The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Now, if I remember correctly, one of the big arguments against the PS2 was that all the games being released for it were, "same old sequels" or "rehashes of PSX games."
Well, today I got Shadow Of Memories. I now have 6 PS2 games. I looked at them, and then thought, "How many are sequels??"
So, I have:
F1 World Championship Season 2000- This isn't really a sequel. I'm an F1 game, so I decided to get the first PS2 F1 game. Every console has an F1 game. Most do anyway.
Smuggler's Run: NOT a sequel.
Tekken Tag Tournament: Okay, this is a sequel, but it's on a different console, and has nice new name. Better than 'Tekken 4' anyway.
Star Wars Starfighter: NOT a sequel.
Shadow Of Memories: NOT a sequel.
Zone Of The Enders: NOT a sequel, and it is also my second favourite game ever.
Now, I believe people such as Wookiee, ssxpro and M16 will back me up on this with the games they have. I mean, that's not exactly 'lots' of sequels, is it??
Thanks for reading, Ant.
Well, today I got Shadow Of Memories. I now have 6 PS2 games. I looked at them, and then thought, "How many are sequels??"
So, I have:
F1 World Championship Season 2000- This isn't really a sequel. I'm an F1 game, so I decided to get the first PS2 F1 game. Every console has an F1 game. Most do anyway.
Smuggler's Run: NOT a sequel.
Tekken Tag Tournament: Okay, this is a sequel, but it's on a different console, and has nice new name. Better than 'Tekken 4' anyway.
Star Wars Starfighter: NOT a sequel.
Shadow Of Memories: NOT a sequel.
Zone Of The Enders: NOT a sequel, and it is also my second favourite game ever.
Now, I believe people such as Wookiee, ssxpro and M16 will back me up on this with the games they have. I mean, that's not exactly 'lots' of sequels, is it??
Thanks for reading, Ant.
Page:
Your Honour wrote:
> SSXPRO, you know i hate to argue :-), but i cant believe you said
> that:
No problem, arguing is supposedly what we`re here for, kind of.
I, personally, think that the PS
> controller is THE most uncomfortable pad i've ever used.
That all depends on what controller you`re used to. If you have used the N64/Dreamcast controllers for a long time they begin to feel comfortable, its the same with the Sony ones.
DC controller: Lacking in true grip places allowing full focus. It doesn`t have handles that are big enough (especially for hands as large as mine). The screen is a waste of time, except as a joke with some friends, but I won`t go into that.
N64 controller. Lacks symmetry - since then I`ve hated it. The actual "prongs" themselves are very similar to those of the PS controllers, and the thumb positions are also virtually identical, This leaves only the analog sticks, which in the case of the N64 version, are capable of creating an imprint on your thumb where as the PS controllers are smoother.
PS contoller - Fully analog (255 settings) on all buttons except start/select. Two analog sticks, allowing extra accuracy of movement in a more versatile range of games. The "handles" allow a comfortable position for thumbs to lie naturally over the buttons, without any stretch, or strain. The location of the analog sticks is so close to the buttons that the position is also comfortable.
I guess its down to opinion, but the PS controller suits the more symmetrical nature of humans much better.
I don't
> see how people can have any thumbs left after they've done an
> endurance race on GT2.
How about 12 hours of Moto GP. No problems there. My best ever, was 21 hours Wipeout 2097 link up with three of us with winner stays in, loser gets to eat and rest for a few minutes. No problems there when you`re used to the controller.
If the definition of a non-sequel console is "it uses
> a different chip-set" then all consoles are non-sequels, as
> they will all use different chip sets to their predecessor.
Exactly. It doesn`t become a sequel just because it has the same controller.
> SSXPRO, you know i hate to argue :-), but i cant believe you said
> that:
No problem, arguing is supposedly what we`re here for, kind of.
I, personally, think that the PS
> controller is THE most uncomfortable pad i've ever used.
That all depends on what controller you`re used to. If you have used the N64/Dreamcast controllers for a long time they begin to feel comfortable, its the same with the Sony ones.
