Viewing Thread:
"Half a year. Why do you bother?"

I have owned my PS2 for exactly a year today and I have enjoyed every last minute of it. However, I am now told that Nintys will have to wait anoth 6 months (that's half a year) to play on their next gen superconsole.

That means, by the time you get your GameCube, I'll have played all the "big" PS2 titles we're all getting excited about, all the unknown titles we're REALLY getting excited about and probably a load of other ace little gems yet to be announced. Bear in mind MGS2 is confirmed as being released in February, here.

And you'll have... nothing. And when you do get it, you'll have no where near as much. No Zelda, no Mario, a merely "good" Luigi game, less than good WaveRace, half a dozen other titles and of course, Super Monkey Ball which might also be on the PS2 by then.

Undoubtably one of you'll come up with the "I like Nintendo" argument which is fine. However, you play games that don't exist and still might be over a year away (we all know what Zelda releases are like). So, your choice but I can only really see the hardcore Nintys backing up the GameCube in the UK at least. Add to that the oh-so-imminent Christmas and Sony's immense marketing might, I think UK Nintys have a problem.

well said pb. No matter how much anyone rants and raves it's not going to change an individuals taste.

Having replayed through the orginal Metal Gear Solid and Mario 64 side by side yesterday, I would say that the N64 game was more enjoyable than the PSX game. Other people would disagree. Why? Well, for the same reason that some people like football, which happens to be the most popular sport in Europe, and other people can't stand it and prefer something like Tennis, which is seen as less popular.

To use an extreme example, some people swear that Cocaine is the best thing they've ever tried. Now does that make you want to go out and try it? No (well, I hope not anyway, it's not worth the risks) People are different and to make people into little clones with the same clothes, the same console, the same tastes in music, food and everything else would be the most boring thing in the world.

It's true to say that the PS2 doesn't appeal to everyone, just as the PSX didn't. Although there were a range of games for both these consoles (and the Dreamcast too) they somehow all felt different to each other. Even similar styles of games are different, Spyro is similar to Mario64, but to many people one is superior to the other. This is called Taste, it is a feature of the human make-up and is part of what makes us all unique and different. To blind yourself to enjoying only one console is stupid, you should try them all out and then decide what you prefer and most importantly let others do the same.

There are more and more cross-platform games now, mainly because of demand for certain genres. You only have to look at the PC/PS2 games list to spot 5 or 6 games ported from one to the other. Anything that gives you a wider choice of game style is a good thing, but you also need variety. I'm not saying that any one console has more variety than the other, but however much you rant and rave about one particular console, it will not make a jot of difference to the true gamers out there who have their favorite system(s).

Me? I have the biggest problem. I like every platform for different reasons, which makes my budget for new games very tight as it is spread across all the platforms I own. Yes, I have a PS2, but if I knew that I would only have a choice of one console, then I'd have got a Gamecube. As it is, I am frantically saving for one before they come out, as I spend the rest of my time playing my mate's import model as he tries to convince me to part with £300 for one myself!

Oh, and Gronti, please use paragraphs more, they are a bit easier to read and split the text up nicely.

Agent under fire also on GC.

I dont care i'd rather have an N64 than a PS2 the N64 has Nintendo games and the PS2 doesn't i can wait and my awsome N64 can keep me company until it does the GC does have asome starting games Star Wars Rogue Leader and Smash Brothers and Pikmin, Eternal DArkness perhaps maybe even Resident Evil. That will do me until Mario, Zelda, Conker and Perfect Dark come along.

Ok, you don't like originality... a year or two of games which are practically the same, and I think you will want something different. I'm not saying that sequels or games which aren't innovative are bad, but unless they are the best of their genre, then you are basically playing something which ultimately is the same as the last game, but not quite as good.

I mean, I'll even use Mario as an example. The old Mario 2D games on NES and Snes were all very good, one of the best series of platformers, but after years of 2D platformers, that all used the same elements they became a little boring. Sure I'd still play em through and try to do everything, but I'd only do it once. Not like Mario 3 on the Snes, which I can remember playing through COUNTLESS times to the end, and never getting bored. But by the time it was Yoshis Island on Snes (the one with Baby Mario) I played through it all and did everything just once. Then came Mario 64. It was a totally different approach. It wasn't getting from one end of a level to another, it was completing tasks within a level to collect items. Then we had more with Banjo-Kazooie. And then more with Donkey Kong 64. And then came the hit of Conkers Bad Fur Day. It showed that 3D platformers didn't just have to be rigidly set out levels with one hub, and collecting items in each level. It showed that you didn't need to collect stuff in a 3D platformer.

