The "Nintendo Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
It amazes me every time I see someone say how the Gamecube is kewl because it is 'small and portable', and that none of the other consoles are. What planet are you on?
Every console is portable. PCs with their monitors and cables are not portable, but consoles are. The fact that the Gamecube is marginally smaller than other consoles does not mean it's the only portable console - it means it is marginally smaller, and that's all. They are all still very portable.
You seem to class the smallest console as the only console that is portable.
It's like saying only cars that can go over 200mph can move.
What will you lot say when someone releases a console that is smaller than the Gamecube? Will the Gamecube all of a sudden not be portable, just like the Xbox and PS2 now? The Dreamcast was also very small, yet no-one claimed that as a selling point. Why not? Because it already had enough selling points that were much more valid - first 128-bit console, only console with working online games, first true next-gen console etc. etc.
The Dreamcast didn't need half-@rsed pointless and trivial selling points like 'it's so small you can take it anywhere!' because that is true of ALL consoles.
Perhaps the fact that Nintendo fans claim the size of the console makes it portable or not and then claim this as a selling point should not come as a surprise, as the majority of Nintendo fans are aged to suit the console? If Nintendo build a console to look like a dinky toy, and then make games to suit my little sisters, I suppose they can't complain when their fan-base is so young that they come up with lame positive points like the size of the console.
Step over the the Microsoft, Sony or Sega forums and you see things like 'specifications' and 'hardware' being talked about. This is because these are in fact adult consoles. No-one expects Nintendo fans to care about such things, as they are too obsessed with their cutesy little fluffy game characters to notice 'frame rate' or 'polygon count', but what they DO expect is that you appreciate that some people actually care about the POWER inside their console, and not just if it's small enough to fit down your Jap's eye or not.
At the end of the day if you lot want to sit there and get erections over your small consoles then you can do that, but don't try using it as a reason behind 'mine is better than yours' as it just makes you look stupid.
How many people have been unable to take their Xbox to another room because it was too big? None. Do you hang your Gamecubes on your eye-lashes to play on it, or do you stick it under your TV, exactly where you would stick an Xbox? How many people can take their Gamecube to places an Xbox cannot go? None. Why is this? Because SIZE DOESN'T MATTER.
Every console is portable. PCs with their monitors and cables are not portable, but consoles are. The fact that the Gamecube is marginally smaller than other consoles does not mean it's the only portable console - it means it is marginally smaller, and that's all. They are all still very portable.
You seem to class the smallest console as the only console that is portable.
It's like saying only cars that can go over 200mph can move.
What will you lot say when someone releases a console that is smaller than the Gamecube? Will the Gamecube all of a sudden not be portable, just like the Xbox and PS2 now? The Dreamcast was also very small, yet no-one claimed that as a selling point. Why not? Because it already had enough selling points that were much more valid - first 128-bit console, only console with working online games, first true next-gen console etc. etc.
The Dreamcast didn't need half-@rsed pointless and trivial selling points like 'it's so small you can take it anywhere!' because that is true of ALL consoles.
Perhaps the fact that Nintendo fans claim the size of the console makes it portable or not and then claim this as a selling point should not come as a surprise, as the majority of Nintendo fans are aged to suit the console? If Nintendo build a console to look like a dinky toy, and then make games to suit my little sisters, I suppose they can't complain when their fan-base is so young that they come up with lame positive points like the size of the console.
Step over the the Microsoft, Sony or Sega forums and you see things like 'specifications' and 'hardware' being talked about. This is because these are in fact adult consoles. No-one expects Nintendo fans to care about such things, as they are too obsessed with their cutesy little fluffy game characters to notice 'frame rate' or 'polygon count', but what they DO expect is that you appreciate that some people actually care about the POWER inside their console, and not just if it's small enough to fit down your Jap's eye or not.
At the end of the day if you lot want to sit there and get erections over your small consoles then you can do that, but don't try using it as a reason behind 'mine is better than yours' as it just makes you look stupid.
How many people have been unable to take their Xbox to another room because it was too big? None. Do you hang your Gamecubes on your eye-lashes to play on it, or do you stick it under your TV, exactly where you would stick an Xbox? How many people can take their Gamecube to places an Xbox cannot go? None. Why is this? Because SIZE DOESN'T MATTER.
Page:
Strafex wrote:
> The slowdown in Rogue Leader is just enough to slightly attract you
> attention - a momentary pause.
>
> Infact, it's less noticable than the pause you get when the game saves
> in Halo!
>
> Besides, slowdown is as much the programming as the console.
> I've not seen anything on the Xbox depict huge battles like Endor with
> literally hundreds of tie fighters (no exaduration), loads alliance
> ships and laser blasts going around.