DC controller: Lacking in true grip places allowing full focus. It doesn`t have handles that are big enough (especially for hands as large as mine). The screen is a waste of time, except as a joke with some friends, but I won`t go into that.
N64 controller. Lacks symmetry - since then I`ve hated it. The actual "prongs" themselves are very similar to those of the PS controllers, and the thumb positions are also virtually identical, This leaves only the analog sticks, which in the case of the N64 version, are capable of creating an imprint on your thumb where as the PS controllers are smoother.
PS contoller - Fully analog (255 settings) on all buttons except start/select. Two analog sticks, allowing extra accuracy of movement in a more versatile range of games. The "handles" allow a comfortable position for thumbs to lie naturally over the buttons, without any stretch, or strain. The location of the analog sticks is so close to the buttons that the position is also comfortable.
I guess its down to opinion, but the PS controller suits the more symmetrical nature of humans much better.
I don't
> see how people can have any thumbs left after they've done an
> endurance race on GT2.
How about 12 hours of Moto GP. No problems there. My best ever, was 21 hours Wipeout 2097 link up with three of us with winner stays in, loser gets to eat and rest for a few minutes. No problems there when you`re used to the controller.
If the definition of a non-sequel console is "it uses
> a different chip-set" then all consoles are non-sequels, as
> they will all use different chip sets to their predecessor.
Exactly. It doesn`t become a sequel just because it has the same controller.
Personally I like the Dual Shock controller - it's the most comfortable for me personally.
I suppose really that once Sony decided that PS2 would be backwards-compatible, the controller pretty much had to be the same, or at least very similar, to allow the games to be played.
I suppose really that once Sony decided that PS2 would be backwards-compatible, the controller pretty much had to be the same, or at least very similar, to allow the games to be played.
Dan_uk wrote:
> I didn't once say that the PS2 being a sequel was completely a bad
> thing.
But it's clear that the Gamecube is far more
> innoative.
You see while Sony know they can make money out of the
> Playstation name, Nintendo know they have to work harder to win over
> the public.
That's why the Gamecube has had more time and effort
> but into it.
That's how it is at the end of the day.
>Goodnight!
That's bullcrap. :D
> I didn't once say that the PS2 being a sequel was completely a bad
> thing.
But it's clear that the Gamecube is far more
> innoative.
You see while Sony know they can make money out of the
> Playstation name, Nintendo know they have to work harder to win over
> the public.
That's why the Gamecube has had more time and effort
> but into it.
That's how it is at the end of the day.
>Goodnight!
That's bullcrap. :D
DC controllers are the best, they got the VM thing, nice layout, they look good and the annollogue is great.
They ain't too hot for fighting games though.
They ain't too hot for fighting games though.
I didn't once say that the PS2 being a sequel was completely a bad thing.
But it's clear that the Gamecube is far more innoative.
You see while Sony know they can make money out of the Playstation name, Nintendo know they have to work harder to win over the public.
That's why the Gamecube has had more time and effort but into it.
That's how it is at the end of the day.
Goodnight!
But it's clear that the Gamecube is far more innoative.
You see while Sony know they can make money out of the Playstation name, Nintendo know they have to work harder to win over the public.
That's why the Gamecube has had more time and effort but into it.
That's how it is at the end of the day.
Goodnight!
Lets have a vote for all the PS2 owners.
Do you prefer it that the controllers are the same, but with Dual Shock 2??
I do, because it means I don't have to pay extra for more controllers!!
Do you prefer it that the controllers are the same, but with Dual Shock 2??
I do, because it means I don't have to pay extra for more controllers!!
SSXPRO, you know i hate to argue :-), but i cant believe you said that:
"Instead of making a mess of one controller, and having to think up a new one like "other" companies, Sony got it right first time"
I, personally, think that the PS controller is THE most uncomfortable pad i've ever used.
I don't see how people can have any thumbs left after they've done an endurance race on GT2.
I agree though, that technically all consoles are "sequels" if you like, of previous ones.
If the definition of a non-sequel console is "it uses a different chip-set" then all consoles are non-sequels, as they will all use different chip sets to their predecessor.
"Instead of making a mess of one controller, and having to think up a new one like "other" companies, Sony got it right first time"
I, personally, think that the PS controller is THE most uncomfortable pad i've ever used.
I don't see how people can have any thumbs left after they've done an endurance race on GT2.
I agree though, that technically all consoles are "sequels" if you like, of previous ones.
If the definition of a non-sequel console is "it uses a different chip-set" then all consoles are non-sequels, as they will all use different chip sets to their predecessor.
Also the backward compatability of the PS2 means you can't really argue that certain games 'aren't really sequels because they haven't appeared on this machine before', because they have. Sort of....
Dan_uk wrote:
> What I meant in the way that the PS2 as a sequel was instead of
> being an entirely new concept, it was just more of something
> popular. It was DESIGNED like a sequel.
I think we`ve covered that, but I don`t quite see why you see it as a sequel, otherwise most things in life are sequels.
It even uses the same
> pads/accessories as the PS1 and plays all the old games too.
So this is bad? Instead of making a mess of one controller, and having to think up a new one like "other" companies, Sony got it right first time. It also helps with the backwards compatibility.
It's
> got one or 2 nice features but it's basically a PS1 with an upgraded
> chipset, modem and DVD player.
What? Its a new chip, the differences in the insides of the consoles are no different to the regular progression of any other console. That comment was a waste of your typing.
The Gamecube has been started from
> scratch.
Completely new chipset, new pads, new accesories and much
> more new ideas.
Yeah, well to build on the back of the N64 would have been suicide. Why use a failed design? The new pads and accessories has been covered. The new chip set is again no different to the upgrade style of Sony. As for "much more new ideas" like what? Can you think of a few please?
It's been designed for a newer market with a unique
> type of disk, instead of the older cartriges.
Might be new, but that may work against it. Just because it has a different type of disc probably won`t help it.
It's got a brand
> new name, it's going for a brand new look.
The only way it's
> similar to the N64 is that Nintendo has made it.
Thats lucky, maybe it might stand a chance. As for the new name, what does it matter? Oh no my PS2 has a similar name, now I bet the gameplay has been comprimised.
Sony on the
> otherhand has simply made a better Playstation.
Erm? Yes. It is called a Playstation, and its better than the other one. However, I do see what you are trying to say, and I disagree, its only a way of trying to claw your way out of your own argument.
That's not a bad
> thing neccesarily but it's a sequel. A sequel to a console that was
> filled with sequels and while a lot of the good PS2 games are
> original, there's a thousand sequels among them.
So what? If they`re good then we buy `em, if not then it doesn`t matter. The main reason there are more sequels on the Psone is that there are more games full stop. I bet the ratios aren`t all that different. It would be interesting to see what the truth is there. (This does not mean I want people coming in making up totally unreasonable statistics to favour their machine, but I bet there would be some surprises were the truth revealed.
The Gamecube on
> the other hand has one or 2 sequels (quality MGS2 style sequels
> instead of the average PS sequel) and lots of original games
> too.
How do you know they are of MGS2 quality? They haven`t been released yet, and only demos are available for MGS2. As for the "one or two" sequels, when the Nintendo guys were telling us all about their fabulous titles, I certainly remember at least 5 of the 6 they mentioned were sequels! Ha! I had fun reading that one!
And because the PSOne was so popular, people have already
> played the PS2's prequels too death while the Gamecubes prequels on
> the N64 aren't that well known to the average gamer so they seem
> more original.
So your saying that due to the fact nobody bothers with thew N64, it won`t matter that there are sequels on the Gamecube. That is a really poor argument.
I've gone a bit haven't it... :-) ? Haven`t got a clue what this meant.
> What I meant in the way that the PS2 as a sequel was instead of
> being an entirely new concept, it was just more of something
> popular. It was DESIGNED like a sequel.
I think we`ve covered that, but I don`t quite see why you see it as a sequel, otherwise most things in life are sequels.
It even uses the same
> pads/accessories as the PS1 and plays all the old games too.
So this is bad? Instead of making a mess of one controller, and having to think up a new one like "other" companies, Sony got it right first time. It also helps with the backwards compatibility.
It's
> got one or 2 nice features but it's basically a PS1 with an upgraded
> chipset, modem and DVD player.
What? Its a new chip, the differences in the insides of the consoles are no different to the regular progression of any other console. That comment was a waste of your typing.
The Gamecube has been started from
> scratch.
Completely new chipset, new pads, new accesories and much
> more new ideas.
Yeah, well to build on the back of the N64 would have been suicide. Why use a failed design? The new pads and accessories has been covered. The new chip set is again no different to the upgrade style of Sony. As for "much more new ideas" like what? Can you think of a few please?
It's been designed for a newer market with a unique
> type of disk, instead of the older cartriges.
Might be new, but that may work against it. Just because it has a different type of disc probably won`t help it.
It's got a brand
> new name, it's going for a brand new look.
The only way it's
> similar to the N64 is that Nintendo has made it.
Thats lucky, maybe it might stand a chance. As for the new name, what does it matter? Oh no my PS2 has a similar name, now I bet the gameplay has been comprimised.
Sony on the
> otherhand has simply made a better Playstation.
Erm? Yes. It is called a Playstation, and its better than the other one. However, I do see what you are trying to say, and I disagree, its only a way of trying to claw your way out of your own argument.
That's not a bad
> thing neccesarily but it's a sequel. A sequel to a console that was
> filled with sequels and while a lot of the good PS2 games are
> original, there's a thousand sequels among them.
So what? If they`re good then we buy `em, if not then it doesn`t matter. The main reason there are more sequels on the Psone is that there are more games full stop. I bet the ratios aren`t all that different. It would be interesting to see what the truth is there. (This does not mean I want people coming in making up totally unreasonable statistics to favour their machine, but I bet there would be some surprises were the truth revealed.
The Gamecube on
> the other hand has one or 2 sequels (quality MGS2 style sequels
> instead of the average PS sequel) and lots of original games
> too.
How do you know they are of MGS2 quality? They haven`t been released yet, and only demos are available for MGS2. As for the "one or two" sequels, when the Nintendo guys were telling us all about their fabulous titles, I certainly remember at least 5 of the 6 they mentioned were sequels! Ha! I had fun reading that one!
And because the PSOne was so popular, people have already
> played the PS2's prequels too death while the Gamecubes prequels on
> the N64 aren't that well known to the average gamer so they seem
> more original.
So your saying that due to the fact nobody bothers with thew N64, it won`t matter that there are sequels on the Gamecube. That is a really poor argument.
I've gone a bit haven't it... :-) ? Haven`t got a clue what this meant.
I think its good that PS2 plays the old PS1 games. As you upgrade to newer consoles over the years, you run out of room to keep any old ones and tend to end up selling them on.
I think it'd be nice if the Gamecube had a slot for N64 cartridges so people can still go back to Conker's, etc. Plus when you sell your old system (and games with it), its a rare thing of getting a decent amount of money for it. So all that money you spend buying these games ends up going down the drain in a way cause you can't use the games anymore once you get rid of the old console.
I mean i've owned 3 consoles at once before and they soon take up space (not to mention the damn wires !). So I'm all for backwards compatability.
I think it'd be nice if the Gamecube had a slot for N64 cartridges so people can still go back to Conker's, etc. Plus when you sell your old system (and games with it), its a rare thing of getting a decent amount of money for it. So all that money you spend buying these games ends up going down the drain in a way cause you can't use the games anymore once you get rid of the old console.
I mean i've owned 3 consoles at once before and they soon take up space (not to mention the damn wires !). So I'm all for backwards compatability.
Page: