Jeralyn's Debate!

1.  Playstation has LUNAR, Nintendo 64 doesn't.

2.  Playstation has fun games, neener neener

3.  Um, Playstation 2 is gonna crash and burn (atleast
I hope it will--I haven't seen any real reason to get
one yet).  Long live Dreamcast!

4.  Playstation has LUNAR 2, Nintendo 64 doesn't.

5.  Face it, I don't really give a care what console
any game is for (but goooo DC!).  The console isn't
what matters, or atleast it shouldn't.  It's the games
that are what make people buy certain consoles.  I
mean, if there's a fun game on N64, then so be it,
great.  If there's a fun game on Game Gear, does it
matter that it might not be the best console?  No.
Serious gamers shouldn't become biased on one certain
system--they'd miss out on fun ones from other
systems!  For example, if I only played Playstation
games and refused to give other systems a second
glance, I'd miss out on a lot of fun coming from N64
and DC.  The same goes for any system.  Here's another
example:  Say a system came out that would be perfect
in every aspect--amazing graphics, speed, sound,
control, everything that makes a system great--but it
had one catch.  There was only one game for it, and
that game was boring and was programmed very poorly,
not using any of the benefits of the perfect system.
Would many people buy that system?  Probably not.
What I'm saying is that the games are what makes the
systems, not the systems themselves (although good
systems are definitely a plus).  Follow the games, not
the consoles.  There are no really bad systems, just
ones that don't have many good games.
Wasn't that cute? Personalized, definetly.
Okies, back to the Rainy Circle!
This page hosted by Get your own Free Home Page