The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Being a die-hard Nintendo fan is not easy you know. Every morning I get up, bow to my Gamecube, kiss all my joy pads and religiously study the manuals of all my Nintendo games (SNES. NES, N64, Gamecube and Gameboy). Every piece of negative news I spin into a positive light, I do it so well, Nintendo should hire me as their PR wizard.
But I’ve had enough. Nintendo you are one ******* stupid bloody piece of ****. That’s right it is I, the legendary Dringo, he who can not be slain by Playstation and starves off the threat of the X-box who is saying this you proud ******. What the hell are you playing at? I’m a WESTERN NINTENDO FAN, I don’t get all those ******* titles from Japan with the words Giftipia or Animal Forest printed on the side. And the ones I do get, Doshin the ******* Giant, turns out to be a pile of utter toss.
Every time I spin some negative news article into a positive light but why? Who’s the idiot now ah? You cut second party ties with a certain Left Field, Left Field (NBA courtside and Excitebike 64) are your sports developer; they make your sports games. But oh look you don’t REALLY need them now SEGA has gone multi-format with their sports range. So remove them, who cares. Oh well look at that, less than a year later and SEGA cancel all their sports titles for the Gamecube. WOOPS! Now whom can you turn to? That’s right NO ONE, I have noticed you are now making your own mature sports games (the upcoming Legend of Golfer) but it’s too late.
Ah yes Nintendo, now onto Rare Ware. My previous status was that “they’re crap anyway” and that “they lost Nintendo money”. ********, you ARE dumb aren’t you Nintendo? Want to know why they didn’t make you much money in the year before you sold them? Because they didn’t ACTUALLY release any bloody games! Rare Ware are an unresponsive developer but they were your other half, they are more than Silicon Knights, Left Field, HAL etc... put together. They made Banjo, Conker, Killer Instinct, Donkey Kong and Perfect Dark… all of these are BIG Nintendo releases, well they would have been if you hadn’t ******* sold them! Look at this, your sales aren’t up to scratch! Could this be down to a certain absence of a company that made half your AAA titles? It nearly forced me away, but then that was okay, at least you have Retro Studios and Silicon Knights.
Oh Sympathy where have you gone.
First off you crush Retro Studio’s. A bit of a re-shuffle was needed, EAD’s help was appreciated on Metroid Prime. BUT did you really need to destroy the 4 teams that were there into 1? Raven Blade, that racer and that football game WAS exactly what Nintendo Gamecube lacks. A decent footy game, a decent exclusive racing title and a mature action RPG. But you cancelled them. Did you really have to scrap all those games?
And now modern day. The one that made me snap. I love Silicon Knights. True they are hardly a true example of Nintendo (prefer cinematic gameplay and adult games) but that was the point. Nintendo you’ve told me time and time again how you want to be more “adult” and Eternal Darkness and Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes are YOUR most mature games. And you cut ties with the company behind them? Too Human can now return to the PS2, which it was originally coded for, and you’ve lost yet another special western developer.
I know Nintendo. You have loads of second parties, some I never even knew about including that new sports developer SETA (ever heard of them? No neither have I). But Rare, Silicon Knights, the full Retro team and Left Field could have all pushed Nintendo in both Europe and America. You would have defeated Microsoft and competed more fiercely. But instead you try to get exclusives from other companies that simply do not sell. Capcom are having to cancel their plans to keep Viewtiful Joe and Killer 7 exclusive and cannot wait for the Resident Evil deal to expire. Namco are doing okay but that’s because they hardly support Nintendo as much as they support Sony. SEGA have been drifting away ever so slowly, remember the Virtual Fighter RPG and the sonic series were once exclusive to Nintendo. They are both now lost.
So tell me Nintendo, who do you have left to sell your product to the western world? You don’t have Rare, you don’t have Silicon Knights, you don’t have Left field. Christ you don’t even have Capcom anymore. And in fact you’ve even lost Dringo, your most avid supporter. Sure I love Zelda and Mario, but I’m a western gamer, I have western needs and the only western game you actually make is Metroid Prime, and I don’t even like it.
Maybe one day you’ll acquire some killer, high profile companies such as Capcom, Midway or Free Radical Design. But in the mean time I need to raise funds for an X-box. After all a western Nintendo fan needs his Rare.
Dringo.
But I’ve had enough. Nintendo you are one ******* stupid bloody piece of ****. That’s right it is I, the legendary Dringo, he who can not be slain by Playstation and starves off the threat of the X-box who is saying this you proud ******. What the hell are you playing at? I’m a WESTERN NINTENDO FAN, I don’t get all those ******* titles from Japan with the words Giftipia or Animal Forest printed on the side. And the ones I do get, Doshin the ******* Giant, turns out to be a pile of utter toss.
Every time I spin some negative news article into a positive light but why? Who’s the idiot now ah? You cut second party ties with a certain Left Field, Left Field (NBA courtside and Excitebike 64) are your sports developer; they make your sports games. But oh look you don’t REALLY need them now SEGA has gone multi-format with their sports range. So remove them, who cares. Oh well look at that, less than a year later and SEGA cancel all their sports titles for the Gamecube. WOOPS! Now whom can you turn to? That’s right NO ONE, I have noticed you are now making your own mature sports games (the upcoming Legend of Golfer) but it’s too late.
Ah yes Nintendo, now onto Rare Ware. My previous status was that “they’re crap anyway” and that “they lost Nintendo money”. ********, you ARE dumb aren’t you Nintendo? Want to know why they didn’t make you much money in the year before you sold them? Because they didn’t ACTUALLY release any bloody games! Rare Ware are an unresponsive developer but they were your other half, they are more than Silicon Knights, Left Field, HAL etc... put together. They made Banjo, Conker, Killer Instinct, Donkey Kong and Perfect Dark… all of these are BIG Nintendo releases, well they would have been if you hadn’t ******* sold them! Look at this, your sales aren’t up to scratch! Could this be down to a certain absence of a company that made half your AAA titles? It nearly forced me away, but then that was okay, at least you have Retro Studios and Silicon Knights.
Oh Sympathy where have you gone.
First off you crush Retro Studio’s. A bit of a re-shuffle was needed, EAD’s help was appreciated on Metroid Prime. BUT did you really need to destroy the 4 teams that were there into 1? Raven Blade, that racer and that football game WAS exactly what Nintendo Gamecube lacks. A decent footy game, a decent exclusive racing title and a mature action RPG. But you cancelled them. Did you really have to scrap all those games?
And now modern day. The one that made me snap. I love Silicon Knights. True they are hardly a true example of Nintendo (prefer cinematic gameplay and adult games) but that was the point. Nintendo you’ve told me time and time again how you want to be more “adult” and Eternal Darkness and Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes are YOUR most mature games. And you cut ties with the company behind them? Too Human can now return to the PS2, which it was originally coded for, and you’ve lost yet another special western developer.
I know Nintendo. You have loads of second parties, some I never even knew about including that new sports developer SETA (ever heard of them? No neither have I). But Rare, Silicon Knights, the full Retro team and Left Field could have all pushed Nintendo in both Europe and America. You would have defeated Microsoft and competed more fiercely. But instead you try to get exclusives from other companies that simply do not sell. Capcom are having to cancel their plans to keep Viewtiful Joe and Killer 7 exclusive and cannot wait for the Resident Evil deal to expire. Namco are doing okay but that’s because they hardly support Nintendo as much as they support Sony. SEGA have been drifting away ever so slowly, remember the Virtual Fighter RPG and the sonic series were once exclusive to Nintendo. They are both now lost.
So tell me Nintendo, who do you have left to sell your product to the western world? You don’t have Rare, you don’t have Silicon Knights, you don’t have Left field. Christ you don’t even have Capcom anymore. And in fact you’ve even lost Dringo, your most avid supporter. Sure I love Zelda and Mario, but I’m a western gamer, I have western needs and the only western game you actually make is Metroid Prime, and I don’t even like it.
Maybe one day you’ll acquire some killer, high profile companies such as Capcom, Midway or Free Radical Design. But in the mean time I need to raise funds for an X-box. After all a western Nintendo fan needs his Rare.
Dringo.
Page:
My ultimate point is thus.
Nintendo are a great multiplayer developer, their Mario series of multiplayer titles are fun, family gaming. The party series has been consistantly good with the most recent being the best, Golf and Tennis were amazing last time around and this time they are bound to also hit the nail on the head. Kart and Smash Brothers to this day stands as the best racing/fighting multiplayer title ever.
To comment on the lack of first person shooters is an obvious thing to do. Nintendo grabbed Die Hard: Vendetta but it failed to attach a multiplayer and grab the market. Geist might do it, we don't know. The thing is Nintendo did make a killer first person shooter. Something even Microsoft owners can be envious of and that is Metroid Prime. One of the finest evolutions of the first person shooter genre. Not a refinement an evolution.
But again it is not a multiplayer title. Thusly struggled to compete. Which is why Metroid Prime 2 does contain a deathmatch mode. Despite criticism this will help elevate Prime to the status Goldeneye acchieved on the N64.
The GBA-GC connectivity concept is clever, it enables players to view their screen and no one else can. It is brilliant. This is why the idea rules, it adopts a system that you can see a view that you share with your co-players on the TV AND your own secret screen. Shame it failed to take off.
Nintendo are still masters of multiplayer.
Nintendo are a great multiplayer developer, their Mario series of multiplayer titles are fun, family gaming. The party series has been consistantly good with the most recent being the best, Golf and Tennis were amazing last time around and this time they are bound to also hit the nail on the head. Kart and Smash Brothers to this day stands as the best racing/fighting multiplayer title ever.
To comment on the lack of first person shooters is an obvious thing to do. Nintendo grabbed Die Hard: Vendetta but it failed to attach a multiplayer and grab the market. Geist might do it, we don't know. The thing is Nintendo did make a killer first person shooter. Something even Microsoft owners can be envious of and that is Metroid Prime. One of the finest evolutions of the first person shooter genre. Not a refinement an evolution.
But again it is not a multiplayer title. Thusly struggled to compete. Which is why Metroid Prime 2 does contain a deathmatch mode. Despite criticism this will help elevate Prime to the status Goldeneye acchieved on the N64.
The GBA-GC connectivity concept is clever, it enables players to view their screen and no one else can. It is brilliant. This is why the idea rules, it adopts a system that you can see a view that you share with your co-players on the TV AND your own secret screen. Shame it failed to take off.
Nintendo are still masters of multiplayer.
This is really starting to annoy me. There was a system in place once that stopped me triple posting. Where's it gone?
Why is it refusing to load up the page?
Why is it refusing to load up the page?
gamezfreak wrote:
?
>
> Why don't you just get all 5? That way it you don't have a
> preference.
I hope you don't mean the N-Gage :o)
?
>
> Why don't you just get all 5? That way it you don't have a
> preference.
I hope you don't mean the N-Gage :o)
Hedfix wrote:
> No I'm agrreeing with Tilt in that there isn't a single Nintendo
> multiplayer game I come back to repeatedly anymore.
Matter of Opinion. Have you played Pacman Vs.
> Oh dear. Have you actually READ my previous posts? No obviously I've
> NEVER played cube multiplayer since most of my play ISN'T geared up
> around mutliplayer and I HAVEN'T just sold my cube with all of it's
> multiplayer titles to a friend.
I've booked you an appointment with the doctor.
> Monkey Ball,
>
> Ultimately shortlived. Good when I only had the cube.
Shortlived? What? More multiplayer games than the X-box has altogether in one game plus a rock hard single player.
> Pac-man,
>
> Looks really shortlived. I had bomberman for the cube and that
> didn't excite so I doubt this will since I'd narrowly squeeze it into
> the same genre.
No... this is made by Nintendo... this uses the GBA. You insult this without playing it then all your points mean nothing to me.
> Kirby,
>
> Nah.
What's the point in argueing with you if you refuse to give anything a chance?
> 1080...
>
> I have MTX: Mototrax and it's online. I prefer my tricks to be on
> motorbikes at the mo. I had MX superfly for the Cube but I bought it
> again for the Xbox so I could make use of the HD for track design and
> get the downloadable content.
1080's better.
> Apart from if it's XIII or any game where it's better if you can't
> see your opponents screen (Splinter Cell 2, for example, would be
> pointless if you could see your opponents screen).
Thank god for a certain GBA-GC idea then :)
> Right well 1) There's the point I made about some games being better
> if you can't see your opponent's screen (such as Splinter Cell 2 and
> a lot of deathmatch games)
But why? I mean you both get that advantage it doesn't make anything unfair.
the Cube.
>
> Well I think claiming all multiplayer awards go to the Cube is
> exactly the sort of 'Nintendo tinted spectacleization I was talking
> about! Ok first of all there's online, then (to repeat myself again
> so hopefully no poster drags this up again and I haver to go all
> yadda yadda yadda again) there's the fact that some games are better,
> infact some are only possible, if you can't see your opponent's
> screen.
Thank God for a certain GBA-GC connection idea.
> The Cube isn't exactly spoilt for choice, but
> what it does have is good enough.
>
> No it isn't good enough, there IS no Goldeneye etc. If you don't like
> arcadey, fast FPS then you're stuffed with the Cube at the moment.
(F-Zero),
> Not a patch on the '64 version as I've said before. If it was online
> it'd be great though.
Matter of opinion. your opinion is wrong.
> classic, crazy multiplay (Mario Kart)
>
> Classic? The '64 and SNES ones were classic the latest has the worst
> multiplayer level design of the lot.
Not even an opinion more total bo11ocks you just sprouted there.
> Apart from it snags a lot of Multiformat games for reasons I have
> given above and it has some exclusives to really shout about. I'd
> like to see Nintendo try something with a bit more depth but it
> appears they are going the other way on a lot of things, this is a
> shame.
Geist, Metroid PRime 2's multiplayer. Smash Brothers had loads of depth, as does multiplayer built titles Monkey Ball and Mario PArty.
> No I'm agrreeing with Tilt in that there isn't a single Nintendo
> multiplayer game I come back to repeatedly anymore.
Matter of Opinion. Have you played Pacman Vs.
> Oh dear. Have you actually READ my previous posts? No obviously I've
> NEVER played cube multiplayer since most of my play ISN'T geared up
> around mutliplayer and I HAVEN'T just sold my cube with all of it's
> multiplayer titles to a friend.
I've booked you an appointment with the doctor.
> Monkey Ball,
>
> Ultimately shortlived. Good when I only had the cube.
Shortlived? What? More multiplayer games than the X-box has altogether in one game plus a rock hard single player.
> Pac-man,
>
> Looks really shortlived. I had bomberman for the cube and that
> didn't excite so I doubt this will since I'd narrowly squeeze it into
> the same genre.
No... this is made by Nintendo... this uses the GBA. You insult this without playing it then all your points mean nothing to me.
> Kirby,
>
> Nah.
What's the point in argueing with you if you refuse to give anything a chance?
> 1080...
>
> I have MTX: Mototrax and it's online. I prefer my tricks to be on
> motorbikes at the mo. I had MX superfly for the Cube but I bought it
> again for the Xbox so I could make use of the HD for track design and
> get the downloadable content.
1080's better.
> Apart from if it's XIII or any game where it's better if you can't
> see your opponents screen (Splinter Cell 2, for example, would be
> pointless if you could see your opponents screen).
Thank god for a certain GBA-GC idea then :)
> Right well 1) There's the point I made about some games being better
> if you can't see your opponent's screen (such as Splinter Cell 2 and
> a lot of deathmatch games)
But why? I mean you both get that advantage it doesn't make anything unfair.
the Cube.
>
> Well I think claiming all multiplayer awards go to the Cube is
> exactly the sort of 'Nintendo tinted spectacleization I was talking
> about! Ok first of all there's online, then (to repeat myself again
> so hopefully no poster drags this up again and I haver to go all
> yadda yadda yadda again) there's the fact that some games are better,
> infact some are only possible, if you can't see your opponent's
> screen.
Thank God for a certain GBA-GC connection idea.
> The Cube isn't exactly spoilt for choice, but
> what it does have is good enough.
>
> No it isn't good enough, there IS no Goldeneye etc. If you don't like
> arcadey, fast FPS then you're stuffed with the Cube at the moment.
(F-Zero),
> Not a patch on the '64 version as I've said before. If it was online
> it'd be great though.
Matter of opinion. your opinion is wrong.
> classic, crazy multiplay (Mario Kart)
>
> Classic? The '64 and SNES ones were classic the latest has the worst
> multiplayer level design of the lot.
Not even an opinion more total bo11ocks you just sprouted there.
> Apart from it snags a lot of Multiformat games for reasons I have
> given above and it has some exclusives to really shout about. I'd
> like to see Nintendo try something with a bit more depth but it
> appears they are going the other way on a lot of things, this is a
> shame.
Geist, Metroid PRime 2's multiplayer. Smash Brothers had loads of depth, as does multiplayer built titles Monkey Ball and Mario PArty.
I agree that the Cube hasn't got one, almighty, groundbreaking multiplayer game liek Goldeneye, but what it does have is still very, very good.
Bloody hell.
Some of you really do have nintendo actually inserted into your anus don't you? It's insane! How can you express so much small mindedness towards one company/console?
Why don't you just get all 5? That way it you don't have a preference.
Some of you really do have nintendo actually inserted into your anus don't you? It's insane! How can you express so much small mindedness towards one company/console?
Why don't you just get all 5? That way it you don't have a preference.
Tiltawhirl wrote:
> Xbox has had Serious Sam for a well over a year now.
But this is the sequel.
And Tilt if you didn't find Mario Kart, Party 5, Pacman Vs (moneys on you haven't played it) and Super Smash Brothers: Melee up to the 64's standards then I am dissapointed in you.
> Xbox has had Serious Sam for a well over a year now.
But this is the sequel.
And Tilt if you didn't find Mario Kart, Party 5, Pacman Vs (moneys on you haven't played it) and Super Smash Brothers: Melee up to the 64's standards then I am dissapointed in you.
Haha, that really is wishful thinking. :-D
Rickoss wrote:
>
> How does having a harddrive and perhaps an online leaderboard make
> the game better?
I said 'extras' aswell as the HD. Things like System Link, Online modes and leader boards, extra levels and downloadable content, also if it's a PC port then the Xbox usually runs them easier due to its architecture. Having a hardrive makes the gaming experience better in my opinion because I have close to a hundered games for my Xbox and that would mean a few memory cards, especially for some of the downloaded content and custom soundtracks which weigh in quite heavy memory-wise.
From what I've played (a lot), Ninty's multiplayer
> titles, along with their exclusives, are much better than multiformat
> titles. TS2 is up there with the best of them, but other than that
> Nintendo's multiplayer line-up is brilliant.
No I'm agrreeing with Tilt in that there isn't a single Nintendo multiplayer game I come back to repeatedly anymore.
Rainbow Six 3 for instance is multiformat, however, and I have spent a good 4 months of dedicated play on it.
>
> Have you actually played Cube multiplayer?
Oh dear. Have you actually READ my previous posts? No obviously I've NEVER played cube multiplayer since most of my play ISN'T geared up around mutliplayer and I HAVEN'T just sold my cube with all of it's multiplayer titles to a friend.
> Monkey Ball,
Ultimately shortlived. Good when I only had the cube.
> Pac-man,
Looks really shortlived. I had bomberman for the cube and that didn't excite so I doubt this will since I'd narrowly squeeze it into the same genre.
> Kirby,
Nah.
> 1080...
I have MTX: Mototrax and it's online. I prefer my tricks to be on motorbikes at the mo. I had MX superfly for the Cube but I bought it again for the Xbox so I could make use of the HD for track design and get the downloadable content.
> they're brilliant, brilliant games and much better
> than I've found on the XBox.
*Shrugs* Rent some more Xbox games then.
having 16 or so players can make
> virtually any game good in multiplayer; look at XIII, splitscreen
> it's awful, probably one of the worst multiformat titles played on my
> Cube for multiplayer, yet I hear nothing but good thigns about
> 16-player.
It's fun but strange online, it would suck offline, it's only 8 player but that fits the level sizes well especially in team deathmatch which is (IMO) the best mode.
The fact that it needs so many players to be good says a
> lot about it. Like I said you can save a lot of money and have much
> more fun on splitscreen games.
Apart from if it's XIII or any game where it's better if you can't see your opponents screen (Splinter Cell 2, for example, would be pointless if you could see your opponents screen).
Oh and once again: It's 8 player on Xbox, but some levels are better with 4.
>
> I was talking about getting another XBox, not Live. Paying £100
> for each player to have their own screen is pointless when you can
> play the same game on splitscreen for no extra money.
Right well 1) There's the point I made about some games being better if you can't see your opponent's screen (such as Splinter Cell 2 and a lot of deathmatch games)
>
> Oh, and 'Nintendo-tinted spectacles'? I have and enjoy all three
> consoles, I'll happily admit that PGR2 kicks the Cube's and PS2's
> racing games right up the ass, and when it comes to FPS', the XBox is
> obviously the outright winner. But multiplayer is always going to go
> to the Cube.
Well I think claiming all multiplayer awards go to the Cube is exactly the sort of 'Nintendo tinted spectacleization I was talking about! Ok first of all there's online, then (to repeat myself again so hopefully no poster drags this up again and I haver to go all yadda yadda yadda again) there's the fact that some games are better, infact some are only possible, if you can't see your opponent's screen.
>
> Yes, there's a lack of FPS', but do you really need more
> than 1?
Well just post that in the Xbox forum and see what replies you get. ;D
> The Cube isn't exactly spoilt for choice, but
> what it does have is good enough.
No it isn't good enough, there IS no Goldeneye etc. If you don't like arcadey, fast FPS then you're stuffed with the Cube at the moment.
>
> Racing games? Well there are 3 that offer very different things;
> ultimate speed (F-Zero),
Not a patch on the '64 version as I've said before. If it was online it'd be great though.
> classic, crazy multiplay (Mario Kart)
Classic? The '64 and SNES ones were classic the latest has the worst multiplayer level design of the lot.
, now, like I said, PGR2 kicks
> these games a*ses, but when it coems to multiplayer I'd much rather
> be playing them. Saying Nintendo's multiplayer games are bad is
> complete crap.
Who said they were bad? I believe I said they were shoerlived and that earlier versions on the '64 were better.
>
> I'm not being bias, I just happen to enjoy original and fun games,
> and Nintendo deliver time after time. Of course if there's an
> outstanding title like Halo 2 or Half Life 2 released, I'll get it,
> but beyond the real killers, the XBox offers very little.
Apart from it snags a lot of Multiformat games for reasons I have given above and it has some exclusives to really shout about. I'd like to see Nintendo try something with a bit more depth but it appears they are going the other way on a lot of things, this is a shame.
>
> How does having a harddrive and perhaps an online leaderboard make
> the game better?
I said 'extras' aswell as the HD. Things like System Link, Online modes and leader boards, extra levels and downloadable content, also if it's a PC port then the Xbox usually runs them easier due to its architecture. Having a hardrive makes the gaming experience better in my opinion because I have close to a hundered games for my Xbox and that would mean a few memory cards, especially for some of the downloaded content and custom soundtracks which weigh in quite heavy memory-wise.
From what I've played (a lot), Ninty's multiplayer
> titles, along with their exclusives, are much better than multiformat
> titles. TS2 is up there with the best of them, but other than that
> Nintendo's multiplayer line-up is brilliant.
No I'm agrreeing with Tilt in that there isn't a single Nintendo multiplayer game I come back to repeatedly anymore.
Rainbow Six 3 for instance is multiformat, however, and I have spent a good 4 months of dedicated play on it.
>
> Have you actually played Cube multiplayer?
Oh dear. Have you actually READ my previous posts? No obviously I've NEVER played cube multiplayer since most of my play ISN'T geared up around mutliplayer and I HAVEN'T just sold my cube with all of it's multiplayer titles to a friend.
> Monkey Ball,
Ultimately shortlived. Good when I only had the cube.
> Pac-man,
Looks really shortlived. I had bomberman for the cube and that didn't excite so I doubt this will since I'd narrowly squeeze it into the same genre.
> Kirby,
Nah.
> 1080...
I have MTX: Mototrax and it's online. I prefer my tricks to be on motorbikes at the mo. I had MX superfly for the Cube but I bought it again for the Xbox so I could make use of the HD for track design and get the downloadable content.
> they're brilliant, brilliant games and much better
> than I've found on the XBox.
*Shrugs* Rent some more Xbox games then.
having 16 or so players can make
> virtually any game good in multiplayer; look at XIII, splitscreen
> it's awful, probably one of the worst multiformat titles played on my
> Cube for multiplayer, yet I hear nothing but good thigns about
> 16-player.
It's fun but strange online, it would suck offline, it's only 8 player but that fits the level sizes well especially in team deathmatch which is (IMO) the best mode.
The fact that it needs so many players to be good says a
> lot about it. Like I said you can save a lot of money and have much
> more fun on splitscreen games.
Apart from if it's XIII or any game where it's better if you can't see your opponents screen (Splinter Cell 2, for example, would be pointless if you could see your opponents screen).
Oh and once again: It's 8 player on Xbox, but some levels are better with 4.
>
> I was talking about getting another XBox, not Live. Paying £100
> for each player to have their own screen is pointless when you can
> play the same game on splitscreen for no extra money.
Right well 1) There's the point I made about some games being better if you can't see your opponent's screen (such as Splinter Cell 2 and a lot of deathmatch games)
>
> Oh, and 'Nintendo-tinted spectacles'? I have and enjoy all three
> consoles, I'll happily admit that PGR2 kicks the Cube's and PS2's
> racing games right up the ass, and when it comes to FPS', the XBox is
> obviously the outright winner. But multiplayer is always going to go
> to the Cube.
Well I think claiming all multiplayer awards go to the Cube is exactly the sort of 'Nintendo tinted spectacleization I was talking about! Ok first of all there's online, then (to repeat myself again so hopefully no poster drags this up again and I haver to go all yadda yadda yadda again) there's the fact that some games are better, infact some are only possible, if you can't see your opponent's screen.
>
> Yes, there's a lack of FPS', but do you really need more
> than 1?
Well just post that in the Xbox forum and see what replies you get. ;D
> The Cube isn't exactly spoilt for choice, but
> what it does have is good enough.
No it isn't good enough, there IS no Goldeneye etc. If you don't like arcadey, fast FPS then you're stuffed with the Cube at the moment.
>
> Racing games? Well there are 3 that offer very different things;
> ultimate speed (F-Zero),
Not a patch on the '64 version as I've said before. If it was online it'd be great though.
> classic, crazy multiplay (Mario Kart)
Classic? The '64 and SNES ones were classic the latest has the worst multiplayer level design of the lot.
, now, like I said, PGR2 kicks
> these games a*ses, but when it coems to multiplayer I'd much rather
> be playing them. Saying Nintendo's multiplayer games are bad is
> complete crap.
Who said they were bad? I believe I said they were shoerlived and that earlier versions on the '64 were better.
>
> I'm not being bias, I just happen to enjoy original and fun games,
> and Nintendo deliver time after time. Of course if there's an
> outstanding title like Halo 2 or Half Life 2 released, I'll get it,
> but beyond the real killers, the XBox offers very little.
Apart from it snags a lot of Multiformat games for reasons I have given above and it has some exclusives to really shout about. I'd like to see Nintendo try something with a bit more depth but it appears they are going the other way on a lot of things, this is a shame.
There are more extreme Ninty optimists than Dringo. Take this post from another forum;
"
As your all probably well aware, rumors are circulating about the SK/GCN breakup being just a Marketing Ploy for an announcment of Eternal Darkness 2. After going through information, heres what I have come up with:
1) Dennis Dyack has stated the relationship between Nintendo and SK is/was very, very strong.
2) This announcment was completly out of the blue. Not the SLIGHTEST warning at all.
3) IGN are the only people to have "offically" reported it. They are VERY close to Dennis Dyack.
4) Planet GameCube, as well as several other websites, also claiming to have contacted Dyack about this, posted the news at 3:33pm.
5) This news was announced April 13th. The E3 press conference ends May 13th.
6) Including the day of the announcment (April 13th) and the day after the end of E3 (May 15th) you have a total of 33 days.
7) Dyack has stated that if he hints towards there next game, ala: MGS, it will be in a much more tricky and sneaky method than he did last time, as people will be prepared.
There has still be NO official announcment. When Rare departed there Nintendo announced it (including press release) the day we knew or the day after.
9) Dyack has said there is much more to the Eternal Darkness story, and that one day he would like to show it. Matt from IGN stated that the script for ED2 was already completed, but a working title wasn't confirmed.
10) IGN posted a new Silicon Knights title for GameCube a day prior to this announcement on their 'officially confirmed' E3 list.
11) Matt from IGN changes his profile on the boards to stating Nintendo left SK, rather then the original story of it being vice-versa.
Just a quick note to those in the dark: In the SK game Eternal Darkness the number 333 had a special, mysterious meaning to all the crazyness that was going on.
Am scraping the bottom of the barrel? Yes, definately. Is some of the stuff here pretty far fetched? Obviously yes, it is.
"
"
As your all probably well aware, rumors are circulating about the SK/GCN breakup being just a Marketing Ploy for an announcment of Eternal Darkness 2. After going through information, heres what I have come up with:
1) Dennis Dyack has stated the relationship between Nintendo and SK is/was very, very strong.
2) This announcment was completly out of the blue. Not the SLIGHTEST warning at all.
3) IGN are the only people to have "offically" reported it. They are VERY close to Dennis Dyack.
4) Planet GameCube, as well as several other websites, also claiming to have contacted Dyack about this, posted the news at 3:33pm.
5) This news was announced April 13th. The E3 press conference ends May 13th.
6) Including the day of the announcment (April 13th) and the day after the end of E3 (May 15th) you have a total of 33 days.
7) Dyack has stated that if he hints towards there next game, ala: MGS, it will be in a much more tricky and sneaky method than he did last time, as people will be prepared.
There has still be NO official announcment. When Rare departed there Nintendo announced it (including press release) the day we knew or the day after.
9) Dyack has said there is much more to the Eternal Darkness story, and that one day he would like to show it. Matt from IGN stated that the script for ED2 was already completed, but a working title wasn't confirmed.
10) IGN posted a new Silicon Knights title for GameCube a day prior to this announcement on their 'officially confirmed' E3 list.
11) Matt from IGN changes his profile on the boards to stating Nintendo left SK, rather then the original story of it being vice-versa.
Just a quick note to those in the dark: In the SK game Eternal Darkness the number 333 had a special, mysterious meaning to all the crazyness that was going on.
Am scraping the bottom of the barrel? Yes, definately. Is some of the stuff here pretty far fetched? Obviously yes, it is.
"
Page: