The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Hear that rolling sound? That because Sony dropped the ball on internet connectivity. Microsoft have picked it up, got their FPS line up sorted and seem destined to win the online battle by default. Sony have been way too slow. Microsoft are currently gearing their top titles for XBox live, for instance Halo 2 and PGR2. Also through May there's Ghost Recon and Wolfenstein. What have Sony unleashed as far as FPS's go? Tribes 2. erm..
Plus for the ps2 you actually have to buy the modem and buy the harddisk.
Am I overlooking something? aside from the blind loyalty factor?
Plus for the ps2 you actually have to buy the modem and buy the harddisk.
Am I overlooking something? aside from the blind loyalty factor?
Page:
He made his point, insulted alot of things which is sure to get bad replies, but apart from that it was a good post.
I was still talking about FPS games mainly, I'm still unconvinced by the games you've suggested. Its sad that the harddisk is being delayed 'downloadable content' is bound to be lacking for a while on PS2.
I asked 'do they [Sony] think that people are mugs?' and you suggesting they'd still buy the PS2 if it had no ports and was 500 quid suggests you do think sony believe people are mugs.
I asked 'do they [Sony] think that people are mugs?' and you suggesting they'd still buy the PS2 if it had no ports and was 500 quid suggests you do think sony believe people are mugs.
heh heh, a JAT thats a smartass. Wouldn't you belive it.
PC beats the pair of them
i dislike keyboards and mice on FPS games, however on strategy games C&C, starcraft and dune 2 etc pc unarguably has the edge.
Keyboards and mice are quicker for FPS games (having been a veteran of many PC vs Dreamcast matches on quake III) but a controller seems to behave more realistically, perhaps not but the slower movement aids me in aiming whereas over/under shooting with a mouse is easy
perhaps mouse requires more skill but i'm in favor of controllers
Keyboards and mice are quicker for FPS games (having been a veteran of many PC vs Dreamcast matches on quake III) but a controller seems to behave more realistically, perhaps not but the slower movement aids me in aiming whereas over/under shooting with a mouse is easy
perhaps mouse requires more skill but i'm in favor of controllers
El Blokey, from what I've read below, with his comments of a massive Sony user base, and how MS alienated people by going broadband only, seems to forget that Sony also have chosen broadband only for Europe....
Nonetheless, I'd be interested to know how many shouting the pros and cons of Xbox Live over any other format have actually been on it a significant amount of time. There was, and still is, a thread in the Xbox forums where we've all listed our (many) complaints.
On paper Xbox Live was good, as is Sony's attempt, but no battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy and no marketing strategy ever survives contact with gamers....hence Xbox Live isn't all Microsoft's adverts make it out to be.
Most games on it are peer to peer, meaning no servers involved, leaving many asking just what we're paying MS for in the first place.
Unreal uses mainly US servers, had bad pings, is fatally flawed by numerous flaws in the game, and has limited voice chat. Whacked is frankly crap. Ghost Recon is good but dependent on you finding a good bunch of people to play it with. Moto GP is a laugh but at the end of the day it's a racing game. Mech Assault looks pretty at first and does play well until the repetitive nature of it makes you lose interest.
Microsoft's attempts to keep minors off the system have also failed miserably and they often wreck many games with their antics, such as shooting own team, abandoning play when their team is doing bad e.t.c. And being annoying on the communicators.
Don't think Sony are going to sidestep, or maybe even have worser, problems any more easily than Xbox Live tried to. If anything the games it has are, to my mind, weaker. SOCOM looks old already and it's the poor mans Ghost Recon, when Counter Strike make it to Xbox in quarter 3 it'll make it look even worse ! My Street ? Yes, I'm sure we want to encourage that age group onto a new online gaming service.....
Nonetheless, I'd be interested to know how many shouting the pros and cons of Xbox Live over any other format have actually been on it a significant amount of time. There was, and still is, a thread in the Xbox forums where we've all listed our (many) complaints.
On paper Xbox Live was good, as is Sony's attempt, but no battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy and no marketing strategy ever survives contact with gamers....hence Xbox Live isn't all Microsoft's adverts make it out to be.
Most games on it are peer to peer, meaning no servers involved, leaving many asking just what we're paying MS for in the first place.
Unreal uses mainly US servers, had bad pings, is fatally flawed by numerous flaws in the game, and has limited voice chat. Whacked is frankly crap. Ghost Recon is good but dependent on you finding a good bunch of people to play it with. Moto GP is a laugh but at the end of the day it's a racing game. Mech Assault looks pretty at first and does play well until the repetitive nature of it makes you lose interest.
Microsoft's attempts to keep minors off the system have also failed miserably and they often wreck many games with their antics, such as shooting own team, abandoning play when their team is doing bad e.t.c. And being annoying on the communicators.
Don't think Sony are going to sidestep, or maybe even have worser, problems any more easily than Xbox Live tried to. If anything the games it has are, to my mind, weaker. SOCOM looks old already and it's the poor mans Ghost Recon, when Counter Strike make it to Xbox in quarter 3 it'll make it look even worse ! My Street ? Yes, I'm sure we want to encourage that age group onto a new online gaming service.....
i'm planning to use three xboxes and having a decent team game, as far as i'm concerned if an opposing team quits during a match its a win, less satisfying but still a win. as long as my friends are playing I know ill have a good game. anyone else playing seriously is a bonus really....
their all cannon fodder wahahahaha (wario has scarred me for life)
their all cannon fodder wahahahaha (wario has scarred me for life)
GameCube is better.
Than everything.
Bwah.
Than everything.
Bwah.
it is good, but i wanna harddisk in mine
Hedfix wrote:
> What have Sony unleashed as far as FPS's go?
> Tribes 2. erm..
SOCOM: US Navy SEALS
Do a search on the web and see how many US fan sites you get.
> Plus for the ps2 you actually have to buy the modem and buy the
> harddisk.
Just a network adaptor, a one-off payment of £24.99 is all you need to get online and start playing. HDD is not required for ANY title in existence bar Final Fantasy XI Online. Even this title might just use 4MB on a memory card by the time it hits Europe, as does EverQuest Online Adventures.
> Am I overlooking something?
No annual fee for gaming service.
Plus 3 other VERY important factors which Sony's beta non-disclosure agreement prevents me from detailing.
You're jumping the gun a little. Keep in mind that by launch time Sony will have had plenty of time to look at XBox Live and take out all the negatives and add in loads more positives. Official launch of Sony PS2's Network service in Europe is a while away yet, but when it hits you're going to be in for a little shock if you haven't got a PS2 :)
> What have Sony unleashed as far as FPS's go?
> Tribes 2. erm..
SOCOM: US Navy SEALS
Do a search on the web and see how many US fan sites you get.
> Plus for the ps2 you actually have to buy the modem and buy the
> harddisk.
Just a network adaptor, a one-off payment of £24.99 is all you need to get online and start playing. HDD is not required for ANY title in existence bar Final Fantasy XI Online. Even this title might just use 4MB on a memory card by the time it hits Europe, as does EverQuest Online Adventures.
> Am I overlooking something?
No annual fee for gaming service.
Plus 3 other VERY important factors which Sony's beta non-disclosure agreement prevents me from detailing.
You're jumping the gun a little. Keep in mind that by launch time Sony will have had plenty of time to look at XBox Live and take out all the negatives and add in loads more positives. Official launch of Sony PS2's Network service in Europe is a while away yet, but when it hits you're going to be in for a little shock if you haven't got a PS2 :)
Page: