The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Well until a few days ago I was a self confessed Nintendo fan. I had played a PS2 courtesy of GA*E and I didnít think it was too special.
At a mates birthday sleepover a few days ago there were 6 of us and 3 had PS2ís. One brought along their PS2 and the others brought their games. WE DID NOT DRINK :o)
Ok, we set it up in a matter of seconds on his big widescreen telly and in went International Track and field. Boom! It hit me, the button bashing crazy had latched onto a new victim, me. We had a great laugh and after a 2hr stretch we stopped because our wrists were killed! In went This Is Football 2002, Boom! It hit me, but not the button bashing, the graphics. GA*E must have had a demo of the game, of their telly was pants because the graphics were so smooth, so crisp.
I was blown away by how fast the game actually ran, I mean its one thing to have good graphics but its another to play it at a high speed. The players looked so real, it was just so realistic. The controls were a bit fiddely but after 5 mins they were easy, and thatís coming from an n64 owner!
You know in a real match, when corners are getting ready to be taken, the keeper sort of like bends down and points to his front and back post and shouts ìMark up!î Well, what do you know, this game recreated it so beautifully.
We didnít have a multi-tap but we had teams of two, one person played the first half and the other played the second. It worked very well.
After a few world cups, a lot of LEMONADE drinking :o) and some nokia game fun we played crazy taxi. This was a bit annoying because its only one player, so one person played while we went off to do something else. After a LOT of waiting I had my go, I have played the Dreamcast version so I wasnít a newbie to the game but still, the graphics were top class, the game ran so smooth, so crisp.
I basically sum up the PS2 as being better than the consoles out there at the moment and I wouldnít say no to a free one :o)
I was until a few nights ago a self confessed Ninty, I didnít have a grudge against Sony but they reminded my of some wordÖ. Whats it againÖ AH, its that word, SEQUALS :o)
MY advise to those out there who donít like the PS2 I say is play it again, and again. You will like it. Playing a PS2 has now totally changed my view on Sony and their consoles.
They have a lot of quality games out on the market but the PS3 beckons so donít shell out for one just yet. If Sony tried to stick to one console for a while like PSX they would be the best, but they release a new console every time the opposition brings out something that might better their current console. So if they put more effort and more time into PS3 any maybe put some expansion slots into it, it could work, but still they might go overboard and put to many slots in and release a new expansion ìThingî every week!
I played ISS98 on my n64 last night and I thought, what the hell is this? The graphics were poor, and thinking about it, the game is solid. You canít outpace other players, and the camera is not the best.
We didnít get to play on GT3 but we had it, so I could of compared the graphics, If they are the same as the graphics on the advert or even better I will be impressed, very impressed.
So basically if Nintendo canít pull it together and make GameCube something special Iím afraid I will be changing to the more popular choice. Sony. Thatís another thing, ALL my mates have a playstation of some sort, so I do feel left out. When they come round I say ìBring you playstationî PSX is just moreÖ Easier.
I want Nintendo to succeed and I thought Zelda could be amazing but I can see straight away that it is already being called childish from the kiddy Zelda graphics. Resident Evil looks ace so with lots of 3rd party games on the way it should be a better success than N64.
I haven't been converted yet, but I am slowly leaning to that dark Sony side.
But as always, like I always say, lets just wait and see.
Thanks for reading
GasMask
At a mates birthday sleepover a few days ago there were 6 of us and 3 had PS2ís. One brought along their PS2 and the others brought their games. WE DID NOT DRINK :o)
Ok, we set it up in a matter of seconds on his big widescreen telly and in went International Track and field. Boom! It hit me, the button bashing crazy had latched onto a new victim, me. We had a great laugh and after a 2hr stretch we stopped because our wrists were killed! In went This Is Football 2002, Boom! It hit me, but not the button bashing, the graphics. GA*E must have had a demo of the game, of their telly was pants because the graphics were so smooth, so crisp.
I was blown away by how fast the game actually ran, I mean its one thing to have good graphics but its another to play it at a high speed. The players looked so real, it was just so realistic. The controls were a bit fiddely but after 5 mins they were easy, and thatís coming from an n64 owner!
You know in a real match, when corners are getting ready to be taken, the keeper sort of like bends down and points to his front and back post and shouts ìMark up!î Well, what do you know, this game recreated it so beautifully.
We didnít have a multi-tap but we had teams of two, one person played the first half and the other played the second. It worked very well.
After a few world cups, a lot of LEMONADE drinking :o) and some nokia game fun we played crazy taxi. This was a bit annoying because its only one player, so one person played while we went off to do something else. After a LOT of waiting I had my go, I have played the Dreamcast version so I wasnít a newbie to the game but still, the graphics were top class, the game ran so smooth, so crisp.
I basically sum up the PS2 as being better than the consoles out there at the moment and I wouldnít say no to a free one :o)
I was until a few nights ago a self confessed Ninty, I didnít have a grudge against Sony but they reminded my of some wordÖ. Whats it againÖ AH, its that word, SEQUALS :o)
MY advise to those out there who donít like the PS2 I say is play it again, and again. You will like it. Playing a PS2 has now totally changed my view on Sony and their consoles.
They have a lot of quality games out on the market but the PS3 beckons so donít shell out for one just yet. If Sony tried to stick to one console for a while like PSX they would be the best, but they release a new console every time the opposition brings out something that might better their current console. So if they put more effort and more time into PS3 any maybe put some expansion slots into it, it could work, but still they might go overboard and put to many slots in and release a new expansion ìThingî every week!
I played ISS98 on my n64 last night and I thought, what the hell is this? The graphics were poor, and thinking about it, the game is solid. You canít outpace other players, and the camera is not the best.
We didnít get to play on GT3 but we had it, so I could of compared the graphics, If they are the same as the graphics on the advert or even better I will be impressed, very impressed.
So basically if Nintendo canít pull it together and make GameCube something special Iím afraid I will be changing to the more popular choice. Sony. Thatís another thing, ALL my mates have a playstation of some sort, so I do feel left out. When they come round I say ìBring you playstationî PSX is just moreÖ Easier.
I want Nintendo to succeed and I thought Zelda could be amazing but I can see straight away that it is already being called childish from the kiddy Zelda graphics. Resident Evil looks ace so with lots of 3rd party games on the way it should be a better success than N64.
I haven't been converted yet, but I am slowly leaning to that dark Sony side.
But as always, like I always say, lets just wait and see.
Thanks for reading
GasMask
Page:
I agree with the post before this.
The best multiplayer games are on Nintendo machines. Having said that, there are some good 4 player games on the DC, Virtua Tennis, Chu Chu Rocket etc.
But that's not to criticise the PS2.
People who buy it know they will get a greater single player experience, GT3, DMC, MGS2 etc, and they take that into account when they make their choice.
The best multiplayer games are on Nintendo machines. Having said that, there are some good 4 player games on the DC, Virtua Tennis, Chu Chu Rocket etc.
But that's not to criticise the PS2.
People who buy it know they will get a greater single player experience, GT3, DMC, MGS2 etc, and they take that into account when they make their choice.
Turbonutter wrote:
> Strafex wrote:
> As far as most PS2 owners are concerned, their games
>
> don't need multiplayer anyway.
That's not strictly true. I have a lot of
> friends that are *very* impressed with the PS2 and come round all the time to
> play on it. Therefore, wether a game is 4 or 2 player is always a consideration
> for me before I buy it, and that's why most of SCEE's eligable titles are
> multiplayer of some sort, and an awful lot of 3rd party's are too. Hell, we've
> even got Rayman Multiplayer!
Everyone's getting Rayman multiplayer.
Still, although some devellopers are pushing 4 player games into the system it's still not a multiplayer based machine.
You seem to be more in to multiplayer than most PS2 owners here (that is, PS2 owners who won't be getting a Gamecube as well) and you only have a moderate view on multiplayer, i.e. for special occasions.
Most PS2 owners won't be bothering with it's multiplayer.
And yes, games like Monkey Ball and Rayman will be released multiformat but it's garaunteed that they'll be more sucessful on the Gamecube.
Why?
Because your average Nintendo player is far more interested in multiplayer than your average Playstation owner.
What's more, the PS2 wasn't even designed with multiplayer in mind. The multitap gives devellopers the option "if they really must!" but it isn't really a multiplayer machine.
It just CAN do multiplayer if you REALLY want to.
If you want the best multiplayer games around though (which most of you probably don't), I think you'll find that they're on the Gamecube.
> Strafex wrote:
> As far as most PS2 owners are concerned, their games
>
> don't need multiplayer anyway.
That's not strictly true. I have a lot of
> friends that are *very* impressed with the PS2 and come round all the time to
> play on it. Therefore, wether a game is 4 or 2 player is always a consideration
> for me before I buy it, and that's why most of SCEE's eligable titles are
> multiplayer of some sort, and an awful lot of 3rd party's are too. Hell, we've
> even got Rayman Multiplayer!
Everyone's getting Rayman multiplayer.
Still, although some devellopers are pushing 4 player games into the system it's still not a multiplayer based machine.
You seem to be more in to multiplayer than most PS2 owners here (that is, PS2 owners who won't be getting a Gamecube as well) and you only have a moderate view on multiplayer, i.e. for special occasions.
Most PS2 owners won't be bothering with it's multiplayer.
And yes, games like Monkey Ball and Rayman will be released multiformat but it's garaunteed that they'll be more sucessful on the Gamecube.
Why?
Because your average Nintendo player is far more interested in multiplayer than your average Playstation owner.
What's more, the PS2 wasn't even designed with multiplayer in mind. The multitap gives devellopers the option "if they really must!" but it isn't really a multiplayer machine.
It just CAN do multiplayer if you REALLY want to.
If you want the best multiplayer games around though (which most of you probably don't), I think you'll find that they're on the Gamecube.
You've got friends Turbo?
Flippin heck what next? Mario games on Sony consoles.
:P
Flippin heck what next? Mario games on Sony consoles.
:P
Strafex wrote:
> As far as most PS2 owners are concerned, their games
> don't need multiplayer anyway.
That's not strictly true. I have a lot of friends that are *very* impressed with the PS2 and come round all the time to play on it. Therefore, wether a game is 4 or 2 player is always a consideration for me before I buy it, and that's why most of SCEE's eligable titles are multiplayer of some sort, and an awful lot of 3rd party's are too. Hell, we've even got Rayman Multiplayer!
> As far as most PS2 owners are concerned, their games
> don't need multiplayer anyway.
That's not strictly true. I have a lot of friends that are *very* impressed with the PS2 and come round all the time to play on it. Therefore, wether a game is 4 or 2 player is always a consideration for me before I buy it, and that's why most of SCEE's eligable titles are multiplayer of some sort, and an awful lot of 3rd party's are too. Hell, we've even got Rayman Multiplayer!
Strafex wrote:
> As far as most PS2 owners are concerned, their games
> don't need multiplayer anyway.
For me personally, that's very true. Partly because I don't have 4 friends who live locally and are into games as much as I am, and partly because I couldn't get 4 people in front of my TV anyway!
By the way... Monkey Ball is also coming for PS2...
http://serverpool.reserve.co.uk/news/story.php?id=1189
> As far as most PS2 owners are concerned, their games
> don't need multiplayer anyway.
For me personally, that's very true. Partly because I don't have 4 friends who live locally and are into games as much as I am, and partly because I couldn't get 4 people in front of my TV anyway!
By the way... Monkey Ball is also coming for PS2...
http://serverpool.reserve.co.uk/news/story.php?id=1189
WÚÛkiee M¯nßÜÄR wrote:
I'd rank you alongside those people who walk into the
> cinema as the titles roll for the main feature, but miss the trailers telling
> them of the brilliance to come.
You know... the ones who wander around
> aimlessly looking for their seat, annoying the people already settled behind
> them, until an usher who knows their way around shows them the light and leads
> them by the hand to their seat.
At which point, all those ticked off people
> behind them begin launching popcorn at their head.
In that case, I'll rank you as someone who goes to see an incredibly anticipated movie...
It turns out to be awful, but you end up raving about it because you were incredibly impressed by the trailer of its sequel! ;-P
Seriously though, I suppose we could strike a balance here.
You being a hardcore Sony fan, found it worthwhile the moment it came out, no matter the price.
For me, the PS2 will never be really worthwhile, because the Gamecube suits me better (the situation stands that I don't have enough money for both).
For the neutral gamer (such as PB or YH), it wasn't worthwhile until now.
Meanwhile, the Tellah Fella said something like:
>Where? N64? I agree that the N64 has good multiplayer games. None are as good as 4 player Timesplitters, which >was available over 1 year ago.
>You can't be talking about the Gamecube. It's not released for 6 months, and the selection of multi-player games is >errrm... minimal.
>Open your eyes Nintys!
I wouldn't know much about Timesplitters, but from what I've heard, it only beats previous games through console power, and was pretty unimaginative.
What's more, it takes more than one or two decent first person shooter to make a multiplayer console.
The PS2 wasn't designed with multiplayer in mind, it's just devellopers want to emulate the superb multiplayer on the N64.
I've yet to see or hear of PS2 games which beat Mario Kart, Waverace, Smash Brothers, Mario Party, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Mario Tennis and those just being the cream that comes to mind.
Then with the Gamecube, there's Monkey Ball and Wave Race just to start with.
This will be followed by Donkey Kong Racing, Smash Brothers Melee, Phantasy Star Online, the new Perfect Dark (which won't be hampered by the N64's outdated power this time)..., loads more - even the new Resident Evil game is set to have a multiplayer.
My eyes are open as wide as they can go, Tellah. Yours seem to be looking in the wrong direction though.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not slating the PS2 in any way.
It doesn't match up in the multiplayer but it doesn't want or try to.
Sony have left devellopers open by putting in link cable and multitap options but it's not the console's focus.
The Gamecube on the other hand has been designed for multiplayer nearly as much as single player and suits the task perfectly.
As far as most PS2 owners are concerned, their games don't need multiplayer anyway.
I'd rank you alongside those people who walk into the
> cinema as the titles roll for the main feature, but miss the trailers telling
> them of the brilliance to come.
You know... the ones who wander around
> aimlessly looking for their seat, annoying the people already settled behind
> them, until an usher who knows their way around shows them the light and leads
> them by the hand to their seat.
At which point, all those ticked off people
> behind them begin launching popcorn at their head.
In that case, I'll rank you as someone who goes to see an incredibly anticipated movie...
It turns out to be awful, but you end up raving about it because you were incredibly impressed by the trailer of its sequel! ;-P
Seriously though, I suppose we could strike a balance here.
You being a hardcore Sony fan, found it worthwhile the moment it came out, no matter the price.
For me, the PS2 will never be really worthwhile, because the Gamecube suits me better (the situation stands that I don't have enough money for both).
For the neutral gamer (such as PB or YH), it wasn't worthwhile until now.
Meanwhile, the Tellah Fella said something like:
>Where? N64? I agree that the N64 has good multiplayer games. None are as good as 4 player Timesplitters, which >was available over 1 year ago.
>You can't be talking about the Gamecube. It's not released for 6 months, and the selection of multi-player games is >errrm... minimal.
>Open your eyes Nintys!
I wouldn't know much about Timesplitters, but from what I've heard, it only beats previous games through console power, and was pretty unimaginative.
What's more, it takes more than one or two decent first person shooter to make a multiplayer console.
The PS2 wasn't designed with multiplayer in mind, it's just devellopers want to emulate the superb multiplayer on the N64.
I've yet to see or hear of PS2 games which beat Mario Kart, Waverace, Smash Brothers, Mario Party, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Mario Tennis and those just being the cream that comes to mind.
Then with the Gamecube, there's Monkey Ball and Wave Race just to start with.
This will be followed by Donkey Kong Racing, Smash Brothers Melee, Phantasy Star Online, the new Perfect Dark (which won't be hampered by the N64's outdated power this time)..., loads more - even the new Resident Evil game is set to have a multiplayer.
My eyes are open as wide as they can go, Tellah. Yours seem to be looking in the wrong direction though.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not slating the PS2 in any way.
It doesn't match up in the multiplayer but it doesn't want or try to.
Sony have left devellopers open by putting in link cable and multitap options but it's not the console's focus.
The Gamecube on the other hand has been designed for multiplayer nearly as much as single player and suits the task perfectly.
As far as most PS2 owners are concerned, their games don't need multiplayer anyway.
Turbonutter wrote:
> Neither.
Thats correct... I own both but my PSX is broken !
> Neither.
Thats correct... I own both but my PSX is broken !
Neither.
Page: