The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Ok, let's clear this up.
Out of this list let's see if GC Sequels can be compared or not to the Playstation Sequel's.
Maybe people will understand it better.
Here Goes:
Pikmin
All-Star Baseball 2002- True Annual Nintendo Sequel, also a PS2 Port with superior GC Visuals.
Animal Forest
Batman Dark Tomorrow- A sequel?
Crazi Taxi
Extreme G3- A Nintendo sequel yes, but not annual, appearing roughly updated every two years.
Madden NFL. True Annual Sequel.
NFL Blitz 2002. True Sequel????
NFL Quarterback Club 2002. True Nintendo Annual sequel.
NHL Hitz. Er...has this appeared on N64???Sequel then...No!
Rogue Spear. Sequel yes, last one appeared about 2 years back.
Simpson's Road Rage.
Spyro the Dragon. Ex-PS Joint Mascot. Not a sequel on the Nintendo scene.
StarWars Rogue Leader. Sequel Yes. Not PS Type annual.
Super Monkey Ball.
UniversalStudios.
Wave Race Blue Storm. Sequel but how long did the last one appear? 4 YEARS.
18 Wheeler.
Eternal Darkness.
Golden Sun.
Super Smash Bros Melee. Sequel, 3 year gap.
SSX Tricky. NO sequel for the Nintendo side.
Virtua Striker 3. NO Sequel regardless of the number, for the Nintendo side of things.
Resident Evil 0.
Resident Evil 1. NO SEQUEL, pure update.
Resident Evil 2. Sequel, updated port.
Resident Evil 3. Sequel, updated port.
Resident Evil: Code Veronica. Sequel, Updated port.
Resident Evil 4. Sequel, New game.
Rave: The groove adventure.
Dave Mirra Freestyle 2. No sequel for Nintendo.
Galleon.
Luigi's Mansion.
NBA Courtside 2002. 4 Year wait update sequel.
Phantasy Star Online Version 2. NO Nintendo sequel.
StarFox Adventures: Dinosaur Planet. Not a sequel, I don't care what people say, the SF Character's where added at the last minute replacing the original characters, different game and style to the previous SF Games.
Mario Sunshine. Sequel yes. But the prequel Mario 64 first appeared in 1996.
NBA Street.
Turok Evolution. Sequel, Not Annual.
Die Hard: Next Gen. No sequel for Nintendo.
Creatures.
Donald Duck.
Hot Wheels.
Jeremy McGarth Supercross.
Jimmy Neutron Boy Genius.
Kameo Elements of Power.
Largo Winch.
Legend of Zelda. True Sequel. Released 2 years since last. Very Rare Nintendo Franchise though to appear.
Legend's of Wrestling.
Perfect Dark Zero.
Conkers Bad Fur day 2. Sequel. 3 Years supposedly since last.
Rally Simulation.
Rayman 3. Sequel.
Robocop.
Rugrats.
Scooby Doo.
Spider Man the Movie.
Star Wars RPG.
Tarzan.
The land before time.
The road to Eldorado.
Tony Hawks 3. True Sequel for Nintendo.
1080 Snowboarding. Sequel.
Bomberman Generations. Sequel.
Crash Bandicoot. EX- PS Mascot. No Nintendo Sequel.
Crouching Tiger Hidden dragon.
Donkey Kong Racing.
Doshin the Giant.
Duke Nukem Forever. True Sequel?
Safire FPS.
Jurassic Park 3.
Mario Kart. Sequel. does not appear often.
Metroid Prime. When did we see the prequel last?
Mickey Mouse.
Mortal Kombat 5.
Pokemon Adventure.
Ridge Racer 6. Last to appear was RR64 2 years back.
Rune.
Saffire RPG.
Sonic Adventure 2. Definately NOT an Nintendo Sequel.
Soul Calibur 2.
Thornado.
Out of this list let's see if GC Sequels can be compared or not to the Playstation Sequel's.
Maybe people will understand it better.
Here Goes:
Pikmin
All-Star Baseball 2002- True Annual Nintendo Sequel, also a PS2 Port with superior GC Visuals.
Animal Forest
Batman Dark Tomorrow- A sequel?
Crazi Taxi
Extreme G3- A Nintendo sequel yes, but not annual, appearing roughly updated every two years.
Madden NFL. True Annual Sequel.
NFL Blitz 2002. True Sequel????
NFL Quarterback Club 2002. True Nintendo Annual sequel.
NHL Hitz. Er...has this appeared on N64???Sequel then...No!
Rogue Spear. Sequel yes, last one appeared about 2 years back.
Simpson's Road Rage.
Spyro the Dragon. Ex-PS Joint Mascot. Not a sequel on the Nintendo scene.
StarWars Rogue Leader. Sequel Yes. Not PS Type annual.
Super Monkey Ball.
UniversalStudios.
Wave Race Blue Storm. Sequel but how long did the last one appear? 4 YEARS.
18 Wheeler.
Eternal Darkness.
Golden Sun.
Super Smash Bros Melee. Sequel, 3 year gap.
SSX Tricky. NO sequel for the Nintendo side.
Virtua Striker 3. NO Sequel regardless of the number, for the Nintendo side of things.
Resident Evil 0.
Resident Evil 1. NO SEQUEL, pure update.
Resident Evil 2. Sequel, updated port.
Resident Evil 3. Sequel, updated port.
Resident Evil: Code Veronica. Sequel, Updated port.
Resident Evil 4. Sequel, New game.
Rave: The groove adventure.
Dave Mirra Freestyle 2. No sequel for Nintendo.
Galleon.
Luigi's Mansion.
NBA Courtside 2002. 4 Year wait update sequel.
Phantasy Star Online Version 2. NO Nintendo sequel.
StarFox Adventures: Dinosaur Planet. Not a sequel, I don't care what people say, the SF Character's where added at the last minute replacing the original characters, different game and style to the previous SF Games.
Mario Sunshine. Sequel yes. But the prequel Mario 64 first appeared in 1996.
NBA Street.
Turok Evolution. Sequel, Not Annual.
Die Hard: Next Gen. No sequel for Nintendo.
Creatures.
Donald Duck.
Hot Wheels.
Jeremy McGarth Supercross.
Jimmy Neutron Boy Genius.
Kameo Elements of Power.
Largo Winch.
Legend of Zelda. True Sequel. Released 2 years since last. Very Rare Nintendo Franchise though to appear.
Legend's of Wrestling.
Perfect Dark Zero.
Conkers Bad Fur day 2. Sequel. 3 Years supposedly since last.
Rally Simulation.
Rayman 3. Sequel.
Robocop.
Rugrats.
Scooby Doo.
Spider Man the Movie.
Star Wars RPG.
Tarzan.
The land before time.
The road to Eldorado.
Tony Hawks 3. True Sequel for Nintendo.
1080 Snowboarding. Sequel.
Bomberman Generations. Sequel.
Crash Bandicoot. EX- PS Mascot. No Nintendo Sequel.
Crouching Tiger Hidden dragon.
Donkey Kong Racing.
Doshin the Giant.
Duke Nukem Forever. True Sequel?
Safire FPS.
Jurassic Park 3.
Mario Kart. Sequel. does not appear often.
Metroid Prime. When did we see the prequel last?
Mickey Mouse.
Mortal Kombat 5.
Pokemon Adventure.
Ridge Racer 6. Last to appear was RR64 2 years back.
Rune.
Saffire RPG.
Sonic Adventure 2. Definately NOT an Nintendo Sequel.
Soul Calibur 2.
Thornado.
Page:
I don't care if they're "true" sequels or not; I'm drooling over the names already, because I know that the games are going to turnout great. The majority of them, anyway.
Man, that guy simply excretes greatness!
This comes from the topic, "What If..." by Mr Nice Guy on Prime.
WolfHound wrote:
Don't be silly Turbonutter.
Life would be no different without Sony.
Ah, another well-backed up, intellectual comment from WolfHound there. :D
WolfHound wrote:
Don't be silly Turbonutter.
Life would be no different without Sony.
Ah, another well-backed up, intellectual comment from WolfHound there. :D
No, he really is a blithering idiot. Also, that's not being abusive. I've done abusive before, you'll KNOW when I'm being abusive ;-)
Turbonutter wrote:
> You blithering idiot.
You can't compare a handheld to a console, it's like
> comparing TVs to VCRs. Many people have both and wouldn't think twice about
> buying both. However, many people will only buy one console of any given
> generation.
Sure you can. Yeh, people will buy one of each, but you can say that you think that, for example, the PS2 compares to the rest of the console market better than the GBA compares to the rest of the (currently pretty much non-existant) hand held market. And it is NOT like comparing TVs to VCRs, since these do totally different jobs. To use your analogy, it's more like comparing DVD players to VCRs, yes? And finally, I for one would prefer it if you didn't get abusive when you disagree with an opinion. :)
> You blithering idiot.
You can't compare a handheld to a console, it's like
> comparing TVs to VCRs. Many people have both and wouldn't think twice about
> buying both. However, many people will only buy one console of any given
> generation.
Sure you can. Yeh, people will buy one of each, but you can say that you think that, for example, the PS2 compares to the rest of the console market better than the GBA compares to the rest of the (currently pretty much non-existant) hand held market. And it is NOT like comparing TVs to VCRs, since these do totally different jobs. To use your analogy, it's more like comparing DVD players to VCRs, yes? And finally, I for one would prefer it if you didn't get abusive when you disagree with an opinion. :)
Listen to the Monster, heed what he says.
WolfHound wrote:
> Is stating that a certain console is better than
> another wrong?
Not at all, as long as it's clear that it's best for you, and in your opinion. The facts show that neither machine has a clear advantage over the other; it's also known that they're not competing for the same market, so the constant PS2 bashing isn't necessary. This is not solely aimed at yourself, though.
> Squaresoft stated recently that they would love to create for GBA, however, they did say
> that if Sony were to release a handheld, they would certainly abandon Nintendo
> in favour of a Sony Handheld, due of course to Sony's
> investment.
I've not read the statement myself, so I can't comment. However, even in Square's case, it's irrelevant as Sony have never announced plans for a handheld. On a personal level, it's highly unlikely that I would buy one even if they did, as I've no interest in them.
> Oh but it is.
So back it up in your post, don't make us go looking.
> Put it this way. Take ALL the games lined up
> for GC which are PS2 Ports, now look at the GC Description's of those PS2
> Port's, Notice how each developer state's that the GC version of the game will
> be superior??
No, I haven't noticed that at all. But having said that, any game can be improved in a port, as you have the benefit of hindsight. Hence the improvements being made to the likes of Deus Ex and Half Life as they come to PS2 from the PC. I'll not go into the specs side of things, as both machines have their advantages, as has been discussed several times before.
> But you have over looked one thing, or really 'Two' things.
No, I haven't. I've made it clear many times that I never count handhelds in sales figures. They're smaller, cheaper and easier to manufacture than 'real' consoles, and so will always, always sell many more units.
> I stated something on the lines of: Nintendo were the
> FIRST to fully 'Revolutionise' the Analogue stick in Console gaming. And so
> they where, every Major title was put to use with the set-up.
The early consoles mentioned in my reply to that post *only* had an analogue stick, no digital pad - so every 'major' title for them used it too. There was nothing revolutionary about analogue sticks on any Nintendo system. In fact, the only thing they did was shorten the stick.
You also tried to tell me that there was no way it could have been "truly analogue", and that analogue sticks had no use in 2D games.
> 'But', I was answering a previous argument about someone saying about the
> Gamecube being at a Disadvantage with the 1.8 GB Disks to the PS2 games, which I
> was right at saying.
Fair enough, but there's no point disputing false truths about one system with false truths about another! :-)
> How can anyone say that the GC Is at a Disadvantage when
> the Majority of the PS2 Games released so far are on the Inferior CD format,
There isn't an 'inferior format' at all. They are all essentially the same, apart from the amount of data they can hold, and the cost of producing them. As far as cost goes, CD is quite possibly the best format of all three. The amount of storage depends on the game - as most titles are developed on some form of hard drive, the format is unlikely to be considered until the game is almost complete and they know how much room is required. If nothing else, at least PS2 gives developers the option to choose the format - though I doubt that it's really a major issue for them.
> Although it didn't live up to what people had it out to be, for a start the games I have
> and the game's Iv'e played, are basically no different to what the Dreamcast can
> handle or offer.
That's a matter of personal opinion, of course - and I can readily accept that you aren't as impressed with it as myself or certain other people. But the number of digs at Sony - intentional or not - do make you seem... unhappy... with them.
> I also prefer Dreamcast over PS2, So...
So why get a PS2, or why keep it? Multi-platform gamer or not, why keep something you're not happy with?
> What a load of Nonsense, Live up to it, the PS2
> Isn't the Bees Knees, nor radically superior to the Dreamcast
It's not nonsense - there have been many claims about aspects of the PS2 which are completely wrong; that wasn't aimed at your posts in particular.
The PS2 isn't a perfect machine. There never will be a perfect machine, because none can be all things to all people. The Dreamcast is/was a fine machine also, and while PS2 isn't *radically* superior, it is superior nonetheless - not in all aspects, but in most. Just as in some ways it is also superior to the Gamecube, while the Gamecube is superior in others.
Of course, at the end of the day, if - like me - you will have both machines (and I gather you will), then what does it matter? You will have access to the best games on both formats, and the better version (whichever that may be) on the multi-format games.
> Is stating that a certain console is better than
> another wrong?
Not at all, as long as it's clear that it's best for you, and in your opinion. The facts show that neither machine has a clear advantage over the other; it's also known that they're not competing for the same market, so the constant PS2 bashing isn't necessary. This is not solely aimed at yourself, though.
> Squaresoft stated recently that they would love to create for GBA, however, they did say
> that if Sony were to release a handheld, they would certainly abandon Nintendo
> in favour of a Sony Handheld, due of course to Sony's
> investment.
I've not read the statement myself, so I can't comment. However, even in Square's case, it's irrelevant as Sony have never announced plans for a handheld. On a personal level, it's highly unlikely that I would buy one even if they did, as I've no interest in them.
> Oh but it is.
So back it up in your post, don't make us go looking.
> Put it this way. Take ALL the games lined up
> for GC which are PS2 Ports, now look at the GC Description's of those PS2
> Port's, Notice how each developer state's that the GC version of the game will
> be superior??
No, I haven't noticed that at all. But having said that, any game can be improved in a port, as you have the benefit of hindsight. Hence the improvements being made to the likes of Deus Ex and Half Life as they come to PS2 from the PC. I'll not go into the specs side of things, as both machines have their advantages, as has been discussed several times before.
> But you have over looked one thing, or really 'Two' things.
No, I haven't. I've made it clear many times that I never count handhelds in sales figures. They're smaller, cheaper and easier to manufacture than 'real' consoles, and so will always, always sell many more units.
> I stated something on the lines of: Nintendo were the
> FIRST to fully 'Revolutionise' the Analogue stick in Console gaming. And so
> they where, every Major title was put to use with the set-up.
The early consoles mentioned in my reply to that post *only* had an analogue stick, no digital pad - so every 'major' title for them used it too. There was nothing revolutionary about analogue sticks on any Nintendo system. In fact, the only thing they did was shorten the stick.
You also tried to tell me that there was no way it could have been "truly analogue", and that analogue sticks had no use in 2D games.
> 'But', I was answering a previous argument about someone saying about the
> Gamecube being at a Disadvantage with the 1.8 GB Disks to the PS2 games, which I
> was right at saying.
Fair enough, but there's no point disputing false truths about one system with false truths about another! :-)
> How can anyone say that the GC Is at a Disadvantage when
> the Majority of the PS2 Games released so far are on the Inferior CD format,
There isn't an 'inferior format' at all. They are all essentially the same, apart from the amount of data they can hold, and the cost of producing them. As far as cost goes, CD is quite possibly the best format of all three. The amount of storage depends on the game - as most titles are developed on some form of hard drive, the format is unlikely to be considered until the game is almost complete and they know how much room is required. If nothing else, at least PS2 gives developers the option to choose the format - though I doubt that it's really a major issue for them.
> Although it didn't live up to what people had it out to be, for a start the games I have
> and the game's Iv'e played, are basically no different to what the Dreamcast can
> handle or offer.
That's a matter of personal opinion, of course - and I can readily accept that you aren't as impressed with it as myself or certain other people. But the number of digs at Sony - intentional or not - do make you seem... unhappy... with them.
> I also prefer Dreamcast over PS2, So...
So why get a PS2, or why keep it? Multi-platform gamer or not, why keep something you're not happy with?
> What a load of Nonsense, Live up to it, the PS2
> Isn't the Bees Knees, nor radically superior to the Dreamcast
It's not nonsense - there have been many claims about aspects of the PS2 which are completely wrong; that wasn't aimed at your posts in particular.
The PS2 isn't a perfect machine. There never will be a perfect machine, because none can be all things to all people. The Dreamcast is/was a fine machine also, and while PS2 isn't *radically* superior, it is superior nonetheless - not in all aspects, but in most. Just as in some ways it is also superior to the Gamecube, while the Gamecube is superior in others.
Of course, at the end of the day, if - like me - you will have both machines (and I gather you will), then what does it matter? You will have access to the best games on both formats, and the better version (whichever that may be) on the multi-format games.
Turbonutter wrote:
> You blithering idiot.
You can't compare a handheld to a console, it's like
> comparing TVs to VCRs. Many people have both and wouldn't think twice about
> buying both. However, many people will only buy one console of any given
> generation.
You blithering idiot Turbonutter. The gamecube and ps/ps1/ps2 are hand held. what are you on?
ps. i carnt be arsed to read the rest of the posts so you may be talkin about one of these, fare enough if you are
> You blithering idiot.
You can't compare a handheld to a console, it's like
> comparing TVs to VCRs. Many people have both and wouldn't think twice about
> buying both. However, many people will only buy one console of any given
> generation.
You blithering idiot Turbonutter. The gamecube and ps/ps1/ps2 are hand held. what are you on?
ps. i carnt be arsed to read the rest of the posts so you may be talkin about one of these, fare enough if you are
You blithering idiot.
You can't compare a handheld to a console, it's like comparing TVs to VCRs. Many people have both and wouldn't think twice about buying both. However, many people will only buy one console of any given generation.
You can't compare a handheld to a console, it's like comparing TVs to VCRs. Many people have both and wouldn't think twice about buying both. However, many people will only buy one console of any given generation.
WolfHound wrote:
No, Im not at all. Just because I say something
> about about the 'Precious' PS2, People go buck mad.
LOL!! And look who's talking!
No, Im not at all. Just because I say something
> about about the 'Precious' PS2, People go buck mad.
LOL!! And look who's talking!
Page: