Topic: my console is better than your console, but no one beats pc thread deviaton

niko_bellic said:
(chrono trigger is better btw.)

Well duh.

Doesn't mean Chrono Cross isn't a good game to play and I wanted to go through it again.

I'm just gonna sit in the corner with my PS2 and play Disgaea and Galerions and Okami.

For the record, my first taste of Multiplayer was Red Faction on ps2. It's horribly dated, didn't offer a ton of stuff unless you figured out all the secrets, but the multiplayer was fun blowing holes in the wall of a tunnel then hiding inside.

i go to sleep and i have to read 6 more flippin pages.
the first game i played on PC that i really enjoyed was rollercoaster tycoon deluxe. the first game i played on PS1 that i really enjoyed was ape escape and this game where your car had weapons attached to it and you had to shoot down other cars forgot what it was called though.

yea last playstation console you really need is ps2, ps3 is just an overpowered 360 but underpowered pc

luvdaporn said:
this game where your car had weapons attached to it and you had to shoot down other cars forgot what it was called though.

Two likely candidates here. Twisted Metal or Vigilante 8. Twisted Metal did everything better than V-8, but V-8 MAYBE had more creative levels. The second Twisted Metal was best of the entire series, and it's kinda sad to see the junk that is Twisted Metal Black and think it's supposed to be the same genre.

back on topic, one way i've seen consoles emulate pc for fps games is making mice controllers, which is very smart in my educated opinion since it gives the precisin needed on hardware that can provide a so-so framerate and graphical experience.

Dude, you can attach anything to a pc. Consoles are only for Games and Multimedia.

They are both good for games, but PC's are better when it comes to certain types of games, so are consoles.

I don't think i can really chose which is better any more...

Fox2K9 said:
Dude, you can attach anything to a pc. Consoles are only for Games and Multimedia.

They are both good for games, but PC's are better when it comes to certain types of games, so are consoles.

I don't think i can really chose which is better any more...

the only reason i see to get a console would be for AWESOME exclusives or console only games, like ssf4, or dante's inferno.

Hey guys...what's going on in this thread?

snes>genesis said:
Hey guys...what's going on in this thread?

slowpoke.jpg
you're a few years late to the party

As for the Wii, it isn't bad, but it only has like 6 good games. I traded mine in roughly a year after I bought it, but I do regret never getting around to play Twilight Princess.

Ultima_Weapon said:
As for the Wii, it isn't bad, but it only has like 6 good games. I traded mine in roughly a year after I bought it, but I do regret never getting around to play Twilight Princess.

its a good game, reminds me of majora's mask. that new skywayrd sword doesn't really grab my attention though, and i'm a huge zelda junky. as for 65 good games, it all depends on the person's taste, which is why i dont really want to bring game's into this discussion, but as a console, it's mediocre

Only reason I'd ever give up my computer (though I only use it for a few, older games) for any console, would be a PS3, because that's what "The Last Guardian" will be released on. Ico and Shadow of the Colossus were/are incredible games.

Niko: As a console, the wii didn't try for raw power, it went for gimmicky playability... Which sold. And still does. :) You can do a lot more on the wii than the other consoles right now.. It just doesn't have the raw horsepower needed for some of the flashier games.

temporal_crux said:
Two likely candidates here. Twisted Metal or Vigilante 8. Twisted Metal did everything better than V-8, but V-8 MAYBE had more creative levels. The second Twisted Metal was best of the entire series, and it's kinda sad to see the junk that is Twisted Metal Black and think it's supposed to be the same genre.

Shut up, both TM and V8 are awesome :) One's just tamer. A lot.

niko_bellic said:
that and i'm more of an action/shooter guy

You might consider seeing if you can try some of these more action-y NDS games:
Castlevania: Order of Ecclesia
Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin
Megaman Z collection
Megaman ZX
Megaman ZX: Advent
Metroid Prime: Hunters
Nanostray 2
Starfox Command

Most are action-platformers, except for the last three.

I claim no responsibility for the withered, cramped claw your hand will become as a result of Metroid Prime: Hunters. It was a fun game, but painful to my left hand.

Personally, I love the DS for the metric ton of quality RPGs that are out for it, including the Etrian Odyssey series (which just announced it's third entry with a collector's edition that comes with an art book, so right here would be a good place to insert the sound of a guy doing a fangirl-ish "eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee~!"), as well as ports of several Dragon Quest games, several Final Fantasy games, Chrono Trigger, Disgaea: Hour of Darkness, a couple of Y's series games, and a couple of other high-quality originals like The World Ends With You.

I, too, probably own in excess of 100 NDS games. And the library continues to grow.

But then, I probably have just about as many Xbox 360 games. And PC games, now that I think of it. And my PS3 library is no slouch, but hamstrung by cross-platform titles that I prefer to get on Xbox 360.

I buy a lot of games.

i have either bought or played teh games you have mentioned, they're either fun once through or just boring. starfox was a terrible name to the seriese, and i thought it couldnt get worse after the gamecube releases. castlevanias were fun once through, nanostray is fun every now and then, metroid is just too repetitive. rpg's just blend too much into each other for me to enjoy them. spikey hair dude must save world from x and must embark on a journey from y village with z friends. besides, there's no point in buying them since theyre single player, so why not just emulate them on pc.

spekaing of chrono trigger, they're may be a reboot.

For a real treat from the east, buy Mushihimesama for the PS2, and Mushihimesama-Futari for the 360.

I can't help but think that Arcturus is probably a PC gamer, and mellis probably loves the Wii.

Aurali said:
Niko: As a console, the wii didn't try for raw power, it went for gimmicky playability... Which sold. And still does. :) You can do a lot more on the wii than the other consoles right now.. It just doesn't have the raw horsepower needed for some of the flashier games.
Shut up, both TM and V8 are awesome :) One's just tamer. A lot.

I loved TM for the humor, but with TM3, it just sorta..... died. It lost that twisted "You win, but your character's story is still riddled with doubt as to whether or not it was worth winning". V8 was fun in multiplayer because it was zany combat, not completely TM's "pinned you down with bullets and bombs, die biatch", which made it more playable.

But gone are the days of multiplayer of being in the same room, so you can punch your friend when he pull that shit.

niko_bellic said:
i have either bought or played teh games you have mentioned, they're either fun once through or just boring. starfox was a terrible name to the seriese, and i thought it couldnt get worse after the gamecube releases. castlevanias were fun once through, nanostray is fun every now and then, metroid is just too repetitive. rpg's just blend too much into each other for me to enjoy them. spikey hair dude must save world from x and must embark on a journey from y village with z friends. besides, there's no point in buying them since theyre single player, so why not just emulate them on pc.

spekaing of chrono trigger, they're may be a reboot.

Try "White Knight Chronicles" for PS3 if you want a multiplayer RPG that's rather fun to kick around on.

sorry, i don't have/want a console, nor am i interested in even approaching rpgs anytime soon

temporal_crux said:
I loved TM for the humor, but with TM3, it just sorta..... died. It lost that twisted "You win, but your character's story is still riddled with doubt as to whether or not it was worth winning". V8 was fun in multiplayer because it was zany combat, not completely TM's "pinned you down with bullets and bombs, die biatch", which made it more playable.

But gone are the days of multiplayer of being in the same room, so you can punch your friend when he pull that shit.

Yeah.. I hate the whole "oh.. yes! it's multiplayer.. if both of you have ps3s.. games... and the INTERNET..."

For same room multiplayer games.. still gotta go for a wii.

[edit]why did it post twice?

Aurali said:
Yeah.. I hate the whole "oh.. yes! it's multiplayer.. if both of you have ps3s.. games... and the INTERNET..."

For same room multiplayer games.. still gotta go for a wii.

if only wii had more good multy games, then itd be worth it. i have my wii at my girlfriends house (hurr hurr pun) but we can't find good multiplayer games, and before anyone asks/says, we got raving rabbits, mario party, house of the dead 2 3 and overkill, cookng mamma, new super mario bros, and brawl (waste of money) that are multy. we just pop open our laptops and play tf2 online or play borderlands on lan.

I only have a wii and PC:
i'm thinking about getting modern warfare reflex edition for wii. is it worth it? online play fun?

luvdaporn said:
I only have a wii and PC:
i'm thinking about getting modern warfare reflex edition for wii. is it worth it? online play fun?

if it plays anything like modern warfare or world at war, then hell to the no. those were the biggest waste of money i've done outside of guitar hero world tour and super smash bros brawl. i bought dead space for the wii today, and by god it's a good game so far, especially since me and my girlfriend can play it together

Personally I loved MW/MW2.

personally, i regretted purchasing those games immensely. im a huge fan of shooters, its 90% of what i play, but the cod series just doesn't take any skill at all to play, and it just turns int oa big pain in teh neck with hackers, cheaters, whining kids, and campers

nvm i just softmodded my wii right now =D
got some emulaters going on it and i'm working on the app that lets you play backed-up/burnt games ;)

Sega Dreamcast is the best system ever. All of your responses are null and void.

WolfieWolfie1992 said:
Sega Dreamcast is the best system ever. All of your responses are null and void.

slowpoke.jpg

well i like the game but i would rather use a controller instead of a wiimote =/
and i don't feel like spending 20 bucks just for a cheap piece of plastic called the "wii zapper"

luvdaporn said:
well i like the game but i would rather use a controller instead of a wiimote =/
and i don't feel like spending 20 bucks just for a cheap piece of plastic called the "wii zapper"

fps, on a controller is even worse than a sii mote, at least with wii mote you get a greater audience of control, where a control is analog. for fps, nothing beats optical controlling (mouse).

niko_bellic said:
fps, on a controller is even worse than a sii mote, at least with wii mote you get a greater audience of control, where a control is analog. for fps, nothing beats optical controlling (mouse).

i have to disagree with you on that. the controller is a lot easier for me to use then wiimote. idk maybe i just need to get used to it. now if only i could plug i mouse in my wii and play like that... i guess that would be just like the PC version then, cept for the hacks and mods (talk about ruining a good game =/)

WolfieWolfie1992 said:
Sega Dreamcast is the best system ever. All of your responses are null and void.

SNES >.>

niko_bellic said:
if only wii had more good multy games, then itd be worth it. i have my wii at my girlfriends house (hurr hurr pun) but we can't find good multiplayer games, and before anyone asks/says, we got raving rabbits, mario party, house of the dead 2 3 and overkill, cookng mamma, new super mario bros, and brawl (waste of money) that are multy. we just pop open our laptops and play tf2 online or play borderlands on lan.

Yeah.. you seem like a FPS kind of person.

luvdaporn said:
i guess that would be just like the PC version then, cept for the hacks and mods (talk about ruining a already ruined shitty game game =/)

sorry, had to correct you. graphics would be terrible too. althoug, on a ps3, they sell special controllers that work as a mouse, and it's own special keypad. i REALLY want to play mag, and since its a ps3 exclusive, one day when its below 200 bucks (jesus 300 bucks still really?) i'll get it.

Aurali said:

Yeah.. you seem like a FPS kind of person.

sir, you have no idea. let me put it this way, in 2 years, just in css and tf2 alone, i've accumulated 1033 hours, that's not counting the gaggle of other games I play. that and i play in rga and twl leuges for css

FPS tends to bore the shit outta me. But then again my sample size is small.. let's see...

Goldeneye 007
Perfect Dark
Metroid Prime Series
Halo

Uh yeah... that's it. Didn't like Halo very much. I thought it was incredibly boring.

halo is the second worst fps i have ever played, first being call of duty. the game mechanics are so stupid and geared towards 10 year old kids.

niko_bellic said:
sir, you have no idea. let me put it this way, in 2 years, just in css and tf2 alone, i've accumulated 1033 hours, that's not counting the gaggle of other games I play.

Sir, you have no idea. Let me put it this way, in WoW alone, I've accumulated 327 days and some odd hours of /played time. Which is around 7850 hours. I've spent nearly a year of my life logged into that goddamn game, and that's not counting the gaggle of other games I play.

I hit 999 hours and 59 minutes on one of my Pokemon games ._.

EDIT: These extreme examples are actually kinda embarrassing.

Marbles said:
I hit 999 hours and 59 minutes on one of my Pokemon games ._.

don't know what a pokemon game could have to keep someone entertained for a thousand hours ._.
most time i've spent on a pokemon game was ~60 hours :P

Marbles said:
Sir, you have no idea. Let me put it this way, in WoW alone, I've accumulated 327 days and some odd hours of /played time. Which is around 7850 hours. I've spent nearly a year of my life logged into that goddamn game, and that's not counting the gaggle of other games I play.

I hit 999 hours and 59 minutes on one of my Pokemon games ._.

EDIT: These extreme examples are actually kinda embarrassing.

wow, you actually payed to waste a year of your life? as for pokemon, depends which pokemans you're talking about, if its red blue or yellow, then i don't blame you, although that time is a bit extreme, MAYBE it would be passable for silver gold and crystal. after that, theyre just retarded.

niko_bellic said:
wow, you actually payed to waste a year of your life?

That's an incredibly stupid statement. Let's invoice my subscription... I've played the game for 5 years, which comes up to $900 over 5 years.

By comparison, the average game has around 20 hours of gameplay, 60 for RPGs. Let's be generous and say all of them are on the high end of gameplay length at 60 hours. And that I'm buying all the games used, so they are only around $30.

To get the same 7850 hours of gameplay through traditional games would have cost me $3925. If I wasn't buying them used, it would have been about $8000

By comparison, $900 of MMO subscriptions over 5 years is fucking cheap. Almost 90% cheaper that traditional games.

EDIT: Of course, I buy traditional games too, and in very large quantities. However, I think it's fairly obvious to anyone with an elementary understanding of arithmetic, can understand how playing an MMO instead of exclusively playing traditional games, has mitigated over $1000 a year off the cost of me playing videogames.

Marbles said:
That's an incredibly stupid statement. Let's invoice my subscription... I've played the game for 5 years, which comes up to $900 over 5 years.

By comparison, the average game has around 20 hours of gameplay, 60 for RPGs. Let's be generous and say all of them are on the high end of gameplay length at 60 hours. And that I'm buying all the games used, so they are only around $30.

To get the same 7850 hours of gameplay through traditional games would have cost me $3925. If I wasn't buying them used, it would have been about $8000

By comparison, $900 of MMO subscriptions over 5 years is fucking cheap. Almost 90% cheaper that traditional games.

i bought my games new, payed for them one time and not every month, and i'm still playing them way after 60 hours. then again i don't like mmos because to me all it is is grind grind grind, where areas fps , the good ones anyways, require several different skills

niko_bellic said:
wow, you actually payed to waste a year of your life? as for pokemon, depends which pokemans you're talking about, if its red blue or yellow, then i don't blame you, although that time is a bit extreme, MAYBE it would be passable for silver gold and crystal. after that, theyre just retarded.

Emerald wasn't that bad.. but you know.. growing up changes a lot of peoples tastes. Also. I'm female :(

Aurali said:
Emerald wasn't that bad.. but you know.. growing up changes a lot of peoples tastes. Also. I'm female :(

The one I hit 999 with was Gold version. I probably would've hit in in the Blue Version if I didn't replay it like, 8 times.

Didn't like Emerald, but I did enjoy Platinum, even if I felt it lacked polish. At least the Pokemon designs in gen4 were almost universally of extremely high quality.

Aurali said:
Emerald wasn't that bad.. but you know.. growing up changes a lot of peoples tastes. Also. I'm female :(

emerald is just a remake of it, in m book remakes don't count unless they change things around ALOT. and i don't see why you being female changes this conversation

niko_bellic said:
emerald is just a remake of it, in m book remakes don't count unless they change things around ALOT. and i don't see why you being female changes this conversation

You called me sir earlier. :/ Besides, Ererald is a directors cut of ruby/sapphire. which are different games from the originals... Never played a pokemon game with cults in them before...

i call everyone sir, even my gf's mother

faggots as far as the eye can see, to be honesty, I'd be happy with just my old gameboy playing pokemon, serrious its a fucking video game lighten up

i spy with my little eye someone with an ignorant opinion or a troll. also, you misunderstand the whole topic of this thread, as we are talking hardware consoles, not games. how about you sit back and let the people who know wtf is going on talk.

niko_bellic said:
actually, i made this thread because my other thread was being deviated by people who felt the urge to talk about video games, this is the best way to give them somewhere to vent without interrupting a thread. if you don't like the subject of this thread you can get out, since there is no trolling involved except your statement.

i wholeheartedly denounce that. there are many problems with the 360 that pc is superior in. primarily, you don't have to pay to just be able to play online.
pc games are cheaper, if you pay for them at all.

graphics are better because graphic hardware is constantly upgrading, where areas 360 is still stuck on dx 8.1.

Games have better communities, i base this claim on the fact that pc games are constatnly modded and said mods are shared, along with custom personal servers. (for example, if you wanted to play with e621 members, you could a) grab everyones gamer tag and wait for them to come online, or b) make a dedicated server for a game and everyone hops in when they feel like it)

pc may be more expensive initially, but they pay for themselves in the long run. a good entry level gaming pc with dx 11 graphics can run about 700 dollars. thats an xbox with a gold membership, a few controllers and maybe a game or two. within the year, you will have payed more for xbox because of games and online play, while on pc you may have not even payed for those 40 games your playing.

does it take some smarts to do that, maybe a bit, but if your chose pc over xbox, then you're not stupid.

do you wish for me to keep slaying your beast?

Could not have said it better myself!

too bad he's banned to oblivion

fabulous necromancy

PC's are meh, long loading times and doesn't afraid of anything.

Stop it.
This thread is dead, Jim! Dead!

snes>genesis said:
PC's are meh, long loading times and doesn't afraid of anything.

lololol, get of your windows 95. consoles loading times are worse though.

Well, since the thread was necro'd...

43503264 said:
Could not have said it better myself!

Except that he's completely wrong... comparing apples to oranges, throwing away money on dissimilar feature sets, discounting the cost of PC games since he prefers to steal them from torrent sites instead, and ignoring the PC upgrade treadmill that you're forced to walk when you shop budget hardware.

A more realistic comparison would be:

$700 pre-games for a budget gaming PC that needs upgrades or replacements every 2 years.

$260 pre-games for a budget Xbox 360 that you might replace in 5 years, based on what console manufacturers are speculating. Throw in another 4 years of online multiplayer service and it's still only a total $500, pre-games, and still looking to last 5 years.

Legally acquired games on both PC and 360 are comparable in price.

Also... just because it matters to me, the Xbox 360's Xenos graphics chip is still comparable to the Nvidia GT240 that you would likely find in a budget gaming PC. A 360 is also DX9 through-and-through, and the consistent hardware profile allows pretty much everyone that matters to emulate DX10 features on it.

Might as well continue to beat the dead horse here.

$300 just to play online is a joke. You did not factor in the PS3. For the cost you spend on just Internet service for an Xbox, you could have had:

A used 80GB model PS3, which costs $300 with controller and cables. Games, used, range $10 - $50. Internet is free. So, a system and one new game, is $350 for all that, and it is still cheaper than an XBX360 and their shitty customer service and repair program.

...and when Sony's products break, at least they do not repair it with used parts pulled from other defective units....

"Yes. Microsoft invested heavily in the 360 warranty program. And, yes, the Jasper mobo released in late 2008 raises the 360's reliability bar. The problem is that Microsoft repair centers mostly swap in old motherboards rather than replace them with Jaspers, leading to repeated RROD incidents."

~Game Informer Magazine, Feb. 2010 (page 39)

PC and console are both pretty shitty at this day and age. The videogame industry is going down the shitter and so are the standards of the average videogame consumer.

LebronJames said:
PC and console are both pretty shitty at this day and age. The videogame industry is going down the shitter and so are the standards of the average videogame consumer.

Welcome to Sturgeon's Revelation.

Beam me out, Scotty. This thread just became dildos!

WolfieWolfie1992 said:
You did not factor in the PS3.

I sure didn't. I was responding to a comparison against the 360. A PS3 compares even more favorably in the long-term than a 360, if only just because online MP is free.

I still think Sony could improve - substantially - on their online community features. Like OS-based voice chat support that crosses seamlessly into and out of games. Or a game invite system that doesn't horrendously suck. Or parties a la XBL.

Unfortunately, these things are unlikely to come anytime soon - the odds are very high that these additions would break functionality that previously-released games depend on. Maybe Sony will actually offer a competent online experience for the PS4, sometime around 2015. Based on the stories I've heard from my friends who've worked for Sony in the past, however, I'm not holding my breath. There are some serious issues inside of that company.

So I can't help feeling MS is the console leader in online services. It's just too bad that so many of their services come with a $60/year premium.

ikdind said:
Well, since the thread was necro'd...
Except that he's completely wrong... comparing apples to oranges, throwing away money on dissimilar feature sets, discounting the cost of PC games since he prefers to steal them from torrent sites instead, and ignoring the PC upgrade treadmill that you're forced to walk when you shop budget hardware.

A more realistic comparison would be:

$700 pre-games for a budget gaming PC that needs upgrades or replacements every 2 years.

$260 pre-games for a budget Xbox 360 that you might replace in 5 years, based on what console manufacturers are speculating. Throw in another 4 years of online multiplayer service and it's still only a total $500, pre-games, and still looking to last 5 years.

Legally acquired games on both PC and 360 are comparable in price.

Also... just because it matters to me, the Xbox 360's Xenos graphics chip is still comparable to the Nvidia GT240 that you would likely find in a budget gaming PC. A 360 is also DX9 through-and-through, and the consistent hardware profile allows pretty much everyone that matters to emulate DX10 features on it.

dx 8.1 you mean. and where do you get your info, 2 years is absurdly soon, a good pc lasts at a inimum 8-10 years, simply because most games have to be dumbed down so consoles can play them. and yea, i agree, the gaming industry is getting shitter and shitter, its mostly to bring in the casual gamer. just look at every fps nowadays
http://www.halolz.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/halolz-dot-com-fpsmapdesign-1993-2010-doom.gif

NOU said:
dx 8.1 you mean. and where do you get your info

Well, since a link to the 360 XDK's online documentation would probably do _you_ no good (you probably don't have a license or account), I'll link to an article from Joystiq:
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/08/24/xbox-360-cant-run-directx-10-confirms-ati/

Currently, Microsoft's console runs an advanced version of DirectX 9, which, according to ATI, features "memory export that can enable DX10-class functionality such as stream-out."

If you think developers aren't exploiting that power, you're insane.

Edit: And 10 years? Really? You realize that 10 years ago, the 1.3Ghz Athlon Thunderbird didn't exist. The GeForce 4 didn't exist. DDR memory didn't exist. And you think that computer would be able to play... Call of Duty: Black Ops?

I get it. I've been trolled.

ikdind said:
Well, since a link to the 360 XDK's online documentation would probably do _you_ no good (you probably don't have a license or account), I'll link to an article from Joystiq:
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/08/24/xbox-360-cant-run-directx-10-confirms-ati/
If you think developers aren't exploiting that power, you're insane.

Edit: And 10 years? Really? You realize that 10 years ago, the 1.3Ghz Athlon Thunderbird didn't exist. The GeForce 4 didn't exist. DDR memory didn't exist. And you think that computer would be able to play... Call of Duty: Black Ops?

I get it. I've been trolled.

im talking with current technology. way to go and put words in my mouth. and on teh subject of black ops, why would you? game was terribad anyways.

NOU said:
im talking with current technology. way to go and put words in my mouth. and on teh subject of black ops, why would you? game was terribad anyways.

No current technology is going to be able to play games from 2020 at any reasonable speed.

says you. direct x 11 actually managed to use LESS resources than previous dx versions, so let's see where it goes.

Wow, I come back to see people beating a horse that I killed a long time ago. PC's and consoles have their own stregnths and weaknesses, but if you want the best performance for games, use something that was built for the sole purpose of playing games, like a console. If you play CoD: Black Ops on the PC, it might suck more than on the Xbox 360, but the bottom line is that Black Ops sucks in general.

Ultima_Weapon said:
Wow, I come back to see people beating a horse that I killed a long time ago. PC's and consoles have their own stregnths and weaknesses, but if you want the best performance for games, use something that was built for the sole purpose of playing games, like a console. If you play CoD: Black Ops on the PC, it might suck more than on the Xbox 360, but the bottom line is that Black Ops sucks in general.

but what if that thing built solely for gaming is using weak hardware? that's exactly what consoles are. ok, theyre not shit tastic weak, but comon my laptop can outperform them

I've owned my PC for 5 years now and it still plays the latest stuff.

...Still prefer mah wii though.

i never get much mileage out of my wii besides playing melee on it.

banana_milkshake said:
i never get much mileage out of my wii besides playing melee on it.

Preferences.. I don't get much mileage out of the PS3.. though my PSP gets a shit ton more out of it then I would a DS (thanks to the hacker community). And I'd never touch a 360.. just got nothing I want on it.

i love my wii, well only after i softmodded it

i think i would get some more use if i modded my wii, but there arn't that many good games out of it, ones that i like anyways. my ps3 makes a good footrest though, aside from the occasional ssf4 match. i would love to say that me and my gf play little big planet all thetime, but she prefers tf2, so she doesn't get much use from it either.

The DSi with mah pokemanz is a million times better than any box or station. I get to browse porn through WiFi and my Pokewanker rewards me with watts as I masturbate to porn while holding it. Beat that, kinekt!