The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Has anyone bought the X-Box version of IndyCar Series?
I'm just wondering if it's any good or not, I've heard it's supposed to be very difficult and very detailed when it comes to setting up your vehicle for qualifying and races. It sounds like it would be a fantastic challenge and a lot more involving than most other racers out there.
So what are your opinions on it, is it worth a shot?
I'm just wondering if it's any good or not, I've heard it's supposed to be very difficult and very detailed when it comes to setting up your vehicle for qualifying and races. It sounds like it would be a fantastic challenge and a lot more involving than most other racers out there.
So what are your opinions on it, is it worth a shot?
Page:
Question someone's intelligence they will question yours back.
That's the way it is.
That's the way it is.
Stupid comments? How about not understanding a perfectly simple statement, saying I was confused, asking if I'd failed GCSE English...
Look, lets forget it eh?
Look, lets forget it eh?
Mav I don't want to make an enemy of you either. I haven't made any stupid comments.
If you say someone can't understand what a five year old could understand then you are not going to get a pleasant reply.
If you say someone can't understand what a five year old could understand then you are not going to get a pleasant reply.
Look, Hedfix, I don't want to make an enemy of you - but looking at some of the stupid comments you've been making, it seems to be going that way. Lets just leave it alright?
I strongly believe that petty console exclusives really aren't worth shouting about; you obviously do. Quite frankly, I don't give a damn anymore.
I strongly believe that petty console exclusives really aren't worth shouting about; you obviously do. Quite frankly, I don't give a damn anymore.
Maverick42 wrote:
>
> I'm absolutely fine with my PS2 version and memory card, and to be
> honest, I don't use the mapmaker much at all. I'll admit it's an
> advantage, but so slight it's hardly an argument.
Nice way to ignore the systemlink superiority.
>
> So are you still saying console extras aren't worth it? It seems
> you're saying console exclusive modes are good here... Have you got
> confused?
>
Here I was saying that console exclusives can
> become more significant when there's a large time gap in between
> versions, but are still not enough to drastically improve games.
This is such a stupid universal statement it really makes you look like a fool. So all extra modes and levels don't drastically improve games? Balls.
>
>
> Rubbish. They rushed the game out; that's why the GameCube version
> didn't have it. A GC Disc could easily handle it, and it wasn't always
> there - the large amount of time in between the PS2 and Xbox versions
> was when they were developing it.
I've seen the footage it was finished. And the Disc capacity excuse was from a magazine.Anyway putting this aside: die hard isn't dratically improved my the addition of a multiplayer mode? Which I might add is surely going to be supererior on the Xbox hardware.
> Look. It's obvious. I have no idea how I'm going to make this any
> clearer to you.
>
> The Playstation 2 usually has the worse versions of multiformat
> titles, but this is rarely significant.
And this was conveyed by "Not by a long way" how? Fail English GCSE did we?
I think you'll find the PS2 having the worst version is significant to a lot of people, it's certainly a good reason not to own one.
>
> Read it. Read it again. I can't give you any more help; I'd have
> thought a five year old would understand it.
Look you're contradicting yourself:
> Granted, the PS2 usually has the worse versions of multiformat
> titles,
> but certainly not by a long way.
"The PS2 usually has the worst versions." fine.
"but not by a long way" makes no sense after what you just said. It is contradictory and makes you look like a fool.
and Mav don't bother comparing people's intelligence to a five year old
when you thought Smugglers Run was GC exclusive and post in threads without reading the original post.
>
> I'm absolutely fine with my PS2 version and memory card, and to be
> honest, I don't use the mapmaker much at all. I'll admit it's an
> advantage, but so slight it's hardly an argument.
Nice way to ignore the systemlink superiority.
>
> So are you still saying console extras aren't worth it? It seems
> you're saying console exclusive modes are good here... Have you got
> confused?
>
Here I was saying that console exclusives can
> become more significant when there's a large time gap in between
> versions, but are still not enough to drastically improve games.
This is such a stupid universal statement it really makes you look like a fool. So all extra modes and levels don't drastically improve games? Balls.
>
>
> Rubbish. They rushed the game out; that's why the GameCube version
> didn't have it. A GC Disc could easily handle it, and it wasn't always
> there - the large amount of time in between the PS2 and Xbox versions
> was when they were developing it.
I've seen the footage it was finished. And the Disc capacity excuse was from a magazine.Anyway putting this aside: die hard isn't dratically improved my the addition of a multiplayer mode? Which I might add is surely going to be supererior on the Xbox hardware.
> Look. It's obvious. I have no idea how I'm going to make this any
> clearer to you.
>
> The Playstation 2 usually has the worse versions of multiformat
> titles, but this is rarely significant.
And this was conveyed by "Not by a long way" how? Fail English GCSE did we?
I think you'll find the PS2 having the worst version is significant to a lot of people, it's certainly a good reason not to own one.
>
> Read it. Read it again. I can't give you any more help; I'd have
> thought a five year old would understand it.
Look you're contradicting yourself:
> Granted, the PS2 usually has the worse versions of multiformat
> titles,
> but certainly not by a long way.
"The PS2 usually has the worst versions." fine.
"but not by a long way" makes no sense after what you just said. It is contradictory and makes you look like a fool.
and Mav don't bother comparing people's intelligence to a five year old
when you thought Smugglers Run was GC exclusive and post in threads without reading the original post.
Hedfix wrote:
> Saving to the HD gives you a lot more freedom and instant,direct
> access to A LOT of saved maps. Also the Xbox has the possibility of
> system link. We'll probably be on Timesplitters 3 by the time we get a
> PS2 HD. :)
I'm absolutely fine with my PS2 version and memory card, and to be honest, I don't use the mapmaker much at all. I'll admit it's an advantage, but so slight it's hardly an argument.
> So are you still saying console extras aren't worth it? It seems
> you're saying console exclusive modes are good here... Have you got
> confused?
Where on earth have I got confused? Console exclusives are nice, but nothing to scream about. Here I was saying that console exclusives can become more significant when there's a large time gap in between versions, but are still not enough to drastically improve games.
> Die Hard Vendetta has always had a multiplayer mode. I saw the footage
> of it before the GC version was released. They claimed they couldn't
> fit the multi on the GC disc.
Rubbish. They rushed the game out; that's why the GameCube version didn't have it. A GC Disc could easily handle it, and it wasn't always there - the large amount of time in between the PS2 and Xbox versions was when they were developing it.
> Maverick42 wrote:
> "Usually yes, but not by a long shot."
>
> HedFix Wrote:
> This statement makes little sense. Elaborate.
>
> Maverick42 Wrote:
>
> Granted, the PS2 usually has the worse versions of multiformat
> titles,
> but certainly not by a long way.
>
> "but certainly not by a long way"? Adding this at the end of
> a perfectly coherent statement makes no sense.
Look. It's obvious. I have no idea how I'm going to make this any clearer to you.
The Playstation 2 usually has the worse versions of multiformat titles, but this is rarely significant.
Read it. Read it again. I can't give you any more help; I'd have thought a five year old would understand it.
> Saving to the HD gives you a lot more freedom and instant,direct
> access to A LOT of saved maps. Also the Xbox has the possibility of
> system link. We'll probably be on Timesplitters 3 by the time we get a
> PS2 HD. :)
I'm absolutely fine with my PS2 version and memory card, and to be honest, I don't use the mapmaker much at all. I'll admit it's an advantage, but so slight it's hardly an argument.
> So are you still saying console extras aren't worth it? It seems
> you're saying console exclusive modes are good here... Have you got
> confused?
Where on earth have I got confused? Console exclusives are nice, but nothing to scream about. Here I was saying that console exclusives can become more significant when there's a large time gap in between versions, but are still not enough to drastically improve games.
> Die Hard Vendetta has always had a multiplayer mode. I saw the footage
> of it before the GC version was released. They claimed they couldn't
> fit the multi on the GC disc.
Rubbish. They rushed the game out; that's why the GameCube version didn't have it. A GC Disc could easily handle it, and it wasn't always there - the large amount of time in between the PS2 and Xbox versions was when they were developing it.
> Maverick42 wrote:
> "Usually yes, but not by a long shot."
>
> HedFix Wrote:
> This statement makes little sense. Elaborate.
>
> Maverick42 Wrote:
>
> Granted, the PS2 usually has the worse versions of multiformat
> titles,
> but certainly not by a long way.
>
> "but certainly not by a long way"? Adding this at the end of
> a perfectly coherent statement makes no sense.
Look. It's obvious. I have no idea how I'm going to make this any clearer to you.
The Playstation 2 usually has the worse versions of multiformat titles, but this is rarely significant.
Read it. Read it again. I can't give you any more help; I'd have thought a five year old would understand it.
Maverick42 wrote:
>
> Once it's released, I expect you can. But a memory card is fine.
> What's your point here?
Saving to the HD gives you a lot more freedom and instant,direct access to A LOT of saved maps. Also the Xbox has the possibility of system link. We'll probably be on Timesplitters 3 by the time we get a PS2 HD. :)
> Nope, the good people at Acclaim had a 'strict 60fps minimum' for all
> versions of Burnout 2.
So the trade-off was in graphics then?
>
> Accepted by whom? In my opinion, it's a poor game to steer well clear
> of anyway. I'm not convinced on this one; the game was a straight port
> to all three consoles.
Turok 4 is good. Apparently the PS2 hardware does it an injustice.
>
> Ok, I was wrong on this account then - I must have been wrongly
> informed. But still, when developers are given long times in between
> versions - it's expected that they add in extra features. The same can
> be said for Die Hard: Vendetta, which contains a multiplayer mode on
> the PS2.
So are you still saying console extras aren't worth it? It seems you're saying console exclusive modes are good here... Have you got confused?
Die Hard Vendetta has always had a multiplayer mode. I saw the footage of it before the GC version was released. They claimed they couldn't fit the multi on the GC disc.
>
>
> See above. And I thought it had terrible gameplay anyway.
If by 'terrible gameplay' you mean arcadey and violent then yes.
Maverick42 wrote:
> "Usually yes, but not by a long shot."
>
HedFix Wrote:
> This statement makes little sense. Elaborate.
Maverick42 Wrote:
>
> Granted, the PS2 usually has the worse versions of multiformat titles,
> but certainly not by a long way.
"but certainly not by a long way"? Adding this at the end of a perfectly coherent statement makes no sense.
>
> Once it's released, I expect you can. But a memory card is fine.
> What's your point here?
Saving to the HD gives you a lot more freedom and instant,direct access to A LOT of saved maps. Also the Xbox has the possibility of system link. We'll probably be on Timesplitters 3 by the time we get a PS2 HD. :)
> Nope, the good people at Acclaim had a 'strict 60fps minimum' for all
> versions of Burnout 2.
So the trade-off was in graphics then?
>
> Accepted by whom? In my opinion, it's a poor game to steer well clear
> of anyway. I'm not convinced on this one; the game was a straight port
> to all three consoles.
Turok 4 is good. Apparently the PS2 hardware does it an injustice.
>
> Ok, I was wrong on this account then - I must have been wrongly
> informed. But still, when developers are given long times in between
> versions - it's expected that they add in extra features. The same can
> be said for Die Hard: Vendetta, which contains a multiplayer mode on
> the PS2.
So are you still saying console extras aren't worth it? It seems you're saying console exclusive modes are good here... Have you got confused?
Die Hard Vendetta has always had a multiplayer mode. I saw the footage of it before the GC version was released. They claimed they couldn't fit the multi on the GC disc.
>
>
> See above. And I thought it had terrible gameplay anyway.
If by 'terrible gameplay' you mean arcadey and violent then yes.
Maverick42 wrote:
> "Usually yes, but not by a long shot."
>
HedFix Wrote:
> This statement makes little sense. Elaborate.
Maverick42 Wrote:
>
> Granted, the PS2 usually has the worse versions of multiformat titles,
> but certainly not by a long way.
"but certainly not by a long way"? Adding this at the end of a perfectly coherent statement makes no sense.
Hedfix wrote:
> Can you save TS2 maps to the PS2 HD?
Once it's released, I expect you can. But a memory card is fine. What's your point here?
> Burnout 2 is slower from what I've heard.
Nope, the good people at Acclaim had a 'strict 60fps minimum' for all versions of Burnout 2.
> Nope. Multiplayer on my GC is keeping me and my friends occupied. And
> i'm coming back Turok 4 despite needing to start playing Splinter
> Cell. The Ps2 version of Turok 4 is accepted to easily be the worst.
Accepted by whom? In my opinion, it's a poor game to steer well clear of anyway. I'm not convinced on this one; the game was a straight port to all three consoles.
> "Smuggler's Run: Warzones was a GameCube exclusive title."
>
> See WS's comment.
Ok, I was wrong on this account then - I must have been wrongly informed. But still, when developers are given long times in between versions - it's expected that they add in extra features. The same can be said for Die Hard: Vendetta, which contains a multiplayer mode on the PS2.
> Yes and no. I wouldn't have bought SOE if it weren't for the Multi. The
> one player isn't worth 15 - 20 quid.
See above. And I thought it had terrible gameplay anyway.
> "Usually yes, but not by a long shot."
>
> This statement makes little sense. Elaborate.
Granted, the PS2 usually has the worse versions of multiformat titles, but certainly not by a long way.
> Can you save TS2 maps to the PS2 HD?
Once it's released, I expect you can. But a memory card is fine. What's your point here?
> Burnout 2 is slower from what I've heard.
Nope, the good people at Acclaim had a 'strict 60fps minimum' for all versions of Burnout 2.
> Nope. Multiplayer on my GC is keeping me and my friends occupied. And
> i'm coming back Turok 4 despite needing to start playing Splinter
> Cell. The Ps2 version of Turok 4 is accepted to easily be the worst.
Accepted by whom? In my opinion, it's a poor game to steer well clear of anyway. I'm not convinced on this one; the game was a straight port to all three consoles.
> "Smuggler's Run: Warzones was a GameCube exclusive title."
>
> See WS's comment.
Ok, I was wrong on this account then - I must have been wrongly informed. But still, when developers are given long times in between versions - it's expected that they add in extra features. The same can be said for Die Hard: Vendetta, which contains a multiplayer mode on the PS2.
> Yes and no. I wouldn't have bought SOE if it weren't for the Multi. The
> one player isn't worth 15 - 20 quid.
See above. And I thought it had terrible gameplay anyway.
> "Usually yes, but not by a long shot."
>
> This statement makes little sense. Elaborate.
Granted, the PS2 usually has the worse versions of multiformat titles, but certainly not by a long way.
Maverick42 wrote:
> Hedfix wrote:
> TS2 on PS2 is apparently really poor. Good on the other systems
> though.
>
> Not at all - the GameCube version is slightly superior, but the PS2
> and Xbox ones are tied.
Can you save maps to the PS2 HD?
>
> Burnout 2 is apparently poor on PS2.
>
> It has fifteen less crash junctions.
and it slower from what I've heard.
>
>
> Turok 4 was an all round 'oh dear'.
Nope. Multiplayer on my GC is keeping me and my friends occupied. And i'm coming back Turok 4 despite needing to start playing Splinter Cell. The Ps2 version of Turok 4 is accepted to easily be the worst.
>
>
> Smuggler's Run: Warzones was a GameCube exclusive title.
See WS's comment.
>
> State of Emergency was made a passable purchase by inclusion of
> multiplayer mode on the Xbox.
>
Yes and no. I wouldn't have bought it if it weren't for the Multi. The one player isn't worth 15 - 20 quid.
>
> Usually yes, but not by a long shot.
This statement makes little sense. Elaborate.
> Hedfix wrote:
> TS2 on PS2 is apparently really poor. Good on the other systems
> though.
>
> Not at all - the GameCube version is slightly superior, but the PS2
> and Xbox ones are tied.
Can you save maps to the PS2 HD?
>
> Burnout 2 is apparently poor on PS2.
>
> It has fifteen less crash junctions.
and it slower from what I've heard.
>
>
> Turok 4 was an all round 'oh dear'.
Nope. Multiplayer on my GC is keeping me and my friends occupied. And i'm coming back Turok 4 despite needing to start playing Splinter Cell. The Ps2 version of Turok 4 is accepted to easily be the worst.
>
>
> Smuggler's Run: Warzones was a GameCube exclusive title.
See WS's comment.
>
> State of Emergency was made a passable purchase by inclusion of
> multiplayer mode on the Xbox.
>
Yes and no. I wouldn't have bought it if it weren't for the Multi. The one player isn't worth 15 - 20 quid.
>
> Usually yes, but not by a long shot.
This statement makes little sense. Elaborate.
Maverick42 wrote:
>
> Smuggler's Run: Warzones was a GameCube exclusive title.
um..no
> Console extras aren't always to be sniffed at.
>
> At the end of the day, I think they are.
Balls.
>
> Smuggler's Run: Warzones was a GameCube exclusive title.
um..no
> Console extras aren't always to be sniffed at.
>
> At the end of the day, I think they are.
Balls.
Page: