The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
We have all seen GT3, we have all marvelled at GT3 and we all know what else is coming from Sony's own in house teams, including Naughty Dog as one of those. So what can we expect for the sales figures of the PS2's software?
Sit down and compare GT3 to Lotus challenge, there is no competition really is there, GT3 blows it away in almost every department. Look down the release list of the Gamecube and list all the games you would want for the system, now count the number which are in house games from Nintendo. The quality and visual appeal of these hames is far beyond the reach of most smaller companies. You will always have your Konami's, your Square's, your Sega's etc. being able to emulate the achievements of these in house teams, but rarley will they beat them to the quality in terms of release dates. F1 2001 and GT3 were quite simply the best looking games available for the PS2 and both have been developed and published by Sony's own in house teams, so should 3rd party developers worry about this and see it as a problem on these companie's consoles??
The Xbox may be able to gain some ground on Sony and Nintendo in this area, and this may be why there is such a massive developer list at the disposal of Microsoft when showing off it's black box. Is it possible that developers are being wooed to the Xbox because of the lack of a massivly successful in house team at Microsoft? Microsoft don;t really make games, what microsoft do best are creating a devlopment environment for others to make games, and this seems to show in the popularity of the Xbox with developers.
On the other hand, sales of the console may be effected by the lack of an in house team. Most people buying a Nintendo, will do so in anticipation of playing games such as Mario and Zelda, and we can currently see that GT3 has been able to boost the sales of the PS2 over the last month of it's release. So this may leave developers in a catch 22 situation, do we go with the lack of in house competition and make our game appeal to owners, or do we go with the massivly successful in house teams who will be driving sales of their products.
As for us poor console owners, we can only marvel at how many sub standard games are being pushed out onto the PS2. PS2 owners wont really care as the in-house teams and the massive 3rd party developers are beginning to deliver the massive games everyone is waiting for. nintendo fans can sit and pick on the system for it's slim pickings at this moment in time, but we can be cntent that we are actually playing some decent games, they are merely waiting for them, either way, developers will still have a risky situation and we may see many smaller development studios folding over the next little while as the sales of poor games continue to fall. There is no lull in the popularity of gaming, just people beginning to stop spending their money on rubbish, and developers need to buck up their ideas and try to compete.
Sit down and compare GT3 to Lotus challenge, there is no competition really is there, GT3 blows it away in almost every department. Look down the release list of the Gamecube and list all the games you would want for the system, now count the number which are in house games from Nintendo. The quality and visual appeal of these hames is far beyond the reach of most smaller companies. You will always have your Konami's, your Square's, your Sega's etc. being able to emulate the achievements of these in house teams, but rarley will they beat them to the quality in terms of release dates. F1 2001 and GT3 were quite simply the best looking games available for the PS2 and both have been developed and published by Sony's own in house teams, so should 3rd party developers worry about this and see it as a problem on these companie's consoles??
The Xbox may be able to gain some ground on Sony and Nintendo in this area, and this may be why there is such a massive developer list at the disposal of Microsoft when showing off it's black box. Is it possible that developers are being wooed to the Xbox because of the lack of a massivly successful in house team at Microsoft? Microsoft don;t really make games, what microsoft do best are creating a devlopment environment for others to make games, and this seems to show in the popularity of the Xbox with developers.
On the other hand, sales of the console may be effected by the lack of an in house team. Most people buying a Nintendo, will do so in anticipation of playing games such as Mario and Zelda, and we can currently see that GT3 has been able to boost the sales of the PS2 over the last month of it's release. So this may leave developers in a catch 22 situation, do we go with the lack of in house competition and make our game appeal to owners, or do we go with the massivly successful in house teams who will be driving sales of their products.
As for us poor console owners, we can only marvel at how many sub standard games are being pushed out onto the PS2. PS2 owners wont really care as the in-house teams and the massive 3rd party developers are beginning to deliver the massive games everyone is waiting for. nintendo fans can sit and pick on the system for it's slim pickings at this moment in time, but we can be cntent that we are actually playing some decent games, they are merely waiting for them, either way, developers will still have a risky situation and we may see many smaller development studios folding over the next little while as the sales of poor games continue to fall. There is no lull in the popularity of gaming, just people beginning to stop spending their money on rubbish, and developers need to buck up their ideas and try to compete.
These Gems you talk about, you mean games like Final Fantasy, Resident Evil and Metal Gear Solid.
Well put it this way, they'd have all made the 64 if they had fitted on a cartrige.
The game storing device was both the best and worst part of the 64bit machine.
Well put it this way, they'd have all made the 64 if they had fitted on a cartrige.
The game storing device was both the best and worst part of the 64bit machine.
I think the Nintendo quality over quantity attitude is very wrong. On the PSone, there were loads of little gems for me that everyone else hated. These would never have got released on the N64 and it would be worse off for it.
Well put it this way.
Third party devellopers can't start work until they have complete hardware.
In house devellopers can play around and start work on unifnished hardware and modify it as the hardware improves.
The result being they have the advantage in time.
Third party devellopers can't start work until they have complete hardware.
In house devellopers can play around and start work on unifnished hardware and modify it as the hardware improves.
The result being they have the advantage in time.
We have all seen GT3, we have all marvelled at GT3 and we all know what else is coming from Sony's own in house teams, including Naughty Dog as one of those. So what can we expect for the sales figures of the PS2's software?
Sit down and compare GT3 to Lotus challenge, there is no competition really is there, GT3 blows it away in almost every department. Look down the release list of the Gamecube and list all the games you would want for the system, now count the number which are in house games from Nintendo. The quality and visual appeal of these hames is far beyond the reach of most smaller companies. You will always have your Konami's, your Square's, your Sega's etc. being able to emulate the achievements of these in house teams, but rarley will they beat them to the quality in terms of release dates. F1 2001 and GT3 were quite simply the best looking games available for the PS2 and both have been developed and published by Sony's own in house teams, so should 3rd party developers worry about this and see it as a problem on these companie's consoles??
The Xbox may be able to gain some ground on Sony and Nintendo in this area, and this may be why there is such a massive developer list at the disposal of Microsoft when showing off it's black box. Is it possible that developers are being wooed to the Xbox because of the lack of a massivly successful in house team at Microsoft? Microsoft don;t really make games, what microsoft do best are creating a devlopment environment for others to make games, and this seems to show in the popularity of the Xbox with developers.
On the other hand, sales of the console may be effected by the lack of an in house team. Most people buying a Nintendo, will do so in anticipation of playing games such as Mario and Zelda, and we can currently see that GT3 has been able to boost the sales of the PS2 over the last month of it's release. So this may leave developers in a catch 22 situation, do we go with the lack of in house competition and make our game appeal to owners, or do we go with the massivly successful in house teams who will be driving sales of their products.
As for us poor console owners, we can only marvel at how many sub standard games are being pushed out onto the PS2. PS2 owners wont really care as the in-house teams and the massive 3rd party developers are beginning to deliver the massive games everyone is waiting for. nintendo fans can sit and pick on the system for it's slim pickings at this moment in time, but we can be cntent that we are actually playing some decent games, they are merely waiting for them, either way, developers will still have a risky situation and we may see many smaller development studios folding over the next little while as the sales of poor games continue to fall. There is no lull in the popularity of gaming, just people beginning to stop spending their money on rubbish, and developers need to buck up their ideas and try to compete.
Sit down and compare GT3 to Lotus challenge, there is no competition really is there, GT3 blows it away in almost every department. Look down the release list of the Gamecube and list all the games you would want for the system, now count the number which are in house games from Nintendo. The quality and visual appeal of these hames is far beyond the reach of most smaller companies. You will always have your Konami's, your Square's, your Sega's etc. being able to emulate the achievements of these in house teams, but rarley will they beat them to the quality in terms of release dates. F1 2001 and GT3 were quite simply the best looking games available for the PS2 and both have been developed and published by Sony's own in house teams, so should 3rd party developers worry about this and see it as a problem on these companie's consoles??
The Xbox may be able to gain some ground on Sony and Nintendo in this area, and this may be why there is such a massive developer list at the disposal of Microsoft when showing off it's black box. Is it possible that developers are being wooed to the Xbox because of the lack of a massivly successful in house team at Microsoft? Microsoft don;t really make games, what microsoft do best are creating a devlopment environment for others to make games, and this seems to show in the popularity of the Xbox with developers.
On the other hand, sales of the console may be effected by the lack of an in house team. Most people buying a Nintendo, will do so in anticipation of playing games such as Mario and Zelda, and we can currently see that GT3 has been able to boost the sales of the PS2 over the last month of it's release. So this may leave developers in a catch 22 situation, do we go with the lack of in house competition and make our game appeal to owners, or do we go with the massivly successful in house teams who will be driving sales of their products.
As for us poor console owners, we can only marvel at how many sub standard games are being pushed out onto the PS2. PS2 owners wont really care as the in-house teams and the massive 3rd party developers are beginning to deliver the massive games everyone is waiting for. nintendo fans can sit and pick on the system for it's slim pickings at this moment in time, but we can be cntent that we are actually playing some decent games, they are merely waiting for them, either way, developers will still have a risky situation and we may see many smaller development studios folding over the next little while as the sales of poor games continue to fall. There is no lull in the popularity of gaming, just people beginning to stop spending their money on rubbish, and developers need to buck up their ideas and try to compete.