[IGN Awards] Best Console of 2006


Recommended Posts

I don't personally think the wiimote is any more innovative than other past Nintendo offerings, like the PowerGlove or the gun used in Duck Hunt way back in the original NES days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw, this is 2006 awards, so it's a Wii VS PS3... the 360 is not here since it was released in 2005.

@The Teej, your argument is worthless. this don't says who is better anyway and if I fellow your way to see stuf, the X360 owned anyone by being released 1 year before. Making no match for Wii or PS3...

The 360 was avable in 2006 :pinch: They could say n64 wins thier years award if they want :rolleyes:

I don't personally think the wiimote is any more innovative than other past Nintendo offerings, like the PowerGlove or the gun used in Duck Hunt way back in the original NES days.

Umm.... not even close =x.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigh, I always hate these types of threads, as they destabilize into fanboys bashing fanboys.

The truth of the matter is, there are Sony haters. There are Nintendo haters. And there are Microsoft haters. But as a "gamer" and a hardware enthusiast (for the PC though, but eh) I can't help but be excited for all three consoles.

Nitnendo Wii - Certainly not the most powerful system out there. I mean, come ON it is nothing more than an overclocked Gamecube. Seriously. It will never stand toe to toe with the 360 or PS3 on graphics. And, frankly I don't think the Wii-mote is all that "inventive" either, especially if companies making games for it don't take advantage of it. I just think Nintendo knows how to make games, Mario, Zelda etc are all classics and continue to please fans. So that is Nintendo's main strength. Now, if 3rd party publishers can put out high quality games that take advantage of the Wii-mote then sure, Nintendo may have a leg to stand on.

Xbox 360 - Has the decided advantage right now, with a years head start on the other two consoles. With killer games like Gears of War, Rainbow Six Vegas, Call of Duty 3, Viva Pinata etc etc. Obviously the system can do good graphics, that compare very well to the PS3 at this point. But Microsoft better not rest on its laurels because if they do Nintendo and Sony will eat them up. Microsoft has to continually put out top games, AAA games that people want. Lost Planet, Halo 3, games like this will keep people buying the system and supporting Microsoft. And let us not forget how important Xbox Live/Arcade is to the whole picture here. As the only "complete" online package in any next-gen system, Xbox Live/Arcade will continue to drive Microsoft to the top of the ladder. The question is, can they topple Sony? (And yes, Sony is still #1 folks, don't forget that as much as you'd hate to admit it)

Playstation 3 - Right off the bat, it is the most powerful system out there. Period. I don't care if the games at launch aren't "incredible" and all that, the system is a beast. Anyone who says otherwise is a fanboy of the other systems. Take a look at the recent trailer videos for Gran Turismo HD - nuff said. Period. Then you have Metal Gear Solid coming (whether it is Sony exclusive doesn't matter at this point) Warhawk (yay!) and other incredible looking games in 2007 and beyond (play beyond?) The online portion of the system, well I don't know much about it, but I'd venture a guess it isn't anywhere near as complete as Live is. But that doesn't matter. As long as people can log into a 40 player game of Resistence Fall of Man, I'd gather most gamers wouldn't care much. Sure it is nice to buy gamer pictures and whatever else, but multiplayer gaming is more important imo. So yes, the PS3 is the most "future proof" console out there. In 2007/08 when we see games that just blow us away like Warhawk etc, it will compete very well with the 360 and Wii.

Now since the 360 can't be "considered" for console of the year of 2006, obviously the pick would go to PS3. All the fanboys can scream all they want, but Nintendo's track record of the past two systems, and Sony's track record with their past two systems show the whole picture. N64 and Gamecube did not get the gaming support Nintendo needed to stay in the pack. PS1 and PS2 are both two of the biggest selling console systems of all time. Period.

It remains to be seen however, if the PS3 can overcome the problems at launch to become then next success for Sony. I'm sure Nintendo and Microsoft are chomping at the bits just in case :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigh, I always hate these types of threads, as they destabilize into fanboys bashing fanboys.

The truth of the matter is, there are Sony haters. There are Nintendo haters. And there are Microsoft haters. But as a "gamer" and a hardware enthusiast (for the PC though, but eh) I can't help but be excited for all three consoles.

Nitnendo Wii - Certainly not the most powerful system out there. I mean, come ON it is nothing more than an overclocked Gamecube. Seriously. It will never stand toe to toe with the 360 or PS3 on graphics. And, frankly I don't think the Wii-mote is all that "inventive" either, especially if companies making games for it don't take advantage of it. I just think Nintendo knows how to make games, Mario, Zelda etc are all classics and continue to please fans. So that is Nintendo's main strength. Now, if 3rd party publishers can put out high quality games that take advantage of the Wii-mote then sure, Nintendo may have a leg to stand on.

Xbox 360 - Has the decided advantage right now, with a years head start on the other two consoles. With killer games like Gears of War, Rainbow Six Vegas, Call of Duty 3, Viva Pinata etc etc. Obviously the system can do good graphics, that compare very well to the PS3 at this point. But Microsoft better not rest on its laurels because if they do Nintendo and Sony will eat them up. Microsoft has to continually put out top games, AAA games that people want. Lost Planet, Halo 3, games like this will keep people buying the system and supporting Microsoft. And let us not forget how important Xbox Live/Arcade is to the whole picture here. As the only "complete" online package in any next-gen system, Xbox Live/Arcade will continue to drive Microsoft to the top of the ladder. The question is, can they topple Sony? (And yes, Sony is still #1 folks, don't forget that as much as you'd hate to admit it)

Playstation 3 - Right off the bat, it is the most powerful system out there. Period. I don't care if the games at launch aren't "incredible" and all that, the system is a beast. Anyone who says otherwise is a fanboy of the other systems. Take a look at the recent trailer videos for Gran Turismo HD - nuff said. Period. Then you have Metal Gear Solid coming (whether it is Sony exclusive doesn't matter at this point) Warhawk (yay!) and other incredible looking games in 2007 and beyond (play beyond?) The online portion of the system, well I don't know much about it, but I'd venture a guess it isn't anywhere near as complete as Live is. But that doesn't matter. As long as people can log into a 40 player game of Resistence Fall of Man, I'd gather most gamers wouldn't care much. Sure it is nice to buy gamer pictures and whatever else, but multiplayer gaming is more important imo. So yes, the PS3 is the most "future proof" console out there. In 2007/08 when we see games that just blow us away like Warhawk etc, it will compete very well with the 360 and Wii.

Now since the 360 can't be "considered" for console of the year of 2006, obviously the pick would go to PS3. All the fanboys can scream all they want, but Nintendo's track record of the past two systems, and Sony's track record with their past two systems show the whole picture. N64 and Gamecube did not get the gaming support Nintendo needed to stay in the pack. PS1 and PS2 are both two of the biggest selling console systems of all time. Period.

It remains to be seen however, if the PS3 can overcome the problems at launch to become then next success for Sony. I'm sure Nintendo and Microsoft are chomping at the bits just in case :)

well said ! totaly agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best console of the year depends on the criteria you want me to judge it on. Such as if games count, or if it's only consoles released in 2006, or if public sentiment counts (anyone notice the recent lack of buzz around PS3 out in the world?).

If games are considered than PS3 flat out can't win. 360 ports that are better on 360 and Resistance just can't cut it, either against the Wii launch lineup or 360. But from a hardware standpoint it's obviously the best console of 2006 (which is where considering only new consoles comes in, I'd have to give power to 360 right now it's just more intelligently designed despite PS3 having more raw power).

I personally can't ignore games in my own personal ranking, they are the reason we buy the consoles in the first place. If it doesn't have good games then it has failed in it's main mission, to be a gaming machine. I also wouldn't only count new systems, 360 is just plain better than anything else this year - I don't care that it's because it's second year or whatever it's just better than the other two right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember when PS2 vx Xbox, this statement was thrown around by Ps2 lovers as the failure of the xbox.

Yeah I remember that, back when it was PS2 vs Xbox. All the PS2 fans were accusing the Xbox of been a PC in a different wrapper (i.e. not a true console) and how power isn't everything, claiming that the Xbox was doomed to failure. Ironic (and somewhat hypocritical) that now Sony is claiming the PS3 is a PC and how power is everything (and Xbox fans claiming the PS3 is doomed to failure :p). You'd think people would of learned something by now, if power = everything then the Xbox should of won the last generation, but it didn't, it got it's arse kicked by the technically inferior one.

Secondly:

It's funny when something like that is thrown around, when most people who have a clue about any type of hardware (ie not your average Ps3 fanboy who shouts teraflops) says that the x360 is evenly matched in terms of the hardware and actually beats the Ps3 in GPU comparison.

Another thing is Wii remote that is certainly an interesting piece of hardware they give Sony the award on hardware that is yet to truly beat the 360 but wont give it to the Wii based on its remote.....

Thirdly: The PS3 can get 10 billion awards and not sell a unit does this make it a success?

Well the PS3 is an interesting piece of hardware, due to it's complexity and features (Blu-Ray, it's CELL processor, ability to legally install Linux on it etc) you have to admit it is fascinating. Is it better then the 360? probably not, but I can understand why IGN choose it over the 360 and the Wii. But your correct the PS3 could get a hundred million awards and still fail horribly. However, if it has award winning games, well that is something else entirely ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.