Cowboyofdeath wrote:
Bogrollbloke wrote:
Cowboyofdeath wrote:
Why not Wii?
Excessively stupid name, kiddy games (Mario is old), to play on it you'l need to flail your amrs around like an idiot (the Wiimote is a joke for first person shooters. It's heck trying to use them to aim)
You are allowed to buy yourself a new remote that doesn't have the motion sensor in.
You can't discriminate against something when you have the option to change it, that's just stupid.
Also look at the new Wii game line up. Farcry for example, a launch title FPS which looks pretty amazing.
Sorry, but you're just wrong in your descision if those are your reasons.Sorry. What i meant to say was that the Wii's processor is 75% slower than the Xbox 360's and at least 150% slower than the PS3's

Eat that
I bet you can't tell me what a processor is until you look it up.
All these stats being thrown around, it doesn't matter. The ps2 was the least powerful out of the three yet was the biggest seller, sony can throw around there stats all they like.
The ps3 is a gamble, blu-ray could very well flop, that pretty much means the ps3 flops to.
The ps3 is also the most expensive console out of the three to develope games for, that again will put off people making games for them - because they cost a fortune now adays and if they flop, it can be big trouble for the company. The 360 is the second most expensive and the wii, has been designed to be cheap yet fun, for both developer and consumer.
Tbh, i do not know of a single child that has parents willing to shell out 600 dollars on a console and anyone that does has more money than brains - i mean that with no offence but that is a HUGE amount of money on something a child does not need, my parents would NEVER spend that amount on me, it's clearly spoiling a child.
Either way..all three consoles are going to do well.