>
> When you consider the detail on each ship and the AI controlling every
> last one, it is very impressive indeed.
> I'm surprised that the slowdown only comes in odd blips (it's more
> like a millisecond pause than genuine slowdown).
yeah also being such a cool game with so much going on your normally to busy to notice
> The slowdown in Rogue Leader is just enough to slightly attract you
> attention - a momentary pause.
>
> Infact, it's less noticable than the pause you get when the game saves
> in Halo!
>
> Besides, slowdown is as much the programming as the console.
> I've not seen anything on the Xbox depict huge battles like Endor with
> literally hundreds of tie fighters (no exaduration), loads alliance
> ships and laser blasts going around.
>
> When you consider the detail on each ship and the AI controlling every
> last one, it is very impressive indeed.
> I'm surprised that the slowdown only comes in odd blips (it's more
> like a millisecond pause than genuine slowdown).
yeah also being such a cool game with so much going on your normally to busy to notice
The slowdown in Rogue Leader is just enough to slightly attract you attention - a momentary pause.
Infact, it's less noticable than the pause you get when the game saves in Halo!
Besides, slowdown is as much the programming as the console.
I've not seen anything on the Xbox depict huge battles like Endor with literally hundreds of tie fighters (no exaduration), loads alliance ships and laser blasts going around.
When you consider the detail on each ship and the AI controlling every last one, it is very impressive indeed.
I'm surprised that the slowdown only comes in odd blips (it's more like a millisecond pause than genuine slowdown).
Infact, it's less noticable than the pause you get when the game saves in Halo!
Besides, slowdown is as much the programming as the console.
I've not seen anything on the Xbox depict huge battles like Endor with literally hundreds of tie fighters (no exaduration), loads alliance ships and laser blasts going around.
When you consider the detail on each ship and the AI controlling every last one, it is very impressive indeed.
I'm surprised that the slowdown only comes in odd blips (it's more like a millisecond pause than genuine slowdown).
Admiteddly there is slowdown in some GC games, but in most cases people aren't gonna notice it. I've heard people talking about slowdown in Rogue Leader but I have yet to actually notice any and it certainly doesn't get in the way fo the gaming experience, for the most part there is a constant framerate.
Framerate problems aren't totally ruled out on X Box either, I can't remember what the game I was reading about was but people where compaining about slowdown.
Framerate problems aren't totally ruled out on X Box either, I can't remember what the game I was reading about was but people where compaining about slowdown.
Ok I just managed to gather the strength to torture myself a little more by reading your post, and have some comments:
1) The Xbox can be connected to the net via the PC's modem.
2) 20% of Europe is actually a very high number of people - dunno how many people you think live in Europe so I can't comment on your obvious stupidity here.
3) You're STILL disagreeing with me on points I make about the GC EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE HERE SAYING THE SAME THING. WHAT A MUPPET. Case in point - slowdown in GC games. If you actually READ what other people have said (that includes what I say actually) then you will SEE that I am not the ONLY one. Since there are more people here willing to admit that there is slowdown than people here so far up Nintendo's hoop to realise it, then it must be true.
Kiss my @rse.
1) The Xbox can be connected to the net via the PC's modem.
2) 20% of Europe is actually a very high number of people - dunno how many people you think live in Europe so I can't comment on your obvious stupidity here.
3) You're STILL disagreeing with me on points I make about the GC EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE HERE SAYING THE SAME THING. WHAT A MUPPET. Case in point - slowdown in GC games. If you actually READ what other people have said (that includes what I say actually) then you will SEE that I am not the ONLY one. Since there are more people here willing to admit that there is slowdown than people here so far up Nintendo's hoop to realise it, then it must be true.
Kiss my @rse.
*
Strafex wrote:
> Hey! It's unfair to say a fanbase is made of idiots.
> Every fanbase has their intelligent gamers and idiots (and
> Whitestripes isn't an idiot, you just seem to have gotten off on the
> wrong foot! :-D).
See, and all I did at the start was post rival arguments to use, if that affects you so much that you behave the way you have been, I suggest you don't start arguments in the future.
> Hey! It's unfair to say a fanbase is made of idiots.
> Every fanbase has their intelligent gamers and idiots (and
> Whitestripes isn't an idiot, you just seem to have gotten off on the
> wrong foot! :-D).
See, and all I did at the start was post rival arguments to use, if that affects you so much that you behave the way you have been, I suggest you don't start arguments in the future.
Gar-J wrote:
> Whitestripes wrote:
>
> No, that's the only one you have been able to understand. There's a
> difference.
No, it's the only one you've mentioned since I joined this topic.
>
> Ok, I will write them out in PLAIN ENGLISH in the HOPE that dear God
> will work some miracle and give your ping-pong ball brain an extra
> little boost so that you may accommodate this information!!!!!
I don't care what English your write them in, just actually writting them would be a big step forward for you.
>
> Xbox
> Plus areas:
> Most powerful, in simplest terms;
> Greatest potential for ground-breaking games due to huge storage space
> which can be used for huge amounts of data that a real world
> environment would need;
> Broadband connectivity - multiplayer games are the way of the future
> as this technology gets cheaper and more widespread;
Online games aren't nesscarily the future (and definatly not for a long time), oh and I predict your response to that:
"Your just saying that becuse the GC doesnt go online"
Seeing as only 20% of houses in Europe will actually be able to use broadband by 2010 whats the bloody point? There are going to be millions of people (well, there would be millions if it at actually sold millions) that have an X-box but no broadband, which sort of renders it useless.
> It's getting some pretty good games, but this isn't a plus area as you
> would of course expect this from any console;
> It laf**ks many original games, but that isn't a negative point either
> because just cos a game isn't original, doesn't mean it isn't
> enjoyable.
>
No, but you've got to admit, there does seem to be a sllght overkill on 'army' games.
> Negative points:
> Hasn't sold well due to difficulty in craf**king the market's fan-base
> and stupidly high price;
> This means some Xbox developers are losing confidence in the machine
> and think it might 'do a Dreamcast', and so are putting some projects
> on hold, and others are being cancelled;
>
> To be honest that's the only reason I haven't gone out and bought
> one.
>
> GC
> Plus points:
> Some unusual games, but I won't say original cos they are not -
> they're updates of older Nintendo games. Still unusual though, so
> that's kewl.
>
> And that's it there.
Uhhh....okay, the GC is capable of having a 56k modem and a broadband connection put into it in the future. Games are updates? Shall I say them again? I must admit, I've really enjoyed playing Pikmin and Animal Crossing on the NES, SNES and N64, and lets not forget those Gameboy versions! Also thers the link up capability between the GC and the GBA, which a lot of games in development now are using. Theres also the e-card reader, which again adds huge potential to what can be put into new, original, games, as well as old ones. Plus, not a huge point and I'm not sure how this compares up to the box but the GC doesn't seem to load! Only two games I have load, WaveRave for 4-5 seconds before a race, and THPS3, which is a PS2 port. All my other games play straight away, with no visible loading times at all.
So, thats slightly better than your list of...one point! Continuing your trend I see.
Oh and Savatt, that Toxic Grind game is coming to the GC as well, it doesn't look very original though..
It's marginally smaller than a PS2, but that
> makes f*f**k all difference in any way so that's not going under plus
> points.
>
> Negative points:
> Least powerful;
We've been over this, the PS2 is the least powerful.
> Already games are dogged by slow-down which show the technical
> capabilities of the machine to be fairly low.
OH MY GOD!! Where do you get your information!? The Everything Nintendo Do Is A Complete Load Of Crap magazine? Games are not dogged by slowdown, and that just shows your incompetence, and the fact you've probably never played on one properly, despite your claims.I own seven games at the moment: LM, RL, SMB, SSBM, Waverace, THPS3 and Pikmin, all of which run smoothly and continuesly. I've had slowdown ONCE for 2 seconds on Rogue Leader, when I was muf**king about I flew right above the ground in the Y-Wing, and dropped all my bombs in one go at the same place, that caused two seconds of slowdown. But consider it was once of the first ever games developed for the GC, plus they had to make it extremely quif**kly and were constantly under pressure to prepare it for launch, so there wasn't much time for optimising. And considreing their result I'd say they have done a damn good job, and so would you if you had played it properly and not just at a mates house or in a shop.
> Although it may have the capability in future, Nintendo say they're
> not going in for multiplayer games yet cos there are too many issues
> to be dealth with; :o/
I assume your talking about online games here, as I'm hoping even your intelligent enough to realise that since the N64 Nintendo have had the best multiplayer games, beating anything on the PS2 or X-box without too much difficulty. And it already has the capability for a modem and broadband, Nintendo are just going to work it out properly, they know hardly anyone has broadband, they see this problem and are trying to work out ways to get around it.
>
> Now, with a completely UN-BIASED view, that is how it is.
hmmm, your un-biased veiw gives the GC only a single good point...
>
> Based on that information, I think the Xbox has the edge.
And based on that, I don't.
> Whitestripes wrote:
>
> No, that's the only one you have been able to understand. There's a
> difference.
No, it's the only one you've mentioned since I joined this topic.
>
> Ok, I will write them out in PLAIN ENGLISH in the HOPE that dear God
> will work some miracle and give your ping-pong ball brain an extra
> little boost so that you may accommodate this information!!!!!
I don't care what English your write them in, just actually writting them would be a big step forward for you.
>
> Xbox
> Plus areas:
> Most powerful, in simplest terms;
> Greatest potential for ground-breaking games due to huge storage space
> which can be used for huge amounts of data that a real world
> environment would need;
> Broadband connectivity - multiplayer games are the way of the future
> as this technology gets cheaper and more widespread;
Online games aren't nesscarily the future (and definatly not for a long time), oh and I predict your response to that:
"Your just saying that becuse the GC doesnt go online
Seeing as only 20% of houses in Europe will actually be able to use broadband by 2010 whats the bloody point? There are going to be millions of people (well, there would be millions if it at actually sold millions) that have an X-box but no broadband, which sort of renders it useless.
> It's getting some pretty good games, but this isn't a plus area as you
> would of course expect this from any console;
> It laf**ks many original games, but that isn't a negative point either
> because just cos a game isn't original, doesn't mean it isn't
> enjoyable.
>
No, but you've got to admit, there does seem to be a sllght overkill on 'army' games.
> Negative points:
> Hasn't sold well due to difficulty in craf**king the market's fan-base
> and stupidly high price;
> This means some Xbox developers are losing confidence in the machine
> and think it might 'do a Dreamcast', and so are putting some projects
> on hold, and others are being cancelled;
>
> To be honest that's the only reason I haven't gone out and bought
> one.
>
> GC
> Plus points:
> Some unusual games, but I won't say original cos they are not -
> they're updates of older Nintendo games. Still unusual though, so
> that's kewl.
>
> And that's it there.
Uhhh....okay, the GC is capable of having a 56k modem and a broadband connection put into it in the future. Games are updates? Shall I say them again? I must admit, I've really enjoyed playing Pikmin and Animal Crossing on the NES, SNES and N64, and lets not forget those Gameboy versions! Also thers the link up capability between the GC and the GBA, which a lot of games in development now are using. Theres also the e-card reader, which again adds huge potential to what can be put into new, original, games, as well as old ones. Plus, not a huge point and I'm not sure how this compares up to the box but the GC doesn't seem to load! Only two games I have load, WaveRave for 4-5 seconds before a race, and THPS3, which is a PS2 port. All my other games play straight away, with no visible loading times at all.
So, thats slightly better than your list of...one point! Continuing your trend I see.
Oh and Savatt, that Toxic Grind game is coming to the GC as well, it doesn't look very original though..
It's marginally smaller than a PS2, but that
> makes f*f**k all difference in any way so that's not going under plus
> points.
>
> Negative points:
> Least powerful;
We've been over this, the PS2 is the least powerful.
> Already games are dogged by slow-down which show the technical
> capabilities of the machine to be fairly low.
OH MY GOD!! Where do you get your information!? The Everything Nintendo Do Is A Complete Load Of Crap magazine? Games are not dogged by slowdown, and that just shows your incompetence, and the fact you've probably never played on one properly, despite your claims.I own seven games at the moment: LM, RL, SMB, SSBM, Waverace, THPS3 and Pikmin, all of which run smoothly and continuesly. I've had slowdown ONCE for 2 seconds on Rogue Leader, when I was muf**king about I flew right above the ground in the Y-Wing, and dropped all my bombs in one go at the same place, that caused two seconds of slowdown. But consider it was once of the first ever games developed for the GC, plus they had to make it extremely quif**kly and were constantly under pressure to prepare it for launch, so there wasn't much time for optimising. And considreing their result I'd say they have done a damn good job, and so would you if you had played it properly and not just at a mates house or in a shop.
> Although it may have the capability in future, Nintendo say they're
> not going in for multiplayer games yet cos there are too many issues
> to be dealth with; :o/
I assume your talking about online games here, as I'm hoping even your intelligent enough to realise that since the N64 Nintendo have had the best multiplayer games, beating anything on the PS2 or X-box without too much difficulty. And it already has the capability for a modem and broadband, Nintendo are just going to work it out properly, they know hardly anyone has broadband, they see this problem and are trying to work out ways to get around it.
>
> Now, with a completely UN-BIASED view, that is how it is.
hmmm, your un-biased veiw gives the GC only a single good point...
>
> Based on that information, I think the Xbox has the edge.
And based on that, I don't.
Tiltawhirl wrote:
> Gar-J give these guys a chance, when most of these guys read they're
> used to having large pictures and illustrations and sometimes if
> they're luck they get to colour stuff in.
>
> :D
Yea man I forgot about that sorry mate!
> Gar-J give these guys a chance, when most of these guys read they're
> used to having large pictures and illustrations and sometimes if
> they're luck they get to colour stuff in.
>
> :D
Yea man I forgot about that sorry mate!
Page: