The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
This pretty much sums up the differences between the systems, apparently.
Q: So the Gamecube's video memory arrangement resembles the PS2's?
A: It shares a few points with the PS2, but we're coming at it from a different approach, so it's not at all a similar design.
Q: What are some of the differences, then?
A: Well, on more general terms, the main difference between the Gamecube and the PS2 is that during development we stuck exclusively to features necessary for games. The concept of the PS2 is to let coders do anything they could possibly want to do; ours is offer high performance, easy development and the ability to concentrate more on creative matters. We know from experience what kind of platform we need, and we included onboard video memory and parallel processing features simply because we thought that's what the games require. I think that's a far different approach from the one PS2 is taking.
The whole article can be read at: http://www.video-senki.com/feat/iw/iw1.html
It just talks about the GAMECUBE hardware. It's coming straight from the horses mouth here too, the figures are correct. If you care much for specs, take a look. I'm not a specs man, so I haven't tryed to draw comparisons between the consoles based on these.
Q: So the Gamecube's video memory arrangement resembles the PS2's?
A: It shares a few points with the PS2, but we're coming at it from a different approach, so it's not at all a similar design.
Q: What are some of the differences, then?
A: Well, on more general terms, the main difference between the Gamecube and the PS2 is that during development we stuck exclusively to features necessary for games. The concept of the PS2 is to let coders do anything they could possibly want to do; ours is offer high performance, easy development and the ability to concentrate more on creative matters. We know from experience what kind of platform we need, and we included onboard video memory and parallel processing features simply because we thought that's what the games require. I think that's a far different approach from the one PS2 is taking.
The whole article can be read at: http://www.video-senki.com/feat/iw/iw1.html
It just talks about the GAMECUBE hardware. It's coming straight from the horses mouth here too, the figures are correct. If you care much for specs, take a look. I'm not a specs man, so I haven't tryed to draw comparisons between the consoles based on these.
Page:
Or†ega wrote:
> So 24 Million Gameboy Advance's in the first year, but only 4
> million Gamecubes in its first year.
Now does this mean the
> Gamecube will get less attention than the Gameboy Advance from
> Nintendo? What is Nintendo's Primary Product?
Well, the GBA is a little cheaper than the Gamecube. And also, it has the driving force of the Gameboy, the most successful console in the world behind it.
> So 24 Million Gameboy Advance's in the first year, but only 4
> million Gamecubes in its first year.
Now does this mean the
> Gamecube will get less attention than the Gameboy Advance from
> Nintendo? What is Nintendo's Primary Product?
Well, the GBA is a little cheaper than the Gamecube. And also, it has the driving force of the Gameboy, the most successful console in the world behind it.
So 24 Million Gameboy Advance's in the first year, but only 4 million Gamecubes in its first year.
Now does this mean the Gamecube will get less attention than the Gameboy Advance from Nintendo? What is Nintendo's Primary Product?
Now does this mean the Gamecube will get less attention than the Gameboy Advance from Nintendo? What is Nintendo's Primary Product?
Well said Wookie me old china ;-)
Yes, games' consoles are for playing games, and therefor the games should be good - Nintendo have purposely designed their lovely box 'o' tricks especially for that reason, whick surely means that games would be easier to play, have smooth gameplay and crisp, clean graphics. PS2 has just designed a console so that the developers can do whatever they want to do, which might result in iffy games or whatever, but lead to developers learning how to utilise the system properly and advance in their skills with the PS2 developing kit; who knows what luxury games that might lead to, eh?
So, yes you're right Wookie, they are virtually equal, only they are different from each other and both have their own unique qualities.
Gamecube for me next (I hope), because me has got myself a PS2 already.
Thank you, thank you.
Shocktrooper.
Yes, games' consoles are for playing games, and therefor the games should be good - Nintendo have purposely designed their lovely box 'o' tricks especially for that reason, whick surely means that games would be easier to play, have smooth gameplay and crisp, clean graphics. PS2 has just designed a console so that the developers can do whatever they want to do, which might result in iffy games or whatever, but lead to developers learning how to utilise the system properly and advance in their skills with the PS2 developing kit; who knows what luxury games that might lead to, eh?
So, yes you're right Wookie, they are virtually equal, only they are different from each other and both have their own unique qualities.
Gamecube for me next (I hope), because me has got myself a PS2 already.
Thank you, thank you.
Shocktrooper.
I just read the article, and it seems to confirm what I've thought for a month or so now. That is, that both PS2 and Gamecube excel in different areas, making them roughly equal.
The differences may also have the effect that one system is particularly better suited to certain types of game than others - but we'll have to wait and see for that.
At the end of the day, the deciding factor for those who can't afford to buy both machines will be the games they want to play. Nintendo will apparetnly have a larger selection this time around than they did with the N64, but we'll have to wait and see if that trend continues throughout the machines life.
Iwata's comment that...
"The concept of the PS2 is to let coders do anything they could possibly want to do; ours is offer high performance, easy development and the ability to concentrate more on creative matters."
...does at the very least imply that the PS2 has a more flexible development system. My thoughts are that developers 'preferred' system will be determined by the way they are used to working.
There were two points which gave me mild concern, though:
1. Iwata says that, "We know from experience what kind of platform we need" That's fine, but he is speaking of the he and his team work. The whole system seems to be based around what he/his team wanted, and that may not always suit other developers.
2. Nintendo think they will sell about 4 million units "by the end of the year". It's not clear whether "the year" means the end of 2001 or the end of the first year of sale, but either way it seems to be a low target, considering it covers both Japan and the US. Of course, they could just be saying that so that they look better for selling more, rather than foolish for selling less.
Well, that's my interpretation...
The differences may also have the effect that one system is particularly better suited to certain types of game than others - but we'll have to wait and see for that.
At the end of the day, the deciding factor for those who can't afford to buy both machines will be the games they want to play. Nintendo will apparetnly have a larger selection this time around than they did with the N64, but we'll have to wait and see if that trend continues throughout the machines life.
Iwata's comment that...
"The concept of the PS2 is to let coders do anything they could possibly want to do; ours is offer high performance, easy development and the ability to concentrate more on creative matters."
...does at the very least imply that the PS2 has a more flexible development system. My thoughts are that developers 'preferred' system will be determined by the way they are used to working.
There were two points which gave me mild concern, though:
1. Iwata says that, "We know from experience what kind of platform we need" That's fine, but he is speaking of the he and his team work. The whole system seems to be based around what he/his team wanted, and that may not always suit other developers.
2. Nintendo think they will sell about 4 million units "by the end of the year". It's not clear whether "the year" means the end of 2001 or the end of the first year of sale, but either way it seems to be a low target, considering it covers both Japan and the US. Of course, they could just be saying that so that they look better for selling more, rather than foolish for selling less.
Well, that's my interpretation...
Turbonutter wrote:
> However, the GC arrangement is totally unflexible. With the PS2, you
> can gear the system more towards AI, mathematics, draw distance etc.
> With the GameCube, you work to set parameters and the games don't
> have the same potential that the PS2 ones
Nonsense!!!!
Did you even attempt to read the interview.
> However, the GC arrangement is totally unflexible. With the PS2, you
> can gear the system more towards AI, mathematics, draw distance etc.
> With the GameCube, you work to set parameters and the games don't
> have the same potential that the PS2 ones
Nonsense!!!!
Did you even attempt to read the interview.
There may be difference between the consoles, but both are built for basically the same thing,'games'.
A console that means making games easier is certainly a good thing. The future for gaming on a whole looks very good.
Three console battling it out, with games getting better and better. We will benefit a lot from this.
A console that means making games easier is certainly a good thing. The future for gaming on a whole looks very good.
Three console battling it out, with games getting better and better. We will benefit a lot from this.
That article was brilliant, thanks for uncovering that. Truely brilliant work from Nintendo, they have designed a good system, it isn't as capable as the PS2, but it is a damn sight easier. Eventually the Ps2 will have a large enough middleware for companies to make full use of the system, but at the moment the stuff just isn't available, Konami addressed this by writing much of their own for MGS2 and Sony are always making advances, but for your average development house, there isn't much they can do.
Gooby bab bab bab I'm right you're wrong.
However, the GC arrangement is totally unflexible. With the PS2, you can gear the system more towards AI, mathematics, draw distance etc. With the GameCube, you work to set parameters and the games don't have the same potential that the PS2 ones do.
Just read the whole interview.
Some interesting stuff in there.
Some interesting stuff in there.
Page: