Anyone ever notice the weakest console almost always wins?

I dont think its just that im sure that helps in some ways, but look when nintendo advertised the Wii U as it own thing, for the hardcore gamer, it fucking flopped its about pandering to the biggest most receptive audience. about being affordable people dont care about Tflops they dont care about gigahertz they care about can it play their spyro or mario or crash or fifa or madden not if it has some major exclusive.

if people cared about games why did they bought the ps4?

The real answer is that people are more likely to buy cheaper stuff.
And Microsoft is releasing cheaper and less powerful next gen Xbox as well.

trannies

idk if its just that either user. look at the DS 1:1 the PSP has way more advanced and deep experiences the DS could NEVER pull off due to its massive limitation.

>tranies
>people

>ps3 vs wii vs 360
didn't 360 win?

Idk user, people also have to associate them with being cheap as well or else they wont get them.
can you 2 not get my bread deleted tank u have a catter as payment

Attached: 1568484647.jpg (500x500, 91.75K)

>PS1 VS N64 VS Saturn (PS1 won)
the weakest was the N64 faggot

No the wii won
PlayStation 3: 87.4 million
Xbox 360: 84 million
Wii: 101.63 million

n64 was stronger than the ps1
it just had cartridges so it had smaller space to do shit

Wrong the N64 had the same limitation as the gamecube, that being the low space it made the games seem inferior to PS1 but the specs are way stronger than PS1 could never pull of the seemlessness of OoT or the incredible fluid gameplay of 64. the 64 specs were far above the PS1 specs
PS1:
consoledatabase.com/consoleinfo/sonyplaystation/
N64:
digitalfantasy.angelfire.com/n64-hardware-specifications.html
your forgetting N64 was 64bit while ps1 was still only 32

to help break it down for you since
is full of numbers
PS1: 33.8 Mhz 32-bit CPU, nameless GPU (effects: texture mapping, flat & gouraud shading, ect.), 2 MB main ram, 1 MB VRAM, can do 180K texture mapped and light sourced polygons per second

N64: 93.7 Mhz 64-bit CPU, 62.5 Mhz RCP (effects: everything the PS1 did + bilinear filtering, mip mapping, anti-aliasing, environment mapping, ect.), 4 MB RDRAM (expendable to 8 MB via Expansion Pak), can do 100K polygons in N64 quality in Fast3D mode and 500 to 600K polygons in PS1 quality in Turbo3D mode

Netflix machine

DS actually opened up more unique gameplay experiences compared to the PSP, though.

yes, but it was still held back a lot by the weaker hardware
Compare KH Birth By Sleep to 356/2 days or Recoded for example

Unique yes but way less in depth im not saying the DS was bad I had one great lil machine but yea PSP had proper real time 3D graphics that looks really good to this day
youtube.com/watch?v=qn8azPVwRVs

the gamecube was cheap as fuck user

Recoded had better gameplay and a much better Command Deck system than BBS, though. And that’s not even getting into games like TWEWY, Ghost Trick, Elite Beat Agents, and 999, who used the system hardware to create unique gameplay experiences you can’t really get elsewhere.

>Atari vs Coleco vs Intellivision
they were all glorified souped-up calculators.
>NES vs Mastersystem
you completely skipped over the famicom's actual competition at launch, the sg-1000, which was both weaker and less successful.
>SNES vs Genisis CD32x vs Jaguar vs 3DO vs CD-i
the jaguar, 3do and cd-i were not part of the 16-bit generation. meanwhile, you left out the pc engine, which was the weakest and least successful of the generation.
>PS1 VS N64 VS Saturn
the saturn was the weakest and the least successful.
>PS2 VS GC VS Xbox
the dreamcast was the weakest and the least successful.
>PS3 VS Wii VS 360
the only time outside of handhelds where the weakest console actually won.
>PS4 vs Xbox One
the wii u was the weakest and least successful. the base xbone was both weaker and more expensive than the base ps4.
>Even handhelds are like this
handhelds were a different market with different considerations. battery life was extremely important early on, which is why the game boy dominated against otherwise technologically-superior systems with color screens.

Attached: 1554698260603.png (680x499, 1.4M)

The console with the most 3rd party support wins most of the times, no matter how powerful it is.

Game library is always more important than specs

1: Yes
2:Japan only so I cant really count it desu
3:They were competition to them because they were out at the time either way they got shrekt so its irrelevant
3.5: PC engine There is a good amount of showings that it isnt as weak as you think but yea fair enough but my point still stands not about specs its about branding.
4: Saturn wasnt the weakest by a long shot segaretro.org/Sega_Saturn/Hardware_comparison#Graphics_comparison_table
5:yea i forgot dreamcast but as /vr/ has it its not really 6th gen user it blew its load to early its more of an interconsole like Wii U
6:proven wrong
7:Wii u was an inter console also the ps4 really was weaker its only better thing was faster ram
8: Im right.

>the dreamcast was the weakest and the least successful.
Its not a 1:1 comparison. The dream cast was strong in areas the PS2 lacked and vice versa. PS2 had a more powerful CPU but Dreamcast had a better GPU with double the VRAM and it was capable of a lot of rendering features the PS2 lacked

>Japan only so I cant really count it desu
no, it also came out in australia, new zealand, italy and spain.
>They were competition to them
they weren't "competition" to anyone, they were massive flops.
>Saturn wasnt the weakest by a long shot
depends on what you're judging by. it was a beast for 2d games - but for 3d games, which dominated the generation, the saturn was awful. sega misjudged the demand for 3d games and had to rush support for 3d graphics into the saturn at the last minute and it shows.
>yea i forgot dreamcast but as /vr/ has it its not really 6th gen
/vr/'s arbitrary rules don't change the facts. the dreamcast was the first 6th gen console, the weakest and the least successful.
>proven wrong
the wii was the exception, not the rule.
>Wii u was an inter console
"inter consoles" aren't a thing.
>the ps4 really was weaker
the base xbone couldn't even do 1080p. people forget how shitty it was.

Following up on this
The Dreamcasts ability to render higher quality textures, superior ability to render lighting, and support for AA are clearly seen here.

Attached: ps2dc.png (1280x720, 1.11M)

Game wise, PS3 blew the Wii out of the water. Wii had Wii Sports, both Mario Galaxys, Twilight Princess and Smash, but most of its library was fucking awful shovelware

Don't be a dumbass
PS3's library was barren until 2009. 90% of any given consoles library is shovelware.

I just imagined playing OoT on a ps1...the horrible frame rate and even lower poly my God how horrifying

I wish it were true but the wonderswan died and hat thing was the pinnacle of cheap + solid quality and good gaming

It doesnt matter the Wii still beat the PS3
wonderswan will live in our hearts but it NEVER had the backing

you're comparing early multiplats where developers fully understood the dreamcast's hardware but hadn't figured out the emotion engine yet. the dreamcast would melt trying to run something like ffxii or gow2.

Attached: 153320-Final_Fantasy_XII_(Europe,_Australia)-1.jpg (960x540, 211.71K)

maybe is just that because the console has more limitations, devs acutally have to be creative to make games, and this acutlly has a positive impact on the quality of the games made this way.

Dreamcast wasnt the weakest. That's just flat out wrong. It had better gpu and vram

>emulator screenshot

The textures and lighting in this pic are still very clearly inferior to the dreamcast game posted above though.

still a ps2 game with ps2 textures/models.

wrong, PCSX2 doesn't render graphics the same way and is all around pretty shit. That's also not the correct resolution.

Theyre not ps2 models if your computer runs them dumbass

>no, it also came out in australia, new zealand, italy and spain.
Literally who countries
>they weren't "competition" to anyone, they were massive flops.
fair enough we dont really even need count them then.
>depends on what you're judging by. it was a beast for 2d games - but for 3d games, which dominated the generation, the saturn was awful. sega misjudged the demand for 3d games and had to rush support for 3d graphics into the saturn at the last minute and it shows.
Fair enough but still on paper its a great machine
>/vr/'s arbitrary rules don't change the facts. the dreamcast was the first 6th gen console, the weakest and the least successful.
as the user below is posting the dreamcast was still a capable machine and graphically superior
>the wii was the exception, not the rule.
clearly not
>the base xbone couldn't even do 1080p. people forget how shitty it was.
It had a better CPU and the PS4's GPU was barely any better. since TF is a garbage measurement of power

Games that people want to play are what drives console sales. Minecraft was a sensation, and it probably drove lots of kids to play shit on PC other than it too, since it's already there might as well play other PC games.

The PS1 got the upper hand over the N64 because not only it had cheaper games cause of CDs, but a franchise likre Final Fantasy was quite popular on the SNES but guess what, only the Playstation had its grand new entry that was going to be huge. Some other third party games also had strong entries, like MGS and Tomb Raider back then.

Before that the SNES's library was simply superior to the Genesis. It doesn't matter that the N64 and Genesis had some good exclusives, big hits were on the competition, and this applied well to the PS2 having some games people wanted to play, or at least timed exclusives. GTA San Andreas was a huge hit and it was on PS2 for one year before the competition.

>xbox feels like the suburban white kids console while PS4 feels like the console for everyone else
Uh. Wut.

obviously this is area to area my bad but either way yea the whole MLG 12 year old screaming over Xbox Live is still how alot of the public sees the brand

yeah, it's almost af if they were cheaper or something

>I think Xbox's issue is its sort of a limbo of sure its great for consumers
>Xbox
>Great for consumers
How soon we forget.

lol ok yes obivously but the Sex looks like a great deal for the consumer its really fair.

I see the latest cope strategy is to pretend it's a good thing that PS5 is underpowered

>PSP was as strong and in some ways stronger than the 3DS a whole SIX YEARS before.
lol not true at all
3DS curbstomps the PSP

Anyone who's even slightly educated about whats good for them as a consumer shouldn't buy an Xbox on principle with the shit they tried to pull with the Xbone.
>Tried to erase consumer rights
>"Please buy our next console it has backwards compatibility"
I haven't touched a microsoft product since the shitshow that was the xbone reveal and I haven't looked back.

So the success of a console boils down to the barrier to entry (price) and the library?

Attached: 1545247012923.png (500x636, 134.29K)

>Literally who countries
still not japan only.
>Fair enough but still on paper its a great machine
on paper =/= actual results.
>as the user below is posting the dreamcast was still a capable machine and graphically superior
peak dreamcast vs. first-year ps2 isn't a fair comparison. back in the days when consoles weren't just gimped PCs, it took time for developers to figure out how to get the most out of them.
>clearly not
and yet literally every other generation disproves your theory.
>It had a better CPU
iirc, they had the exact same cpu. microsoft just boosted the xbone cpu's clock speed at the last minute to save face from how much weaker it was overall.

Yes, hence why the Wii U bombed
No library and not significantly cheaper than consoles with a large library

Im not user I only have a PC, switch and PSP im just showing some facts I think are interesting not everything has to relate to the current thing but the way things are going even though the Xbox SeX seems like the WAY better console il put my money on the PS5.(not buying it you know what I mean)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_Portable
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_3DS
its alot closer than you would think anoon.
Yes but on PAPER the SeX is a way better deal than the PS5, but obviously that isnt how it going to be
pretty much as well as brand recognition and association

the psp is better than the DS

>still not japan only.
user its not fair to compare a console with a world wide release to one that never had that it was never in the running
>on paper =/= actual results.
and? once again the average consumer doesnt know that the Saturn still wasnt the weakest it isnt right to call it that
>and yet literally every other generation disproves your theory.
Wrong it shows its right
>iirc, they had the exact same cpu. microsoft just boosted the xbone cpu's clock speed at the last minute to save face from how much weaker it was overall.
Maybe but in the long run the weakest console prevailed the PS4 Pro as the X and Pro are still 8th gen

Yea it is but it still lost