Site Search
User login
Bill's 2010 Holiday Buying Guide - Console Edition
Since other media outlets have had to fulfill their apparent obligation this holiday season like every holiday season to recommend what to buy and why, I thought I would join in on the fun, with the big difference with my guide being that I actually own and use all of the systems in question, so I'm not just talking out of a hypothetical butt like some others do. Allegedly. Now here's a bad cell phone photo of my three consoles as evidence (you're welcome in advance for the bikini snow angel):
I'll talk about the systems in order of their initial release. Don't agree with any of this? Take it to the comments!
Xbox 360
For those where online gaming and interactions are important, the Xbox 360 is hard to beat, though its base cost is not as competitive as it should be compared to what you get standard on the PS3.
Pros:
Cons:
PlayStation 3
Besides offering a nice combination of much of what the Wii and 360 offers, it's hard to ignore the fact that the PS3 also makes a great Blu-ray player. As a pure games machine, though, it's not quite at the level of the Xbox 360, particularly in the area of online support.
Pros:
Cons:
Nintendo Wii
I'd say the Wii offers the most distinct alternative for those who are primarily high-end PC gamers. It's also a good choice for those with old TV's or who want a companion system for an Xbox 360 or PS3. While the PS3 and, particularly the Xbox 360, offer a nice selection of classic games, Nintendo has the only offering with a large selection of classic Nintendo platforms and titles.
Pros:
Cons:
Bottom line, it's about the games, stupid. So if you take a look at each system's combination of boxed games and downloadable offerings and determine that that's the system for you, then hey, that is in the fact the system for you. If it's close, maybe some of the extra features might be the deciding factor, the total cost to get all of the features you're after, or perhaps what most of your friends have. In short, there's no right answer for everyone and it's hard to go wrong with any of the three if you go into the purchase aware of the limitations.
Happy holidays and good luck shopping!
Comments
The fourth console:
"None"
Pros: Save all your money and still play a ton of awesome independent and PC games!
Cons: Can't access crappy, overpriced, un-supported lowest-common-denominator software
With that said, I have a Wii, but only for running old-school emulators on - it has never run a single actual Wii game, I'm proud to say.
Please, Keith, don't even get me started on the PC as a gaming platform. It's certainly an option, but it's certainly not cheap and certainly not a picnic trying to keep up with running all the latest games or making sure everything is stable. I'm back into PC gaming and enjoying it, but the console experience is still far, far superior to me for a lot of reasons.
When I moved a few years back I boxed up my PS3, Wii and Xbox360. I still haven't unboxed them yet. The only games which really interest me are the "marketplace" games and since those games are tied to the unit (which can break) and/or the actual service (which could be discontinued or made obsolete) I can't really even get into those.. I have a heavy aversion to service based DRM (Only use still to pick up sub $5 goodies on steam.. because I really just consider them rentals)
So, I have all three current systems but the only ones I actually have hooked up are the PS2, Dreamcast and the original Xbox (for emulation).
My primary platform of choice is the PC.. and even there I have a quad core with 2 graphics cards in SLI, 4 gigs of memory that I hardly ever use.. 98% of the time I use this old Athlon XP 2800+ with 2gigs mem and a nVidia 6800 graphics card.. and I don't even begin to max it out.. but that's really because the games I play are twitch action low spec games.. or old school RPG's.
One nice thing about most PC games is that you can turn off the bells and whistles to optimize performance. I suppose everyone would like to go "ultra" or "high" in their graphics settings, but I don't mind knocking this down to improve my frame rates. Of course, this can result in a muddy look on very old systems.
While it's possible to get by on the cheap with PC gaming, there's no doubt that you'll spend a lot more upfront. But if you're willing to pirate games or stick to indie/budget software, you will save thousands in the long run and get better performance to boot. Even if you choose to buy top-tier games, you'll still save (usually $10-$20 per title or more) since the publishers don't have to pay fees to the console makers. Plus, you'll get access to PC exclusives like Star Craft II and pretty much all the adventure/RTS games. On top of all that, a gaming rig is powerful enough to run most any app at high speed, so you can do some graphics, audio, or video work on the side.
Consoles are the "Joe Gamer" solution. Cheaper than buying a PC upfront, but you'll make up for that when you start spending a few hundred bucks each trip to the game store (let's not forget that consoles make most of their money on the licensing fees, not the hardware itself--sometimes they even sell it a loss!). Furthermore, all the emphasis on online and connectivity these days also reduces the fool proofing. On the other hand, it's getting easier to mod systems for pirating games as well as rent/gamefly type services, so you might make out anyway.
In any case, now seems like a bad time to jump into this generation. Once the new systems come out, this current crop will be dumped into bargain bins and treated like second-class citizens. They are also quite long in the tooth compared to a modern PC. Nevertheless, the prices are still high. I wouldn't do it.
I can't say I really agree. To me, consoles are where it's at if you want the latest and greatest games, and still after all these years rival what a high end PC can offer you. Just take games like Halo Reach or Gran Turismo 5 as just two recent examples of the technical prowess of consoles. There's also more innovation going on in consoles, particularly in terms of motion gaming. So yeah, consoles remain the place to be.
With that said, I never intended this partially tongue in cheek shopping guide to the three consoles to bring out the PC fanboys. We know what you guys prefer and I'm fine with that. However bringing up PC stuff in a console discussion is the equivalent of mentioning Linux when someone talks about Windows. Sure, you may love Linux, but the topic is about Windows. We don't need another console versus PC discussion because everyone has already picked what side they want to be on around here. As I've always said, if you're stuck with only one platform then the PC would be it because it does a little bit of everything well. If you want to play the hottest games hassle free than a console is probably a better choice. And no, it has nothing to do with piracy which is a risky proposition on both 360 and PS3 if you ever intend to do anything online. The Wii is a bit easier to get away with that nonsense, but it's so far removed from PC, 360 and PS3 gaming that it's a separate discussion anyway.
Well, as you know, I went with the Wii precisely because it was the console I felt was the most distinctive from my PC experience. The 360 just seems too much like what I can already play on the PC, though of course now that has changed with Kinect. As for the PS3, the only thing that interests me is the fact that it's also a blu-ray player. I don't like the bulk of the games for that system, and they are missing the unique Nintendo franchises. It really seems like the worst proposition to me.
If I didn't have a PC, though, I would definitely choose the 360. Almost all of my gaming friends have them, and love playing all the Halo and Gears of War games on them.
However, I feel comfortable waiting until the next generation, when I can hopefully scoop up a 360 for $20 or so like I did with the original Xbox and the PS2. :)
However, I feel comfortable waiting until the next generation, when I can hopefully scoop up a 360 for $20 or so like I did with the original Xbox and the PS2. :)
To me, picking these systems up AFTER their effective commercial lives is missing out on some of the fun. These consoles are at their greatest when they're on top and everyone is playing them.
Anyway, my prediction is that we won't see the next generation of consoles from the big three until AT THE EARLIEST holiday 2012, and Nintendo has to be the first out of the gate. I could then see the new systems from Microsoft and Sony hitting some six to eight months after that. We have the very real prospect of this being an incredibly long console generation and certainly the longest we've had in a few decades. I welcome long generations simply because it gives developers more time to learn the hardware and more time to wow us with mature software. The 360 and PS3 are more than capable to see us through 2013, which at least in the 360's case, would give it an active lifespan of 8 years.
Bill, could you and I be at opposite ends of the spectrum any more? I guess that's a boon to Armchair Arcade.
"To me, picking these systems up AFTER their effective commercial lives is missing out on some of the fun. These consoles are at their greatest when they're on top and everyone is playing them."
How does that make a game better if "everyone is playing it" or not? I can see like, a multiplayer game being easier to play, or an MMO, but *better*? I used to work at Gamestop and much to the chagrin of management I would always tell customers: "Games don't get worse; they only get cheaper." I believe this is true. Madden '93 is just as good today as it was in 1993. How could it not be? It is 100% exactly the same game as it was then.
Support is a factor, yes, Keith. You are still guaranteed access to all the online add-ons, upgrades, etc., and yes, multiplayer with actual people to play against when the system is still current. Now more than ever with the consoles being connected like they are, you'll probably miss out on 25% of the overall experience by getting one after it's off the market. So I stand by my statement that you'll be missing out on some of the fun.
ther is just one problem iwth ONLINE console games. The people who play um. I hae my 360, Ps3, Wii, and PC. I havwe put many hours online in on each (err no, not the Wii). While all contain A$$hats, the consoles contain 10X more than the PC, at least in my playtime. I have yet to play a game of HALO without hearing some racial, or foul assualt on somebody. I play MAG a bit on PS3 (probebly my favorite Online FPS on consoles), its a littel easier on the ears, mainly becuase hardly anybody uses mics. If i had any kids playing online games, with my time online, I wouldnt let tehm play online at all on consoles.
But if i was buying for kids it would simpley be a Wii, for an adult it would be a PS3 (better selection of RPG's and none FPS), and for a teenager it would be a 360. Knowing what I do know, I would have skipped the Wii, then decide between the 360 and Ps3. Right now I have more games I truelly loved on the PS3 than the 360, but I have WAY more games on the 360... The great games I have played on either system.
PS3: valkyria chronicles, Demons Souls ( Still stand that this is the BEST CONSOLE game in ages), Folklore, Heavy Rain, Littel Big Planet (even Im suprised at hoe much I played this), Metal Gear, WHite Knight, Warhawk, And BOTH Uncharteds (no better adventure games IMHO).
360: Earth Defence Force (sadly I love this game!), and Bullet Witch (but that was on both systrems). Not a fan of Sticky cover game GoW, or Halo..
But I prefer the PS3 controler.. so I'm biased again.. I also wouldnt have bought mY MOVE or Kinect (of course that may change with more games, but so far the girls next door are the only ones getting any play out of those).
Im just far to PC... If i was to pick purely for somebody who knows nothing about games.. I may go 360... its $100 cheaper.
I think Bill has a much more level headed guide ... I'm far to biased.