These show how a tried and tested formula can remain good for a while, but after that the formula must be changed to keep it fresh. Okay, the games you listed:

GTA3- Will get it on PC
Airblade- Can't say I know much about it
Devil May Cry- Looks good, but I think Eternal Darkness looks better (and more innovative :D)
Soul Reaver 2- Again, don't know loads about it
007 Agent Under Fire- Another attempt to create a bond game as good as Goldeneye? Don't reckon they will though. Rare make the best console shooters. No contest.

And MGS2, I liked the PSX game, but it didn't blow me away. And so what if it was called best game ever? You say I may still be playing Mario 64! It was and still is called the best game ever! See if MGS2 is still called the best game ever 6 years after it comes out shall we? And both N64 Zeldas have been called the best games ever, Mario Kart 64 has been called best console multiplayer game. Oh, and Perfect Dark and Goldeneye have been called the best game ever too. But I bet you'll find a load of stuff wrong with all of them...

Oh and Wave Race is not GT3 on water. That is like saying Star Wars: Rogue Leader is Time Crisis in space. Does GT3 have stunts, power bar for your vehicle and turbo boosts? Does it have a track which moves and makes bumbs? The comparison is a little (and when I say a little, I mean very) innappropriate.

And I suppose you'll tell me that games like Star Wars: Rogue Squadron, Eternal Darkness, Super Smash Bros. Melee, Starfox Adventures, Kameo: Elements of power, Resi Evil Zero & 4, Mario Sunshine, Metroid Prime, Zelda, Mario Kart GC, Perfect Dark sequel, Turok sequel, A lylatwars/ starfox sequel, and a Conker BFD sequal don't impress you one bit? Even if you don't like them, we are talking exclusive games from Nintendo, one of the greatest and most innovative (oh, sorry, I forgot, that's a bad thing) developers ever, Rare, again one of the greatest developers ever, who can make a great game out of any genre they choose, Retro Studios, who are working on the stunning looking Metroid Prime, and Silicon Knights working on one of the games I want most (and one of the games with the freshest and most innovative twist I have ever seen put in a 'scary' game), Eternal Darkness.

So why wait? Cos there's not that much out on the PS2 which I would feel are MUST HAVE titles for ME! I would get GTA3, maybe MGS2, and probably the next FF game, but there are no decent 1st person shooters that aren't ports or that Rare hasn't already beaten with PD on the N64 (an 'inferior' system). While on GC there are loads of games which, I feel are MUST HAVE titles for me. Who cares how long I have to wait, if I get the games I want then that's all that matters. If I just went out tomorrow (oh no its a Sunday, we'll say Monday) and got a PS2 then I would buy probably about two games with it, then very few games from what I've heard, simply because there are a lot of games on it that look pretty good, but I don't want a lot of 'pretty good' games, I want a few incredible games that I never want to put down.

And for me that's just what the GameCube has.

Well i'm not waiting!

I'm just gonna keep playing on my mates Gamecubes until I get mine when it comes out next year!

:)

Sibs wrote:
> I think your whole argument here is flawed. Someone who really likes Ninty wants
> to play Nintendos games. You are basically saying that every gamer should want a
> next gen console just for the sake of it. I have seen very little on PS2 that I
> really want. GTA3 I want, MGS2 looks okay (I wasn't a huge fan of the PSX
> version though, so it's hard to get hyped about it), and burnout looks okay. But
> what don't I see on PS2? Innovation! Most PS2 games are using tried and tested
> formulas, just doing them a bit better than before. Or they are PC ports.

But do we want innovation??

And innovation isn't neccesarily a completely new game. Deus Ex wasn an FPS, but it offered so many new options it certainly wasn't unoriginal. Nor was Max Payne.

And unoriginality can be good. It's a tested formula, and it works. Why not use it? I love FPS', and 3rd person shooters.

Pikmin looks awful. :D That's just my opinion, but the whole idea just seems boring and childish. Sorry to seem so biased, but I just really don't like any aspect of it. Luigi's Mansion will be repetitive, and the other launch title (Wave Storm or something,) is GT3 on water.

How can you not get excited about MGS2? It has been proclamied the best game ever by the might GameSpot, and there are AAA titles coming from everywhere now. Surely you would be interested in titles such as GTA3, Airblade, Devil May Cry, Soul Reaver 2 or 007 Agent Under Fire?? Or are you only into Mario games?
I expect you'll say that the games don't appeal to you, but I reckon most 'Nintys' would jump for joy if they were to be released on the GameCube.

But as Turbo says, I'm playing my next-gen console. I'm playing lots of AAA titles and loving every minute of it, while N64 owners are still playing Mario 64!

SonicRav wrote:
> I gave up waiting for the GC and sold my soul to Sony, buying a PS2 and
> all.

As Turbo says, the console isn't being released for ages (probably
> longer than nintys claim!), and add to that the lack of the killer apps that
> people seem to be buying the console for.

Nintendo have made a repeat of the
> N64 fiasco with a vengance. They release last. They have a small advertising
> budget. They GIVE all xmas consoles sales to Sony. They release with a limitted
> number of games (ok, so the PS2 did this, but at least it was first, and has
> been given the time to build on it's titles).

You know, the N64 was released
> with only one game. 3 months after release only 4 games were available for it.
> And fanboys still think it was a huge success... the only things less successful
> than the N64 in Nintendo's books are the Virtual boy and the 64DD. Oh, and guess
> what? The reasons they were unsuccessful was due to a lack of games, a refusal
> to let 3rd parties develop on the console (which Ninty did with the N64), and a
> lack of advertising.

History repeats.

Saying that, I'll buy a second hand
> GC when the big guns come out.

Sonic

Yes, but this time history isn't repeating itself... Ninty has got 3rd party support, (not as much as PS2, but enough) and Ninty have more second parties, (Retro Studios, and Silicon Knights) to ensure more games, and more importantly more GOOD GameCube EXCLUSIVE games. Ninty may also have lower advertising budgets, but at least this time the adverts are supposed to be half decent.

Also you may say the N64 was a failure from a commercial point of view, but looking at all the great games and innovations, it really didn't fail those who bought one.

Ah but success is in the eye of the beholder and people liked the N64 and it's games. Yes there were less than that of the PS2 but they were mostly great games and there were less bad ones than on the PS2, perhaps as a direct result of there being less games. Anyway I think it's a bit unfair of Sony to still be selling their console at a reduced price of £200 when the unreduced price was too much in the first place. Anyway, if you really want to buy a games machine at Christmas, why not get a PC? It's good for all the family, it serves the purposes of practically anything you could want it to (well maybe not house cleaning yet) and most importantly it has great games. Indeed the PC has the best games, always has and always will but only because there is no limitation because of upgradeability and differing hardware configurations. If consoles had this they'd be the same, but then they'd also be PCs really. Consoles are good and they do certain types of games better than the PC, such as platforms and wrestling games but the main reason to get a console is because you can play good games with your friends around one machine without having to wait to go through Windows or something similar. Of course consoles are cheaper too, which is why more households can afford them and the advantages of a PC depend on how much you use them for different purposes but even if you use your PC exclusively for games it will still be very good at it until it becomes obsolete.

I gave up waiting for the GC and sold my soul to Sony, buying a PS2 and all.

As Turbo says, the console isn't being released for ages (probably longer than nintys claim!), and add to that the lack of the killer apps that people seem to be buying the console for.

Nintendo have made a repeat of the N64 fiasco with a vengance. They release last. They have a small advertising budget. They GIVE all xmas consoles sales to Sony. They release with a limitted number of games (ok, so the PS2 did this, but at least it was first, and has been given the time to build on it's titles).

You know, the N64 was released with only one game. 3 months after release only 4 games were available for it. And fanboys still think it was a huge success... the only things less successful than the N64 in Nintendo's books are the Virtual boy and the 64DD. Oh, and guess what? The reasons they were unsuccessful was due to a lack of games, a refusal to let 3rd parties develop on the console (which Ninty did with the N64), and a lack of advertising.

History repeats.

Saying that, I'll buy a second hand GC when the big guns come out.

Sonic