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.

Ah PC Ports, what an interesting idea and Perhaps a good point in time delays. It took several years for Half-Life to come out on the PS2 and PS2 fans said that it was far better than the original. In truth it isn't really that different, which seems a little odd since they've had so long to improve it. Of course the reason could be because of the technology of the PS2 not being able to do that much extra. As it happens Half-Life has been improved but because of the passage of time just as consoles improve with the passage of time and so it is worth letting time pass to get a better console. Of course the best element of Half-Life was the mods and many people don't seem to believe this despite being more interested in playing Half-Life mods than playing through the game again. Unfortunately for PS2 owners the modability just isn't possible on a console and so all those free downloads that made Half-Life great are not going to be available for PS2 version Half-Life owners. So Half-Life is infact worse for the PS2 overall. As this translates into consoles then surely the PS2 would be good since it is the original. Well no not really because there is nothing the PS2 can do that the new consoles wont be able to do and infact they will have their own new tricks. So perhaps you want to cling to your PS2 until the PS3 is released at which point you will be saying "it was worth the wait".

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.

I don't want a next gen console just for the sake of being able to play games with better graphics. If there is a console with tons of games you REALLY want then you are going to wait for that, rather than getting a console with some games you'd quite like to play, but none that you really feel you must have.

Anyway, all the PS2 titles that I like the look of are probably gonna be on PC anyways. Why fork out £200 extra just to play them on my TV with a Sony controller? The GC games I want most are ONLY for Nintendo GameCube! And why do us Nintendo fans bother? Because these are the games WE want to play!

Turbonutter wrote:
I wrote this topic for the same reason I
> write all my topics - to start an argument. It also appears to be working, bith
> becuase people are arguing in it, and because I'm arguing in it.

You mean discussion surely.

Anyway, maybe PC gamers should boycott GTA3 in protest to getting inferior products which are delayed because of PS2. It's another Red Faction in the making, except that GTA3 will probably be good since GTA never relied on technology before.

Grix Thraves wrote:
> Turbo, where did you find that official announcement? Because for some reason I
> can't find it anywhere.


Dringo definitely told me it was official.


"Yeah and I'm getting sodding tired of these
> forums, but at least I'm trying to get back to how it was."

> By making
> one topic accusing everyone but yourself of being wrong? How on earth does that
> make you do more work than anyone else?


Everyone but myself? Eh?

I wrote this topic for the same reason I write all my topics - to start an argument. It also appears to be working, bith becuase people are arguing in it, and because I'm arguing in it.


"8 months ago a topic like this
> would be welcomed with open arms and the arguments would last long into the
> night."

No it wouldn't, eight months ago you would have got a bunch of
> people telling you how biased you were.


Urgh... Do you want me to dig up one of my old topics from 8 months ago?


Some of us are happy to wait because
> we are not impatient, and know what pleases us. If you can't accept that other
> people can find fun in things that you do not, then I have no intention of
> reading any more of your posts.


I'm not saying anything like that, I'm just pointing out the fact that a lot of people aren't waiting and more people won't be.


Am I a hardcore Ninty? What the hell is a
> hardcore Ninty? I like playing the styles of games on the N64, I enjoy many
> games on my Dreamcast, and I am thinking of getting a PS2 because the games on
> that appeal to me to. I am a gamer. That's all I want to be.


What makes you think this post was aimed at you?


And if all this
> anger is because of the notable elections, which I'm beginning to think it is,
> for God's sake go and take a breather. They are not serious, they mean nothing,
> and if you DO take them seriously then you've got something wrong with you.


I dont't care whether your name's purple, gold, teal or yellow with pink spots. What I do care about is out votes being ignored and all the other people caring so much about it. I actually blocked Dringo yesterday becuase he just would not shut up about it.

"Nintendo - The parent's console."

I think that sounds a lot better. :0)

Why do I bother?

Simple. What good would buying a console that I'd only want a handful of games for be now, when another is being released next year with a list of games as long as my arm that I want?

And given that I would only be able to play those PS2 titles I'd want once the kids were in bed, I'd be cutting out most of my available time for games.

In probably one of the best marketing moves of the past year, Sony bought the rights to GTA3, so the PC can only get it in about a years time.

I forgot about the whole noteable thing, oh well passed over for promotion again. When is the closing date anyway? (or are they done?)

I agree with you Grix but don't fund that evil Sony when you could be funding the even more evil Microsoft! Hmm, that doesn't sound right.

Anyway why are they delaying GTA3 on the PC? GTA is an orgiginal PC series that was kidnapped by Sony and made worse. GTA2 should have been what is now GTA3 and GTA 3 should be blowing our minds (more than it is) but the PS + PS2 market has taken so much away. I hope they improve GTA3 for the PC during the extended wait because otherwise I'll be most annoyed. It wont stop me buying it though, and it's not like I'm going to complain but this is the only conversion where it will be marginally acceptable that no change has been made from PS2 to PC. Evil Red Faction fooled a lot of people for a long time and in truth it was just a cheap PS2 conversion that was infact very overpriced for the low quality it provided.

Turbo, where did you find that official announcement? Because for some reason I can't find it anywhere.

"Yeah and I'm getting sodding tired of these forums, but at least I'm trying to get back to how it was."

By making one topic accusing everyone but yourself of being wrong? How on earth does that make you do more work than anyone else?

"8 months ago a topic like this would be welcomed with open arms and the arguments would last long into the night."

No it wouldn't, eight months ago you would have got a bunch of people telling you how biased you were.

Some of us are happy to wait because we are not impatient, and know what pleases us. If you can't accept that other people can find fun in things that you do not, then I have no intention of reading any more of your posts.

Am I a hardcore Ninty? What the hell is a hardcore Ninty? I like playing the styles of games on the N64, I enjoy many games on my Dreamcast, and I am thinking of getting a PS2 because the games on that appeal to me to. I am a gamer. That's all I want to be.

And if all this anger is because of the notable elections, which I'm beginning to think it is, for God's sake go and take a breather. They are not serious, they mean nothing, and if you DO take them seriously then you've got something wrong with you.

Well I think it's well worth waiting the extra few months till the X-Box/GC come out before shelling out the cash for a brand spanking new console. For one thing, the £200 I would spend on a PS2 could be better spent if I wait a mere 4 months to get an X-Box since the X-Box will last much longer.

The PS2 doesn't do much to appeal to me for a lot of reasons. For one thing those adverts are very annoying, more so than many lower budget adverts (such as that Werthers Original advert, grr but it comes close) and I really don't see why they bother with all the stupid third place stuff when the only purpose of the advert is to remind you that the PS2 exists. They could have saved money by just having screen shots/footage of games and the PS2 logo and maybe I would be more likely to consider a PS2, though it's a bit late now. Another reason is the pricing of the PS2, it always seemed a little high considering the competition prices and it never really did enough to justify the price. Maybe more people would have bought a PS2 if it was cheaper and didn't have the DVD playing ability, since most people buy PS2s for their games (or because of peer pressure). Anyway they also seem to take advantage of the customer with all these games that would work on the PS that are actually quite good but would work on a much cheaper machine without ever having to pay the £300 and now £200 for a PS2. People did always say that you could get a different console and some games for the price of a PS2 and I'm surprised this didn't influence more people. Of course PS2 games are often reasonably priced so at least that's one thing in the PS2's favour. One of the problems with PS2 games is that they are often released on the PC but they just don't stand up to the competition and what is acceptable for a PS2 owner is downright rude in it's badness for a PC owner (Red Faction). Now this would be alright because consoles always have that multiplayer on one machine advantage but the PS2 mistakenly restricted this and made up for it by charging the gamer who has more than one friend. Of course the PC isn't a console and so the PS2 doesn't have to compete with it (though it does try) and it would be unfair not to point out that any game on any console is unlikely to be well recieved by PC owners without some form of improvement over the original. Of course the X-Box will be able to run games which are new for the PC and so when the X-Box is out gamers will get PC quality games on a machine that costs a mere £300, at least for a little while. Yes I know you're wondering why £300 was a big issue when the PS2 came out and is "a mere £300" now, well it's not bias it is the fact that the PS2 cost far more than anything else and was probably overpriced on release while the X-Box is competitively priced at just £100 over the cost of a more than one year old machine which doesn't have the lastability of new consoles. The issue of the number of games is a fair point but if you put your £200 towards an X-Box or GameCube in a few months then you'll be getting new games for a long time which take advantage of newer higher technology. The alternative of paying £200 for a PS2 and then playing older games until the PS3 comes out (or you get fed up) is not a great plan, especially since you will have to buy all the games. You see there may be a lot of choice for the PS2 but when you buy a console chances are you're only going to get a game or two when you first get it and gradually build your collection from there, so if you buy a PS2 now you'll only be able to get a couple of games (unless you're loaded) or you can save up and buy a next generation console and get some new games on the release and build your collection from there. In the end you would be better buying a next generation console which will have as big a choice as the PS2 has now after a year has passed anyway. I seriously doubt that a lot of people own every game for the PS2 and who really wants games that are a year old when they can get new games which use new technology? There may even be more reasons to wait just 4-5 months for a next generation console rather than buying a PS2 but I think that will suffice for now.

So I think it's safe to say that it's worth waiting to get a next generation console, feel free to disagree though. Of course the next question must be... Do you get an X-Box or a Gamecube?