The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Last week, The Mail on sunday ran a small feature on the X-Box. You can find it in last weeks TV guide if you're interested. The peice was about Microsofts entry in the console war.
Now we all know how useless the non-gaming media is at reporting on gaming, as this prime example shows. Here is (word for word) the sidebox, labelled "Video Wars"
------------------------
The X-Box
By: Microsoft
Cost: £299. Processing power from a 733Mhz Pentium III processor (the most powerful of the three).
Features: DVD, Hard drive, Built in broadband internet access and four controller ports.
Launch games:Oddworld: Munch's Oddysee, Halo, Shrek, Malice, DOA3.
Aimed at: Boys who can't resist toys.
Playstation 2.
By: Sony.
Cost: £199. Processing power from a 300Mhz "Emotion engine" processor. It can handle 75 million 3D updates per second.
Features: DVD, optional hard drive, optional broadband/56k modem and four controller ports.
Launch games: Timesplitters, Gran Turismo 3.
Aimed at: Discerning gamers.
Gamecube.
By: Nintendo.
Cost: £179. Processing power from a 405Mhz IBM "Gecko" processor. IBM's copper microchip technology has produced a processor faster than PS2 but behind X-Box.
Features: Optional broadband/56k modem.
Launch games: Star wars: Rogue Leader, Luigi's Mansion, Mariokart, Zelda, Pikmin.
Aimed at: Children.
------------------------
Firstly, how much of this is true? The last I heard, the X-Box's DVD was optional, and the last time I looked at my PS2, it only had 2 ports. I also had problems finding GT3 at launch and I expect others to have had the same trouble. I'm not sure on the GC facts they list, perhaps if anyone could list it's flaws? Surely, if you are going to write a set of facts for a national newspaper, you would want them to be right?
Secondly, they are not comparing like for like. Would it not make sense to note that the PS2 will have over 150 games by the time the X-Box is released?
For the non gaming enthusiast like us, these papers are how people find out more about gaming. You would expect them to have done some more research into their piece, if you read the rest of the article, every other sentence makes you wince with the thought of ineptitude and incompetence. An idea for an article to fill their pages butchered into something that only makes them look stupid.
It's no wonder that the gaming community looks down and laughs at these people. Is it too much to ask that they do some research?
Slave (Don't vote for me, noone else will...)
Now we all know how useless the non-gaming media is at reporting on gaming, as this prime example shows. Here is (word for word) the sidebox, labelled "Video Wars"
------------------------
The X-Box
By: Microsoft
Cost: £299. Processing power from a 733Mhz Pentium III processor (the most powerful of the three).
Features: DVD, Hard drive, Built in broadband internet access and four controller ports.
Launch games:Oddworld: Munch's Oddysee, Halo, Shrek, Malice, DOA3.
Aimed at: Boys who can't resist toys.
Playstation 2.
By: Sony.
Cost: £199. Processing power from a 300Mhz "Emotion engine" processor. It can handle 75 million 3D updates per second.
Features: DVD, optional hard drive, optional broadband/56k modem and four controller ports.
Launch games: Timesplitters, Gran Turismo 3.
Aimed at: Discerning gamers.
Gamecube.
By: Nintendo.
Cost: £179. Processing power from a 405Mhz IBM "Gecko" processor. IBM's copper microchip technology has produced a processor faster than PS2 but behind X-Box.
Features: Optional broadband/56k modem.
Launch games: Star wars: Rogue Leader, Luigi's Mansion, Mariokart, Zelda, Pikmin.
Aimed at: Children.
------------------------
Firstly, how much of this is true? The last I heard, the X-Box's DVD was optional, and the last time I looked at my PS2, it only had 2 ports. I also had problems finding GT3 at launch and I expect others to have had the same trouble. I'm not sure on the GC facts they list, perhaps if anyone could list it's flaws? Surely, if you are going to write a set of facts for a national newspaper, you would want them to be right?
Secondly, they are not comparing like for like. Would it not make sense to note that the PS2 will have over 150 games by the time the X-Box is released?
For the non gaming enthusiast like us, these papers are how people find out more about gaming. You would expect them to have done some more research into their piece, if you read the rest of the article, every other sentence makes you wince with the thought of ineptitude and incompetence. An idea for an article to fill their pages butchered into something that only makes them look stupid.
It's no wonder that the gaming community looks down and laughs at these people. Is it too much to ask that they do some research?
Slave (Don't vote for me, noone else will...)
The mail "lets jump on the band wagon" on sunday how inciteful it is into te complex world of video gamimg.
Not!
The mail always seems to get it wrong. With the PS2 launch they declared that it would make your childrens old games system obsolete.
I also dislike the way the media jumps on the hype train without thinking, te emotion engine will be able to generate emotion in your gaming characters, you will be able to see your players sweat in the game as they work hard.
Do I care: no.
Not!
The mail always seems to get it wrong. With the PS2 launch they declared that it would make your childrens old games system obsolete.
I also dislike the way the media jumps on the hype train without thinking, te emotion engine will be able to generate emotion in your gaming characters, you will be able to see your players sweat in the game as they work hard.
Do I care: no.
The fact is the media is clueless when it comes to gaming. They try to make everyone think they know what they are talking about but the truth is they don't.
They are probably given a story to look up and since before they wrote the article they didn't have a clue about it they tend to get their facts wrong. And this is why the media should get gaming addicts like most of the people on the forums here to write these articles. It's writers like the one that wrote this one that condemn computer games.
It reminds me of the medias attitude to violent games. "This game is bad so don't buy it make sure your kids don't buy it, it will damage them and they will go on violent rampages killing everyone". It's that kind of thing they talk about. And the people who write this rubbish don't know what they are talking about. I'd like to bet that the people that write articles like this have not even played the game and instead have relied heavily on secondary sources such as game descriptions. A game described is very different from a game played.
Lets be honest, and take GTA 1 for example. When this game came out it was the first of it's kind. I'm sure many people had doubts about it, maybe thinking it was a bad game as it was very violent and you could run people over. Surely many people questioned whether games like this should have been released as they "promote crime". Nevertheless I'm sure many of us were curious and played it and liked it. A game like this may sound bad but when you get round to playing it you forget about the controversial issues surrounding it because it is great fun to play (as long as you don't kill children in it which is sick).
Many journalists judge games from descriptions I tend to find and try persuading parents not to get these games as they are bad.
The result is some people don't ever play these games because they have been told by journalists with no speciality in the subject not to. People base their opinions on products they have never played.
That's why I think the media and gaming don't mix.
They are probably given a story to look up and since before they wrote the article they didn't have a clue about it they tend to get their facts wrong. And this is why the media should get gaming addicts like most of the people on the forums here to write these articles. It's writers like the one that wrote this one that condemn computer games.
It reminds me of the medias attitude to violent games. "This game is bad so don't buy it make sure your kids don't buy it, it will damage them and they will go on violent rampages killing everyone". It's that kind of thing they talk about. And the people who write this rubbish don't know what they are talking about. I'd like to bet that the people that write articles like this have not even played the game and instead have relied heavily on secondary sources such as game descriptions. A game described is very different from a game played.
Lets be honest, and take GTA 1 for example. When this game came out it was the first of it's kind. I'm sure many people had doubts about it, maybe thinking it was a bad game as it was very violent and you could run people over. Surely many people questioned whether games like this should have been released as they "promote crime". Nevertheless I'm sure many of us were curious and played it and liked it. A game like this may sound bad but when you get round to playing it you forget about the controversial issues surrounding it because it is great fun to play (as long as you don't kill children in it which is sick).
Many journalists judge games from descriptions I tend to find and try persuading parents not to get these games as they are bad.
The result is some people don't ever play these games because they have been told by journalists with no speciality in the subject not to. People base their opinions on products they have never played.
That's why I think the media and gaming don't mix.
Last week, The Mail on sunday ran a small feature on the X-Box. You can find it in last weeks TV guide if you're interested. The peice was about Microsofts entry in the console war.
Now we all know how useless the non-gaming media is at reporting on gaming, as this prime example shows. Here is (word for word) the sidebox, labelled "Video Wars"
------------------------
The X-Box
By: Microsoft
Cost: £299. Processing power from a 733Mhz Pentium III processor (the most powerful of the three).
Features: DVD, Hard drive, Built in broadband internet access and four controller ports.
Launch games:Oddworld: Munch's Oddysee, Halo, Shrek, Malice, DOA3.
Aimed at: Boys who can't resist toys.
Playstation 2.
By: Sony.
Cost: £199. Processing power from a 300Mhz "Emotion engine" processor. It can handle 75 million 3D updates per second.
Features: DVD, optional hard drive, optional broadband/56k modem and four controller ports.
Launch games: Timesplitters, Gran Turismo 3.
Aimed at: Discerning gamers.
Gamecube.
By: Nintendo.
Cost: £179. Processing power from a 405Mhz IBM "Gecko" processor. IBM's copper microchip technology has produced a processor faster than PS2 but behind X-Box.
Features: Optional broadband/56k modem.
Launch games: Star wars: Rogue Leader, Luigi's Mansion, Mariokart, Zelda, Pikmin.
Aimed at: Children.
------------------------
Firstly, how much of this is true? The last I heard, the X-Box's DVD was optional, and the last time I looked at my PS2, it only had 2 ports. I also had problems finding GT3 at launch and I expect others to have had the same trouble. I'm not sure on the GC facts they list, perhaps if anyone could list it's flaws? Surely, if you are going to write a set of facts for a national newspaper, you would want them to be right?
Secondly, they are not comparing like for like. Would it not make sense to note that the PS2 will have over 150 games by the time the X-Box is released?
For the non gaming enthusiast like us, these papers are how people find out more about gaming. You would expect them to have done some more research into their piece, if you read the rest of the article, every other sentence makes you wince with the thought of ineptitude and incompetence. An idea for an article to fill their pages butchered into something that only makes them look stupid.
It's no wonder that the gaming community looks down and laughs at these people. Is it too much to ask that they do some research?
Slave (Don't vote for me, noone else will...)
Now we all know how useless the non-gaming media is at reporting on gaming, as this prime example shows. Here is (word for word) the sidebox, labelled "Video Wars"
------------------------
The X-Box
By: Microsoft
Cost: £299. Processing power from a 733Mhz Pentium III processor (the most powerful of the three).
Features: DVD, Hard drive, Built in broadband internet access and four controller ports.
Launch games:Oddworld: Munch's Oddysee, Halo, Shrek, Malice, DOA3.
Aimed at: Boys who can't resist toys.
Playstation 2.
By: Sony.
Cost: £199. Processing power from a 300Mhz "Emotion engine" processor. It can handle 75 million 3D updates per second.
Features: DVD, optional hard drive, optional broadband/56k modem and four controller ports.
Launch games: Timesplitters, Gran Turismo 3.
Aimed at: Discerning gamers.
Gamecube.
By: Nintendo.
Cost: £179. Processing power from a 405Mhz IBM "Gecko" processor. IBM's copper microchip technology has produced a processor faster than PS2 but behind X-Box.
Features: Optional broadband/56k modem.
Launch games: Star wars: Rogue Leader, Luigi's Mansion, Mariokart, Zelda, Pikmin.
Aimed at: Children.
------------------------
Firstly, how much of this is true? The last I heard, the X-Box's DVD was optional, and the last time I looked at my PS2, it only had 2 ports. I also had problems finding GT3 at launch and I expect others to have had the same trouble. I'm not sure on the GC facts they list, perhaps if anyone could list it's flaws? Surely, if you are going to write a set of facts for a national newspaper, you would want them to be right?
Secondly, they are not comparing like for like. Would it not make sense to note that the PS2 will have over 150 games by the time the X-Box is released?
For the non gaming enthusiast like us, these papers are how people find out more about gaming. You would expect them to have done some more research into their piece, if you read the rest of the article, every other sentence makes you wince with the thought of ineptitude and incompetence. An idea for an article to fill their pages butchered into something that only makes them look stupid.
It's no wonder that the gaming community looks down and laughs at these people. Is it too much to ask that they do some research?
Slave (Don't vote for me, noone else will...)