Whenever I talk about game consoles here on SlashGear, much of the discussion reverts to arguments over which console – the Nintendo Wii, Sony’s PlayStation 3, or the Xbox 360 – is best. And in many cases, gamers pick their favorites and defend it to the bitter end.
Now, it’s important to note that these battles are nothing new. For decades, gamers have been picking sides and debating with their friends about why their respective console choice is better than the other’s. I can still remember the heated battles that took place between Sega and Nintendo fans over which console (and mascot) was best.
But as I sit here, looking at my Wii, Xbox 360, and PlayStation 3, I realize that I don’t have a favorite. I see all of their virtues and I’m disheartened by their many shortcomings. Is there a single console that might deliver a more viable entertainment experience to me at any given point? Sure. But when it’s all said and done, I can’t point to a single “favorite.”
Perhaps that’s why I typically sit here and think about what my “super” console would really be. I envision it having the first-party support that Nintendo enjoys, the third-party library that the Xbox 360 has, and the multimedia extras that the PlayStation 3 boasts. It would deliver some of the best features of all three consoles into a single device. And it would undoubtedly improve the overall entertainment experience that I enjoy while using these game consoles.
But alas, it doesn’t seem like that super console is in the cards. Nintendo is content with what it’s offering and Microsoft doesn’t seem too keen on bringing Blu-ray to its console. And until Sony’s PlayStation 3 starts selling better, Microsoft’s offering will still probably feature some of the best third-party experiences in the industry.
Now, just because I have a favorite, it doesn’t mean that I don’t have a console I tend to use more than others. I’ll freely admit that I spend most of my time playing games on the Xbox 360 (Xbox Live is a significant factor there), but I watch most of my movie and TV content on the PlayStation 3. The Nintendo Wii, as I’ve mentioned here before, has been collecting dust in my house as of late, due to the overwhelming number of casual titles that just don’t appeal to me.
The Wii might not deliver the most value to me at this very moment, but the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 aren’t necessarily better than Nintendo’s console, in my book. It’s a fine line, for sure, but it’s one that must be drawn.
So, as much as I might judge video game consoles, I feel confident in saying that I don’t have a favorite. And until a single device delivers everything I’m looking for, I won’t.
Whether it’s gaming I’m after, or if I want to spend some time watching some of my favorite shows and movies, I’m typically sitting in front of my HDTV each and every night. And since I spend so much of my time with it, having a viable television sitting in my living room is something that I’m always concerned about. But lately, all the talk in the television market has revolved around the future adoption of 3D TV by an increasing number of consumers. Speculation abounds that over time, consumers will start warming to the new technology and see it as a valuable option in their living rooms.
When I first heard about the possibility of 3D making its way to my television years ago, I was skeptical, to say the least. I’m not too keen on the 3D experience in the movie theater, and the very thought of having to sit in my living room with 3D glasses on while I watched a show just didn’t appeal to me.
However, recently I had the chance to try out 3D TV at a friend’s house. And much to my surprise, the experience was much nicer than I thought it would be. Not only was I not annoyed by wearing the glasses, but I quickly realized that it added something (substantial, at times) to my entertainment experience.
Now, I should note that I was only viewing 3D content for a short time. And it’s entirely possible that being forced to put 3D glasses on each passing day to enjoy the new technology I paid handsomely for could get annoying.
But the experience showed that I’d be willing to give 3D a fair try. Will I eventually enjoy it? Who knows? Will I hate it? It’s certainly possible. But I realized while trying out 3D TV that I don’t have enough evidence yet to decide. And maybe immersing myself in that experience for a while will help me decide if 3D really is a technology that I want to live with going forward.
Of course, trying out 3D can be a costly prospect. Most HDTVs without 3D technology can be purchased for less than those with 3D. But in many cases, those sets that feature 3D TV also boast some better specs. So, even if someone doesn’t use the 3D option, they won’t necessarily lose so much value on their money. And at the very least, they’ll have 3D for whenever they might need it in the future.
That’s the justification I’m going to use whenever I buy another HDTV. Yes, it might cost me more whenever I do it, but at least I’m getting a lot for my money. And it provides me with an experience that I might just find to be far more viable than anything else I’ve enjoyed to this point.
I might not have much company in this, but I think it’s time to try out 3D TV. We all might get burned by it, but it’s making its way to the market in a big way, and the onus is on us to decide if it really does deserve to be a part of our future entertainment experiences.
As someone who loves to sit down in front of the television after a long day’s work and watch a movie or television show, I typically spend some time each month heading down to Best Buy or browsing Amazon to find out what the latest entertainment releases are. It has become a habit that at least so far, I’m unwilling to give up.
But over the past year, my buying decisions have changed, and I’ve officially ditched DVD in favor of Blu-ray or streaming services.
Now, I know that some are probably wondering why it took so long. After all, Blu-ray has been around for quite some time, and the technology is being embraced in a big way to the detriment of DVD. But as I mentioned, I’m an entertainment addict. And far too many of my favorite films or television shows were still only available on DVD through 2009.
But this year, due mainly to my entertainment preferences, all that changed. Everything I wanted to buy was available on Blu-ray, which of course, prompted me to choose that copy. Moreover, much of the older content that I enjoy could be readily streamed through Netflix or other streaming services.
That resulted in a conscious decision on my part to stop buying DVDs. And at least for now, I just don’t see myself buying a DVD version of a film or television show at any point in the future.
To some extent, that’s a good feeling. DVD was ideal for me as I emerged from the darkness of the VHS days. But after I bought my first HDTV, became inundated with HD channels that made me cringe when I went back to SD content, and Blu-ray launched, it was becoming clear to me that DVD just couldn’t do the job anymore. I needed to go with the new technologies. And I needed to do it quickly.
Although I’ve mostly accomplished that goal, I should note that DVDs aren’t entirely gone from my life. Just last week I watched a few episodes from my series collection of The Sopranos, which I have on DVD. It was disappointing.
That said, I’ve spent the past year replacing much of my DVD content with Blu-ray versions of the titles. I already have a copy of The Godfather Trilogy on DVD, but I bought the Blu-ray version to round out my collection. I did the same with several other favorites, including Saving Private Ryan.
And all that fails to mention the times when I just don’t feel like going to the collection of discs to find a particular film, so I simply stream it from Netflix.
Simply put, DVDs just aren’t that big a part of my life any longer. They once ruled my entertainment experience. But like many others, I’m sure, they’ve quickly lost ground to the newer options that provide more quality and convenience.
And at least so far, I couldn’t be happier about it.
When it comes to video games, every player is different. Some gamers enjoy sitting down on the couch for hours and playing through an adventure game that might take weeks to complete. And each and every time, they complete it.
However, there are also some gamers in the market that don’t have the time (or the desire) to play games in that way. Instead, they enjoy shorter titles that they can play for a half-hour at a time and eventually complete it when they get around to it. They might also like more casual games that they can quickly pick up for a few minutes on their smartphones.
But whenever console video games are reviewed by players nowadays, their main storyline’s length is always a major issue. If they’re short, like Medal of Honor’s campaign, which took a handful of hours to complete, they’re typically panned. But if they take 20 or 30 or 40 hours to complete, they’re called an “epic” title that delivers value on the gamer’s hard-earned money.
Now, I can appreciate that people want to get as much as possible out of a $60 game. And I’ll be the first one to admit that if a game has a good story line, I will invest the 40 hours it takes to complete it. But I also see value in short games. I like the idea of knowing that I won’t be locked into a title for a work week. And I especially like knowing that the game will move at a rapid rate with the ultimate goal of getting me to finish it in short order.
Simply put, I guess I’m up for just about any type of game. And I can appreciate both types.
But I’m a little concerned that some gamers aren’t. Some folks feel that developers pulled one over on them by not delivering a long game. And they feel cheated out of their hard-earned cash. They think that the length of the main story matters more than the experience of living through that story.
That’s a sad belief. Some of the best games I’ve played this year didn’t necessarily take so long to complete, but delivered a lasting appeal that I still look back on fondly. And such an extreme opinion about a short title forgets about another key aspect of video games today: multiplayer.
That’s precisely why I can’t fault Medal of Honor or Call of Duty: Black Ops for being so short. Their developers focused much of their efforts on the multiplayer experience. And especially in the case of Black Ops, that strategy worked beautifully. So, while we might not spend dozens of hours beating Black Ops, we will spend dozens of hours online playing the game after the main campaign is complete.
I just don’t think the length of a given title’s main storyline should matter. Sure, it shouldn’t last for an hour or two, but as long as it hits the five-hour mark and features solid online play, I’m content. And I won’t fault developers who are spending boatloads of cash just to get a game onto store shelves for delivering a shorter game.
But that’s just me. What do you think? Do games with longer main stories hold more value than shorter titles?
As mentioned in a previous column here on SlashGear, I’m currently in the market to buy a new HDTV. I’ve found that my current 50-inch plasma isn’t performing as well as I would like, and it’s probably about time to replace the aging set with something new. But whenever I go to the store to compare pricing on TVs, I lose all sense of reality. Instead of sticking with my belief that I can probably be quite happy with a 42- or 46-inch television, my eyes start to wander towards the larger, 52- and 55-inch sets.
As I stand there in the store, analyzing what’s available, I reason that I can’t possibly get a smaller television than what I have already. And although some might say I can get the same size television, I keep asking myself what the point is of replacing a 50-inch set for another. I’m upgrading. And I want the full upgrade.
Over the years, I’ve heard from many people that you need to measure the viewing distance between you and the screen to adequately determine how big of a display you really need. I get that. And I did it. The only problem is, that measurement revealed that a 42- to a 46-inch display would be best for that room. And as I mentioned, the rational part of my mind says I should follow that, but the tech addict in me — and the part of my mind that’s winning — says I should ignore that result and go with my heart.
In preparation for writing this column, I decided to ask others if they feel the same way. I asked them if when they search for a new set, they justify buying the bigger option simply because, well, it’s bigger. And in every single case, they said that they forgo rational decision-making for the sole purpose of getting a bigger television.
Upon learning that, I started to feel better. After all, if I’m not the only person trying to tell myself that a bigger set is better, I’m not really wrong in thinking that way, right? For once, my irrational desire for a larger television seemed, well, normal.
So, with that new-found knowledge, I went back to the stores. Only this time, I didn’t feel guilty about my desire for a bigger HDTV. Sure, it might not be the most practical option, but you know what? I don’t care. Like everyone else, I love a big HDTV, and I’m not afraid to admit it.
That’s precisely why if you see me at your local Best Buy, you’ll notice that I won’t be paying much attention to the 46-inch HDTVs. I’ll be firmly planted in the 50- to 60-inch range.
If you’ve been following my columns here on SlashGear, you know that I’m a bit of a tech addict. Whether it’s video games, set-top boxes, new televisions, or anything in-between, I’m typically ready and willing to buy it — assuming of course, that it makes proper financial sense to acquire yet another gadget.
But Black Friday changes everything for me. Not only is it a day that I look forward to each and every year, but it’s also a day that I spend a lot of money. I, like so many others around the U.S., am a sucker for a good deal.
I fully realize that by being a sucker for a good deal, I’m also playing into the retailers’ (and vendors’) favor and potentially losing the good commercial sense that I enjoy the rest of the year.
Whereas in April I might opt against buying a certain product because the price is too high, on Black Friday, I’m won over by the belief that “I won’t get a better deal if I wait, so I should probably just buy it now.”
It’s a thought that has been proven wrong time and again throughout the years, but each and every year, I anxiously await the newspaper ads, check out my favorite retailers’ Web sites, and start devising a strategy that can get me to the stores in the shortest time possible.
Now, the cynics out there might just ask why I haven’t learned my lesson. But those in my position understand my plight: I have a tech addiction. And as more products hit store shelves, the more of them I want.
I justify purchases of certain products based on how I believe I will use them: “See that cool iPod alarm clock over there? Well, I don’t like sleeping in all the time, so maybe if I had that, I could wake up sooner to the tracks I really want to hear.”
Next thing I know, that alarm clock is collecting dust next to the bed, since I refuse to set it each passing day. It’s a common issue, since my affection for technology clouds my better judgment at times. But it’s not something that I apologize for.
I simply love technology. I love the opportunities it affords and the problems it solves in my life. And I really do see value in the vast majority of products on store shelves. So, when I get the chance to save a few extra bucks on something that I think can help solve another problem, I typically jump on it.
Yes, I know that continues to feed my addiction. And I fully realize that such impulsiveness has burned me in the past. But when I get that single product for a great deal that I use each and every day, it makes it all worth it.
Say what you will about Black Friday, but this year, I’ll be out among the other shoppers trying to find the best deals on tech.
Now, before I start talking about why my Wii has been collecting dust, let me just make this clear: I have been a fan of Nintendo products since the 1980s. And each new Nintendo console typically finds its way into my home on launch day. I also enjoy The Legend of Zelda and the Mario franchise.
But that doesn’t mean that I won’t criticize the Wii.
Over the past five months, I have not booted up my Nintendo Wii. However, I have been playing games. In fact, I’ve played so many games as of late that I’ve had to pull myself back a bit to ensure I don’t get ahead of the long list of titles that I plan to beat in the coming year.
But during that period, I haven’t found a single compelling Wii title that makes me want to put down a competitor on the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3. It’s not that I haven’t been searching — trust me, I have — but I simply look at the Wii library and find a slew of casual games that are every now and then punctuated by a so-called “core” title.
Now, I realize that such a complaint is nothing new to the Wii, and a lot of people in my position have had the same reaction. But I’m a little concerned. The Nintendo Wii is the world’s best-selling video game console. It’s also home to several outstanding franchises, most notably Super Mario and The Legend of Zelda. It has a lot going for it.
But it’s also home to a motion technology that isn’t so new anymore. And it’s being met with competition in Sony’s PlayStation Move, that at least in my experience, works exceptionally well, compared to the Wii. And all that fails to mention the value consumers will continue to see in the Microsoft Kinect, which delivers motion-gaming fun without the controller. Simply put, the key revenue driver for the Wii isn’t so unique and compelling any longer.
Of course, that probably won’t stop Nintendo from continuing to enjoy strong sales this holiday season. But it does make me wonder how much longer I will keep the Wii hooked up to my television, rather than disconnect it to free up precious electrical outlet space behind my entertainment center.
Looking at the upcoming Wii release calendar, Donkey Kong Country Returns certainly appeals to me, and I suppose I should (finally) try out Goldeneye 007. But other than that, I’m bored by both what’s available and what’s coming out soon.
It goes beyond games. Although the Wii has Netflix, I don’t go to that device to access content. Instead, I typically choose my Apple TV or my PlayStation 3, now that it also offers support for Hulu Plus. It also helps that the PS3 has a Blu-ray drive, making it even more viable.
Simply put, I’m seeing few reasons to use the Wii much anymore. Although I believe the console has merit and provides a viable experience for some gamers, for me, it’s starting to lose its value.
Whenever I talk about HDTVs with other tech lovers, they typically point to Samsung LED-LCDs or Panasonic plasmas as the go-to televisions for the person looking for the best picture. And as an owner of a Panasonic plasma, I never protest. My 50-inch HDTV has been a treat to have in the house.
But when I get my hands on my next HDTV, I won’t be buying a Samsung LED or even a plasma to replace my beloved Panasonic. No, when I finally head to the store to get my hands on a new HDTV, I’m going to buy a Vizio set.
Now, I know what you’re thinking. Yes, Vizio is supposedly a “budget” HDTV company that shouldn’t be able to compete against products from competitors like Samsung and Panasonic. But if you’ve been following Vizio’s improvements over the years, you’ve probably noticed that visual quality is quite impressive. And all the extras available in its HDTVs make it an ideal choice.
Oh yeah, and there is also that fact that they’re more readily affordable than alternatives.
For the sake of this discussion, allow me to point to the Vizio XVT3D554SV. The LED set features a 55-inch display and 3D technology. Plus, it’s nice and thin at about 3 inches thick. It also has ample inputs for set-top box lovers, thanks to its 5 HDMI ports.
Now, those specs might not seem like much. But consider the fact that the 55-inch set also comes with 120 zones for local dimming; a full selection of Vizio’s “Internet Apps,” including Netflix, Pandora, and Amazon Video On Demand; and the kicker, Wi-Fi, built-in. So, instead of worrying about running a cable from your router to your HDTV, all you need to do is connect it to your Wi-Fi network and you’re all set.
The best part is, its MSRP is just $2,400.
Some might say that competitors have similar offerings. And that’s certainly true. For example, Samsung’s 55-inch LED 3D TV UN55C7000WF, comes with Netflix, Hulu, and other entertainment apps, and features a one-inch thickness. But it only comes with 4 HDMI ports. And the only way to access your Wi-Fi network with the device is with the LinkStick adapter. Oh, and then there’s the issue of price: its MSRP is $3,299.
That’s not to say that Samsung’s HDTV won’t beat Vizio in picture quality — I haven’t tested either product myself, so I can’t say for sure — but on paper, when one compares the competition to Vizio, the HDTV maker holds up quite well. In fact, I think it delivers the most value for your hard-earned dollars than any other company on the market.
And that’s precisely why I’ll be buying a Vizio set next time around. It’s not that I have an issue with other fine options from major vendors, but I like knowing that I’m getting a lot for my money. And time and again, Vizio delivers products that prove it’s trying to capitalize on that kind of customer.
Recently, my day was over and I wanted to relax, so I took to the couch, picked up the remote, and turned on the television. Based on what time it was, I thought I’d catch the end of one of the shows I watch each week and then get to another program after that. I thought it would be a slow, relaxing night.
As I turned on my DVR, it took about 15 seconds to start. When I tried changing the channels, it took about 10 seconds to perform the action. And in the moments when I hit a few buttons, like the channel up and channel down keys to test response time, it locked up for about a minute or so. When it came back, it performed all those actions in about a second.
At that point, I had enough. I knew the drill from talking to my cable company’s customer service agents in the past that the best idea in that situation is to unplug the DVR, wait 30 seconds, and plug it back in. So I did.
And then, as I stared at the black display on my television for, oh, about 5 minutes, I realized something. DVRs today are arguably the worst set-top boxes in any person’s entertainment center. And yet, many of us have them, so we can watch our favorite programming and record shows we want to see.
That is precisely why I can’t wait to get rid of my DVR. I long for the day when a single set-top box (or even a few) will be able to deliver me all the content I care about, so I can finally call the cable company and tell them that their DVR services are no longer required.
The best part is, I think I’m getting close to that point. I have Netflix streaming for old programming, the prospect of using Hulu Plus on my Roku set-top box at some point in the near future for the new stuff, and the possibility of seeing all kinds of content with Google TV once the search giant can find a way to coax studios into seeing its potential as the next big thing in home entertainment.
But alas, I’m not there yet. I watch too many cable shows for me to just ditch Time Warner Cable. And the content I’m currently accessing on other set-top boxes, like that on the Apple TV, can in no way match what I’m getting from my cable provider. At this point, I need to take the abuse my DVR doles out so I can be entertained.
But my patience is wearing thin. I have had countless DVRs over the years, and none of them have worked up to a standard that I even find adequate. There is no attention to detail put into the design of the boxes. They are simply poorly designed pieces of equipment that have no place in the home.
Now, I’m sure some might say I should get a TiVo. I should note that I have one in the bedroom. I replaced it in my living room with my DVR due to the issues I was having with my cable provider’s switched digital video adapter that accompanied the TiVo in order to access several channels. It was a major issue for me.
So, as I sit here contemplating what I will do tonight, I’m afraid I’ll have to go back to the DVR. It’s not that I want to — that’s certainly not the case — but at this point, I simply have no other choice.
What sort of DVR replacements do you think would solve this problem?
I love gaming. Any chance I get to relax, I’m usually found sitting on the couch, playing one of the latest video games to hit store shelves. It’s not simply something that I like to do, it’s a passion of mine. But video game consoles aren’t liked they used to be.
Years ago, the Nintendo Entertainment System, Sega Genesis, or just about every other old console really only allowed people to play video games. Over time, consoles became more sophisticated, allowing folks to pop a CD into a console to listen to music or throw a DVD into the device to watch a movie. But other than that, most consoles throughout history have been focused on gaming.
With the new generation of consoles, the Nintendo Wii, Sony PlayStation 3, and Microsoft Xbox 360, all that has changed. Gaming is just one part of the experience of using those devices. And thanks to continued updates, it’s clear now that all a person really needs in their living room to be entertained is a game console.
Let’s think about the Xbox 360 for a minute. The console obviously plays games both online and offline, but it also delivers ESPN content now, along with social networking features, Netflix, and available television shows and movies. Plus, users can still pop a DVD into the device to watch a movie from their library.
The same can be said for the PlayStation 3. It offers gaming, along with that Netflix content, television shows and movies, and much more. And unlike the Xbox 360, the PlayStation 3 offers Blu-ray playback, making it all the more viable. Like Microsoft’s alternative, it’s an all-in-one device.
But when we look beyond the consoles, we quickly find that no other device can match it. Sure, the Apple TV is priced right at $99, but it only has access to a finite number of television shows and movies, along with Netflix access. Other than that, you’re pretty much out of luck when it comes to entertainment, other than having the ability to access your music library.
The same can be said for Roku set-top boxes, TiVos, and just about every other set-top box on the market. They all offer some of the best features available in game consoles, but they lack gaming, which makes them less attractive.
Now, some might say that the Logitech Revue wins out in this category. After all, they say, the device allows users to access the Web, which provides a wealth of opportunity. But let’s not forget that the Logitech Revue costs $300. And for that price, consumers aren’t even getting the chance to play a game like Call of Duty: Black Ops.
So, maybe it’s time that we focus more of our entertainment attention on video game consoles. They are the real entertainment hubs in our living rooms. They deliver television shows, movies, Web features, and gaming. They provide the full end-to-end experience that consumers covet today.
