so many things to talk about in this thread....
i will do them one by one because there are so many things ive wanted to discuss lately and this is definatly the time to do it.

first off let me point out that there are some people in this thread that are so biased towards one manufacturer its sad.
whether your a sony, microsoft or nintendo fan, its pathetic to try and see someone back up their system by putting down the flaws of another.

my point here is that EVERY!! system has their flaws. i wont go into them but its a proven fact that no system launches without problems.
especially as the technology gets better and companies get more greedy. they want to release their system faster and therefore overlook certain things.
example here, shortages. each console had a shortage at their release. i dont care if one had it worse off than the other because so far people are still having a damn hard time getting their hands on a Wii which is supposed to have the best launch of the 3.

the point here is that no console is better than the other. anyone who says that is a ignorant fanboy. each system has their pros and cons and no one can say different. saying that i would like to point out a couple corrections made by people in this thread..

1) for the person who was talking about grand turismo costing money... false. sony has since abandoned that idea. they as well as everyone else realized it wouldn't fly and has since cancelled GT:HD and are putting all their work into GT 5. it was a stupid idea to begin with and a very similar situation happened during the ps2 version of GT 3. so before people continue to try and put sony down, this is false.

2) that entire article about Sony being a technological dissapointment is accurate in some cases but is definatly jumping on the hate sony bandwagon. they mention the DS outselling the PSP and this is supposed to be disapointing how? the fact that sony even survived against nintendo is achievement enough. Nintendo has held the portable market for years and years. so because they're not beating a company who has had such a great record with handhelds that makes them a bad company. maybe its just me but that makes no sense at all. theres no way sony would ever beat nintendo in the handheld market.

i started to write a complete paragraph on all the shortcomings of this article but its a waste of time...
point is, this guy is nitpicking in most of the cases, excluding the rootkit (that was just plain bad news from the beginning) and battery recalls (and problems like these arise in many companys)

3) someone said pc gaming was dying. this is the biggest joke of a statement if i've ever seen one. but from coming from someone who may not play pc games its not a surprise. when you stick to a specific format you tend to lose grasp on anything outside of your own format. its happens with everyone. but if you look at a game like crysis for example. crysis has so far cost over 27 million dollars to develope. are you telling me that they're putting all this money into a dying format? they're not stupid, they want to make money. take a look at the majority of online games such as Counterstrike, Battlefield 2, or how bout MMORPG's like World of Warcraft or Everquest. World of Warcraft alone has over 7 million subscribers. Sims games are dominating the female market in games (which is impressive because more and more females are becoming gamers.) the fact of the matter is PC gaming is not dying and will never die. as long as games are made on computers they will always have a market.

4) and im not picking on darth chatlab here but he sums up my next point perfectly and i want to thank him for that.

Hm... I don't know what to tell you, Sage. I've enjoyed PC gaming, but anymore it's so hard to keep up with the technology curve that I really can't get into PC gaming anymore.

i agree with him 100%! more than 100% because this is my major gripe with games today. however there is a major flaw to his argument which many people fail to notice.
earlier he said.

I understand full well the Wii is nowhere near as powerful as the PS3, and I don't care. I played a PS3 at Wal-Mart and well, it was a PS2 game with better graphics. (Some NBA or NCAA Basketball game)

Graphics aren't what made me want a GC--Super Smash Bros Melee was. And online Smash Bros Brawl is ultimately what sold me on the Wii. (It's my email address for crying out loud.)

so if graphics aren't what made you a fan of certain games why do you feel the need to keep up with technology?
i hear people say this all the time. "PC's cost too much to maintain if you want to play games on them"

this is about the worst possible excuse in the world. if you dont want to play games with all the bells and whistles. guess what? you dont have to. you can still play a game on low graphics or medium graphics and get the same amount of enjoyment out of it. will better graphics give you a better experience. in some cases yes, probably (depending on who you are i suppose.) but there is no rule that says you must upgrade. that is just a pissing competition between pc gamers which has been around forever. just as it is with the ps3 and xbox 360. fans of the two will be bitching at eachother for years trying to one up the other. and its so old.

the point im making in this regard is that gaming computers are not expensive. they are only expensive if you want them to be.
you could pick up a video card today for about the same amount of money as an xbox 360 and be able to play games that look just as good as the xbox. if a game comes out in a couple years, you can still play it on medium or low settings and have it look like the xbox 360 or (if your a graphics whore) you can spend more money to play a game that will look better than the xbox 360. the whole point is the pc has never been more expensive than a console. if anything its been cheaper.

but who cares at the end of the day?
we all have our favorite games and genres... and rather than bitching about which is better we should just be happy with what we have.

today the game market has been taking a downward trend with graphics first and gameplay second. unfortunatly some gamers out there believe this is the way of the future for games. me personally? i think its the downfall. you can make a game look a fuckin real as possible but i would still take a second rate game like The Legend of Zelda (gold cartridge) over it anyday. in fact i would go as far as saying, if i were allowed 1 game for the rest of my life it would be that. Keep your FEAR and Farcrys and Doom3's away from me. without gameplay a nice looking game is just a movie. Gameplay is what companys should be focusing on, and graphics should take the backseat. i have all the time in the world to watch games get pretty. no need to rush it.

wow my fingers are sore. thanks to those who read my rant.
please try not to quote it.