The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
The GameCube will have to be brilliant to sell better than the PlayStation 2. So dar, I fail to see anything they have done right.
The fact that the machine is only 128 proves that Nintendo are starting to rush things - the whole world expected a 256 machine, but they have only equalled the power of the PlayStation 2 and Dreamcast. It may have a better processor or more RAM, but whereas the difference between PSX and N64 graphics was definitely noticeable, the GC and PS2 graphics do not look that different.
I also think that the Nintendo 64 has lowered the company's profile. I'm sure the Dreamcast would have sold a lot better if the Saturn was not a flop, and although the N64 was a bigger success than the Saturn, it is still nothing compared to Sony's popularity. PlayStation owners will definitely choose the PS2 over the GameCube, but I don't think all Nintendo fans will be as loyal.
The one thing Nintendo MUST do is undercut the price of the PS2, and seeing that Nintendo are famous worldwide for overpricing, I cannot see this happening. The PlayStation 2 will be £200 or even £150 by the time the GC arrives, and the PS2 also doubles up as a DVD movie player, while the GC does not. If you saw a PS2 for £200 (with already about 100 titles available) and a GC for £300 (with only a handful of launch games) which one would you buy?
Overall, the only things that Nintendo have done right is to copy Sony, and become 'less Nintendo' than before (eg. standard controller shape, using DVDs instead of carts, etc). I know that Nintendo have been responsible for most technical innovations in modern video games, they are starting to fall behind the competition. Just like the England football squad, the makers have been bettered at their own game. And unless they break tradition, the GC could become the new Saturn.
The fact that the machine is only 128 proves that Nintendo are starting to rush things - the whole world expected a 256 machine, but they have only equalled the power of the PlayStation 2 and Dreamcast. It may have a better processor or more RAM, but whereas the difference between PSX and N64 graphics was definitely noticeable, the GC and PS2 graphics do not look that different.
I also think that the Nintendo 64 has lowered the company's profile. I'm sure the Dreamcast would have sold a lot better if the Saturn was not a flop, and although the N64 was a bigger success than the Saturn, it is still nothing compared to Sony's popularity. PlayStation owners will definitely choose the PS2 over the GameCube, but I don't think all Nintendo fans will be as loyal.
The one thing Nintendo MUST do is undercut the price of the PS2, and seeing that Nintendo are famous worldwide for overpricing, I cannot see this happening. The PlayStation 2 will be £200 or even £150 by the time the GC arrives, and the PS2 also doubles up as a DVD movie player, while the GC does not. If you saw a PS2 for £200 (with already about 100 titles available) and a GC for £300 (with only a handful of launch games) which one would you buy?
Overall, the only things that Nintendo have done right is to copy Sony, and become 'less Nintendo' than before (eg. standard controller shape, using DVDs instead of carts, etc). I know that Nintendo have been responsible for most technical innovations in modern video games, they are starting to fall behind the competition. Just like the England football squad, the makers have been bettered at their own game. And unless they break tradition, the GC could become the new Saturn.
the fact that the gc will be 128 does not mean that it is copying the ps2. after all, the x-box will be 128 also. dont expect to see a 256 machine for a few years. btw no-one expected it to be a 256 machine.
by the time that the gc arrives the ps2 will not be £150. also the gc will be $199 at launch so expect £199 in england.
using dvds was not copying sony, it was taking a step forward in technology. dvd was the only choice.
but i do agree with you about the english football squad!!! lol
by the time that the gc arrives the ps2 will not be £150. also the gc will be $199 at launch so expect £199 in england.
using dvds was not copying sony, it was taking a step forward in technology. dvd was the only choice.
but i do agree with you about the english football squad!!! lol
The GameCube will have to be brilliant to sell better than the PlayStation 2. So dar, I fail to see anything they have done right.
The fact that the machine is only 128 proves that Nintendo are starting to rush things - the whole world expected a 256 machine, but they have only equalled the power of the PlayStation 2 and Dreamcast. It may have a better processor or more RAM, but whereas the difference between PSX and N64 graphics was definitely noticeable, the GC and PS2 graphics do not look that different.
I also think that the Nintendo 64 has lowered the company's profile. I'm sure the Dreamcast would have sold a lot better if the Saturn was not a flop, and although the N64 was a bigger success than the Saturn, it is still nothing compared to Sony's popularity. PlayStation owners will definitely choose the PS2 over the GameCube, but I don't think all Nintendo fans will be as loyal.
The one thing Nintendo MUST do is undercut the price of the PS2, and seeing that Nintendo are famous worldwide for overpricing, I cannot see this happening. The PlayStation 2 will be £200 or even £150 by the time the GC arrives, and the PS2 also doubles up as a DVD movie player, while the GC does not. If you saw a PS2 for £200 (with already about 100 titles available) and a GC for £300 (with only a handful of launch games) which one would you buy?
Overall, the only things that Nintendo have done right is to copy Sony, and become 'less Nintendo' than before (eg. standard controller shape, using DVDs instead of carts, etc). I know that Nintendo have been responsible for most technical innovations in modern video games, they are starting to fall behind the competition. Just like the England football squad, the makers have been bettered at their own game. And unless they break tradition, the GC could become the new Saturn.
The fact that the machine is only 128 proves that Nintendo are starting to rush things - the whole world expected a 256 machine, but they have only equalled the power of the PlayStation 2 and Dreamcast. It may have a better processor or more RAM, but whereas the difference between PSX and N64 graphics was definitely noticeable, the GC and PS2 graphics do not look that different.
I also think that the Nintendo 64 has lowered the company's profile. I'm sure the Dreamcast would have sold a lot better if the Saturn was not a flop, and although the N64 was a bigger success than the Saturn, it is still nothing compared to Sony's popularity. PlayStation owners will definitely choose the PS2 over the GameCube, but I don't think all Nintendo fans will be as loyal.
The one thing Nintendo MUST do is undercut the price of the PS2, and seeing that Nintendo are famous worldwide for overpricing, I cannot see this happening. The PlayStation 2 will be £200 or even £150 by the time the GC arrives, and the PS2 also doubles up as a DVD movie player, while the GC does not. If you saw a PS2 for £200 (with already about 100 titles available) and a GC for £300 (with only a handful of launch games) which one would you buy?
Overall, the only things that Nintendo have done right is to copy Sony, and become 'less Nintendo' than before (eg. standard controller shape, using DVDs instead of carts, etc). I know that Nintendo have been responsible for most technical innovations in modern video games, they are starting to fall behind the competition. Just like the England football squad, the makers have been bettered at their own game. And unless they break tradition, the GC could become the new Saturn.