The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
These posts crop up all the time my console is better than yours, I’m not about to sit and complain about people doing that considering im a prime culprit of such mud slinging but what I do despise about those posts is the biased approach to them. If I write a Console War post everyone will know even before clicking on it that I will pretend to be fair but Nintendo will ultimately win.
So how can I avoid such Bias? Well by writing one of these posts without mentioning Nintendo so I entitle this post.
Microsoft Vs. Sony
Lets face it this has been a storming year for Sony, the only competition their next gen wonder machine (shudders) has had to face is from a dying Dreamcast and an outdated N64. But it hasn't just been a good year due to lack of competition Playstation 2 has finally received those smash hit revolutionary titles that the console has been gearing up to receive (it should be noted that the majority of these titles have been released in the last 2 months).
Even I, a Nintendo fan has enjoyed these last few months, every day round a friends house watching them run over Gill in Simpson's Road Rage and old ladies in GTA3. It’s been a joy to watch and great fun to play discovering new little things especially in GTA3 (my GTA3 owning friend meanwhile attacks GTA3 quite often saying it can be very boring). Smackdown 3 despite having problems is also great fun to play, as will be Devil May Cry as soon as I play it.
So Sony really have taken off this year but next year will prove to be there toughest year yet.
Despite Sony's success in Europe they have hit a problem this Christmas in both America and Japan. As 2 Next generation consoles have been released to rival it, these 2 consoles will also be here next year.
One of these consoles is Microsoft’s X-box. Without a doubt much more powerful than the PS2 (like Gamecube) and with graphical capabilities to soundly thrash Sony’s awesome console (like Gamecube). But as we all know it’s the games that make a console its specifications. For the X-box to even come close to the PS2 it will need to create some awesome franchises mixed with many well established ones and have a load of cracking games as well (*cough* Gamecube *cough*).
So lets look and see if X-box can deliver?
First off Oddworld this is already a well-established franchise getting the 3-D treatment and according to a few of my American friends the game is brilliant but not as good as Halo. Halo is the First Person shooter sent out to kill Nintendo's Perfect Dark (which it won’t :D) graphically gorgeous, gameplay wise it feels like it came from the greatest games company ever (*cough* Nintendo *cough*). And with GTA3 looking bigger and better than ever, Shenmue 2 making an exclusive appearance this console looks a winner.
The X-box exclusives such as Dead or Alive 3 are some of the most desired games from other console manufactures (like Resident Evil which is on the Gamecube) and Microsoft have carefully pickled the possible big sellers. But Microsoft doing this might be seen as a waste of money, some exclusive titles that are on the X-box can appear on other systems but after the X-box release and SEGA also insisted Shenmue 2 won't just be appearing on the X-box.
Console wise I believe Microsoft has the better offering by taking the PS2 to the next level, but there is other factors against it. It's very pricey at £300 (unlike Gamecube) and is very large (unlike Gamecube). But for the £300 you are getting a decent games console but a CD player, DVD player, MP3 player, Internet from the box in fact a complete multi-media package not avalible on the Playstation 2. Also size wise it is similar to the PS2 it will fit underneath your TV but still its really big.
But some insist that although the DVD, CD and MP3 add ons are not why people buy games machines these extras just make a console pricier and should concentrate on games (like Gamecube), which is why people buy game consoles in the first place.
So there you go my completely "unbiased" analysis of the next generation war all without mentioning Gamecube once. (Do you think I got away with it?)
Here's to the Future.
Dringo.
So how can I avoid such Bias? Well by writing one of these posts without mentioning Nintendo so I entitle this post.
Microsoft Vs. Sony
Lets face it this has been a storming year for Sony, the only competition their next gen wonder machine (shudders) has had to face is from a dying Dreamcast and an outdated N64. But it hasn't just been a good year due to lack of competition Playstation 2 has finally received those smash hit revolutionary titles that the console has been gearing up to receive (it should be noted that the majority of these titles have been released in the last 2 months).
Even I, a Nintendo fan has enjoyed these last few months, every day round a friends house watching them run over Gill in Simpson's Road Rage and old ladies in GTA3. It’s been a joy to watch and great fun to play discovering new little things especially in GTA3 (my GTA3 owning friend meanwhile attacks GTA3 quite often saying it can be very boring). Smackdown 3 despite having problems is also great fun to play, as will be Devil May Cry as soon as I play it.
So Sony really have taken off this year but next year will prove to be there toughest year yet.
Despite Sony's success in Europe they have hit a problem this Christmas in both America and Japan. As 2 Next generation consoles have been released to rival it, these 2 consoles will also be here next year.
One of these consoles is Microsoft’s X-box. Without a doubt much more powerful than the PS2 (like Gamecube) and with graphical capabilities to soundly thrash Sony’s awesome console (like Gamecube). But as we all know it’s the games that make a console its specifications. For the X-box to even come close to the PS2 it will need to create some awesome franchises mixed with many well established ones and have a load of cracking games as well (*cough* Gamecube *cough*).
So lets look and see if X-box can deliver?
First off Oddworld this is already a well-established franchise getting the 3-D treatment and according to a few of my American friends the game is brilliant but not as good as Halo. Halo is the First Person shooter sent out to kill Nintendo's Perfect Dark (which it won’t :D) graphically gorgeous, gameplay wise it feels like it came from the greatest games company ever (*cough* Nintendo *cough*). And with GTA3 looking bigger and better than ever, Shenmue 2 making an exclusive appearance this console looks a winner.
The X-box exclusives such as Dead or Alive 3 are some of the most desired games from other console manufactures (like Resident Evil which is on the Gamecube) and Microsoft have carefully pickled the possible big sellers. But Microsoft doing this might be seen as a waste of money, some exclusive titles that are on the X-box can appear on other systems but after the X-box release and SEGA also insisted Shenmue 2 won't just be appearing on the X-box.
Console wise I believe Microsoft has the better offering by taking the PS2 to the next level, but there is other factors against it. It's very pricey at £300 (unlike Gamecube) and is very large (unlike Gamecube). But for the £300 you are getting a decent games console but a CD player, DVD player, MP3 player, Internet from the box in fact a complete multi-media package not avalible on the Playstation 2. Also size wise it is similar to the PS2 it will fit underneath your TV but still its really big.
But some insist that although the DVD, CD and MP3 add ons are not why people buy games machines these extras just make a console pricier and should concentrate on games (like Gamecube), which is why people buy game consoles in the first place.
So there you go my completely "unbiased" analysis of the next generation war all without mentioning Gamecube once. (Do you think I got away with it?)
Here's to the Future.
Dringo.
Page:
The PS2 is getting bought because everyones friend have it i asked why are you getting a PS2 and he said because i dont know anyone else getting a Gamecube... Why does this matter?
My Brother said the same as did my friend Edward about 5 people have said that... popularity is why the PS2 succeeds but SEGA were popular remember that...
My Brother said the same as did my friend Edward about 5 people have said that... popularity is why the PS2 succeeds but SEGA were popular remember that...
ssxpro wrote:
Another point was the complex architecture. This has worked
> against Sony for a while, and has turned some companies away. However, it could
> be a major plus point in the future, as the capabilities of the console will be
> gradually unlocked. The GC will be instantly good looking, but with less
> potential for improvement. In other words, in two years time, the GC looks
> better, but the PS2 could catch it up again in 4 years perhaps.
I dont exactly see how this is a positive thing for the PS2.
I see the "development curve" shooting right up for the Gamecube, while the PS2 will take a much longer time to reach its peak. Thats graphically yes, so while SONY developers are spending more and more time trying to get the graphical side of the game to look good, Nintendo developers will have done the same job in half the time and have much more time to concentrate on the the actual gameplay elements.
Read Strafex's post in Nintendo forum.
http://ukchatforums.reserve.co.uk /display_messages.php?threadid=26894&forumid=132
remove space after uk.
Another point was the complex architecture. This has worked
> against Sony for a while, and has turned some companies away. However, it could
> be a major plus point in the future, as the capabilities of the console will be
> gradually unlocked. The GC will be instantly good looking, but with less
> potential for improvement. In other words, in two years time, the GC looks
> better, but the PS2 could catch it up again in 4 years perhaps.
I dont exactly see how this is a positive thing for the PS2.
I see the "development curve" shooting right up for the Gamecube, while the PS2 will take a much longer time to reach its peak. Thats graphically yes, so while SONY developers are spending more and more time trying to get the graphical side of the game to look good, Nintendo developers will have done the same job in half the time and have much more time to concentrate on the the actual gameplay elements.
Read Strafex's post in Nintendo forum.
http://ukchatforums.reserve.co.uk /display_messages.php?threadid=26894&forumid=132
remove space after uk.
The Atari 7600 or 5400 (which ever it was) was a significant improvement over the 2600, possibly a bigger jump in technology than the PSX to PS2, in terms of what it could do. Though they both look rather puny today, it was quite some achievement.
The Colecovision could also play Atari 2600 games, as well as it's own Colleco games, which were quite different.
The Colecovision could also play Atari 2600 games, as well as it's own Colleco games, which were quite different.
Meka_Dragon wrote:
>I believe that the Atari 5400 or 7600 could play Atari 2600 games, but I'm not certain.
Again... not technically difficult if they did!
>Sega released an add on for the Megadrive that made it backwards compatiable with the Sega Master System, and the Super Gameboy allowed you to play Gameboy games through a SNES.
I think you died here by using the word "ADD ON" the PS2 does it "ON BOARD" and "Out Of the Box"
>So the PS2 is hardly the first backwards compatiable console, is it?
Apart form the GBC, it's the first "major" console to do it without "ADD ONS"
>I believe that the Atari 5400 or 7600 could play Atari 2600 games, but I'm not certain.
Again... not technically difficult if they did!
>Sega released an add on for the Megadrive that made it backwards compatiable with the Sega Master System, and the Super Gameboy allowed you to play Gameboy games through a SNES.
I think you died here by using the word "ADD ON" the PS2 does it "ON BOARD" and "Out Of the Box"
>So the PS2 is hardly the first backwards compatiable console, is it?
Apart form the GBC, it's the first "major" console to do it without "ADD ONS"
Dringo being as "unbiased" as ever...
...in otherwords as biased as hell!
:-D
...in otherwords as biased as hell!
:-D
Tyla wrote:
> Gronti_v wrote:
> Don't get me started on Backwards compatibility, it'll
> only become a gory mess.
> Anyway the Gameboy colour had it first did it
> not?
Agreed... no gory mess, though getting the GBC to play GB titles wasn't
> that technically difficult especially as it was the hardware that put the
> colours in!! So yeap, GBC was the first, but a monkey with half a brain could
> have created that!!
I believe that the Atari 5400 or 7600 could play Atari 2600 games, but I'm not certain.
Sega released an add on for the Megadrive that made it backwards compatiable with the Sega Master System, and the Super Gameboy allowed you to play Gameboy games through a SNES.
So the PS2 is hardly the first backwards compatiable console, is it?
I can't see the Xbox becoming more popular than the Playstation2, because it's image sucks, and the games have crap names.
> Gronti_v wrote:
> Don't get me started on Backwards compatibility, it'll
> only become a gory mess.
> Anyway the Gameboy colour had it first did it
> not?
Agreed... no gory mess, though getting the GBC to play GB titles wasn't
> that technically difficult especially as it was the hardware that put the
> colours in!! So yeap, GBC was the first, but a monkey with half a brain could
> have created that!!
I believe that the Atari 5400 or 7600 could play Atari 2600 games, but I'm not certain.
Sega released an add on for the Megadrive that made it backwards compatiable with the Sega Master System, and the Super Gameboy allowed you to play Gameboy games through a SNES.
So the PS2 is hardly the first backwards compatiable console, is it?
I can't see the Xbox becoming more popular than the Playstation2, because it's image sucks, and the games have crap names.
So... the only interesting thing said below was: PS2 will sell less well in a years time as its yesterdays news, its less powerful, and will be beaten graphically by X-box and GC.
So why does the PSone continue to sell so well? Its at least last weeks news in comparison, and yet people still go for it. I don`t doubt for a moment that this will be the case for the PS2 when the competition arrives. Further price drops, more advertising, and the increasingly good games range will keep Sony well nd truly afloat.
As for the "graphical improvements" found on the other consoles, I remember Wookiee talking about the pros and cons of PS2 and GC. GC was fine for your average platformer, but when it came to racing style games PS2 was superior (draw distances?). Another point was the complex architecture. This has worked against Sony for a while, and has turned some companies away. However, it could be a major plus point in the future, as the capabilities of the console will be gradually unlocked. The GC will be instantly good looking, but with less potential for improvement. In other words, in two years time, the GC looks better, but the PS2 could catch it up again in 4 years perhaps.
So why does the PSone continue to sell so well? Its at least last weeks news in comparison, and yet people still go for it. I don`t doubt for a moment that this will be the case for the PS2 when the competition arrives. Further price drops, more advertising, and the increasingly good games range will keep Sony well nd truly afloat.
As for the "graphical improvements" found on the other consoles, I remember Wookiee talking about the pros and cons of PS2 and GC. GC was fine for your average platformer, but when it came to racing style games PS2 was superior (draw distances?). Another point was the complex architecture. This has worked against Sony for a while, and has turned some companies away. However, it could be a major plus point in the future, as the capabilities of the console will be gradually unlocked. The GC will be instantly good looking, but with less potential for improvement. In other words, in two years time, the GC looks better, but the PS2 could catch it up again in 4 years perhaps.
Well done Dringo - I know it is hard not compare the other two consoles to Nintendos box of delights, so I congratulate you on an (almost) completly free (of Nintendo) post about console 'wars'.
Well done - It must be hard to resist the temptation to trounce the other two consoles - in words anyway.
;[]
Well done - It must be hard to resist the temptation to trounce the other two consoles - in words anyway.
;[]
Tyla wrote:
Agreed... no gory mess, though getting the GBC to play GB titles wasn't
> that technically difficult especially as it was the hardware that put the
> colours in!! So yeap, GBC was the first, but a monkey with half a brain could
> have created that!!
Sometimes gory messes are fun. Anyway, GBC games did have to be developed with the colours added just as games do for other consoles, the hardware just allowed this to work. I suspect that a monkey with half a brain might have lacked the technical knowledge to upgrade the GB to the GBC but to be fair it depends on how learned the monkey is in the area of hand held console technology, which half of the brain the monkey was left with and how intelligent the monkey was. Indeed it's quite possible that a monkey with half a brain could have created the PS2 and very believable that a monkey with half a brain wrote those adverts. Well, maybe not that believable but you get the idea.
Agreed... no gory mess, though getting the GBC to play GB titles wasn't
> that technically difficult especially as it was the hardware that put the
> colours in!! So yeap, GBC was the first, but a monkey with half a brain could
> have created that!!
Sometimes gory messes are fun. Anyway, GBC games did have to be developed with the colours added just as games do for other consoles, the hardware just allowed this to work. I suspect that a monkey with half a brain might have lacked the technical knowledge to upgrade the GB to the GBC but to be fair it depends on how learned the monkey is in the area of hand held console technology, which half of the brain the monkey was left with and how intelligent the monkey was. Indeed it's quite possible that a monkey with half a brain could have created the PS2 and very believable that a monkey with half a brain wrote those adverts. Well, maybe not that believable but you get the idea.
Gronti_v wrote:
> Don't get me started on Backwards compatibility, it'll only become a gory mess.
> Anyway the Gameboy colour had it first did it not?
Agreed... no gory mess, though getting the GBC to play GB titles wasn't that technically difficult especially as it was the hardware that put the colours in!! So yeap, GBC was the first, but a monkey with half a brain could have created that!!
> Don't get me started on Backwards compatibility, it'll only become a gory mess.
> Anyway the Gameboy colour had it first did it not?
Agreed... no gory mess, though getting the GBC to play GB titles wasn't that technically difficult especially as it was the hardware that put the colours in!! So yeap, GBC was the first, but a monkey with half a brain could have created that!!
Page: