's never evangelized on the issue of load times so much as their fans and haters, both of which doing a good job of spreading urban legends on their own.

I don't understand much of that. What I do know is that it is very rare that I put a Nintendo published game into my Gamecube and sit and wait for a little bar to fill up. Metroid Prime, Super Smash Bros, and Wind Waker are all examples of relatively expansive games that more than hold their own graphically, yet boast almost non-existant load times.