The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
For the first time in years, there are more than two serious consoles hitting the market. Even more amazingly, two of these consoles are launching head-to-head, and the other is extremely well established... both with brand name and games.
So, not only has Nintendo got to compete with Sony (again!), but this time Microsoft have joined the scene. Add to that, the PS2 has had two Christmases worth of sales, and a huge repetoire of games, and the Xbox has a huge marketting budget (and a strong launch to go).
Clearly, Nintendo cannot compete with Microsoft on the TV screens- they simply don't ahve the money for that.
Oh no... Ninty have a far greater weapon at their disposly- games. And lots of them. With characters and franchises ranging from Mario and Zelda to Metroid and Kirby you wouldn't be suprised if Nintendo launched the Gamecube with the best line up of AAA titles seen...
In fact, I thought Nintendo had gone one better when they announced, a while back, that they had given the rights to many of their games away. Metroid, Smash Brothers and Starfox, amongst others, were to have sequals made by developers outside Nintendo. This would then enable Nintendo to concentrate on making some of the most spectacular games ever. Maybe a new Zelda for launch? Maybe something totally new!
But alas, things seem to be crumbling. First we hear news of Ninty's in house games. It turns out that Mario and Zelda will be absent from launch, to be replaced by a couple of weaker games. Ok, so the in house games are good fun, no doubt, BUT will these attract gamers to buy the Gamcube. Methinks not.
Nor will the news of a new Zelda wet gamers appetites- 90% of gamers are the casual sort who will buy a console on brandname alone, and don't read multiformat mags. How are Nintendo going to get these gamers to part with their PS2s, and buy a console that looks like a kids toy? (Sorry, but the console doesn't look "serious".)
OH! And things get worse!...
Those franchised games Ninty have given out aren't all they were promised to be.
At Spaceworld, there was a big absence of Metroid clips- only 8 seconds of the game were shown. Asked why this was, Mr. Miyamoto had to admit that he'd only got the code for the game just before the show, and he wasn't impressed by what he saw. The game had bad pop-up, no sound, was not interactive, and certainly wasn't worth the months of work that had been spent on it. (I believe the game was 8 months into developent at this time!). In fact, the whole future of the game looked on a knife edge.
The other games Ninty had handed out were all good, but many were so far from ready that you wonder why Nintendo didn't just make one of these games themselves to get it out at launch.
Before Nintendo fans throw a riot, let me just saya few things:
1) I am only talking about launch titles
2) I'm a huge Miyamoto fan and will be buying a GC myself
3) This topic is MEANT to cause discussion.
Oh, and remember, all the titles that miss release will come out eventually. So those Zeldas and Marios will certainly mean the console is a great piece of kit. That;s not what I'm arguing about.
I just want to know where all of Ninty's time has gone? They've given away many of their big games, has ages to make a killer titles, and instead they come out with Pikmin... fun, but not AAA by any means.
Sonic
So, not only has Nintendo got to compete with Sony (again!), but this time Microsoft have joined the scene. Add to that, the PS2 has had two Christmases worth of sales, and a huge repetoire of games, and the Xbox has a huge marketting budget (and a strong launch to go).
Clearly, Nintendo cannot compete with Microsoft on the TV screens- they simply don't ahve the money for that.
Oh no... Ninty have a far greater weapon at their disposly- games. And lots of them. With characters and franchises ranging from Mario and Zelda to Metroid and Kirby you wouldn't be suprised if Nintendo launched the Gamecube with the best line up of AAA titles seen...
In fact, I thought Nintendo had gone one better when they announced, a while back, that they had given the rights to many of their games away. Metroid, Smash Brothers and Starfox, amongst others, were to have sequals made by developers outside Nintendo. This would then enable Nintendo to concentrate on making some of the most spectacular games ever. Maybe a new Zelda for launch? Maybe something totally new!
But alas, things seem to be crumbling. First we hear news of Ninty's in house games. It turns out that Mario and Zelda will be absent from launch, to be replaced by a couple of weaker games. Ok, so the in house games are good fun, no doubt, BUT will these attract gamers to buy the Gamcube. Methinks not.
Nor will the news of a new Zelda wet gamers appetites- 90% of gamers are the casual sort who will buy a console on brandname alone, and don't read multiformat mags. How are Nintendo going to get these gamers to part with their PS2s, and buy a console that looks like a kids toy? (Sorry, but the console doesn't look "serious".)
OH! And things get worse!...
Those franchised games Ninty have given out aren't all they were promised to be.
At Spaceworld, there was a big absence of Metroid clips- only 8 seconds of the game were shown. Asked why this was, Mr. Miyamoto had to admit that he'd only got the code for the game just before the show, and he wasn't impressed by what he saw. The game had bad pop-up, no sound, was not interactive, and certainly wasn't worth the months of work that had been spent on it. (I believe the game was 8 months into developent at this time!). In fact, the whole future of the game looked on a knife edge.
The other games Ninty had handed out were all good, but many were so far from ready that you wonder why Nintendo didn't just make one of these games themselves to get it out at launch.
Before Nintendo fans throw a riot, let me just saya few things:
1) I am only talking about launch titles
2) I'm a huge Miyamoto fan and will be buying a GC myself
3) This topic is MEANT to cause discussion.
Oh, and remember, all the titles that miss release will come out eventually. So those Zeldas and Marios will certainly mean the console is a great piece of kit. That;s not what I'm arguing about.
I just want to know where all of Ninty's time has gone? They've given away many of their big games, has ages to make a killer titles, and instead they come out with Pikmin... fun, but not AAA by any means.
Sonic
Page:
Sadly not! Damn those dirty Ninty PR monkeys!
You mean the GBA can't reproduce all the PSX and Saturn games?
What? How can this be...?!?
NOOOOOOOO!
;-)
What? How can this be...?!?
NOOOOOOOO!
;-)
Meka has proved my point!
The Jaguar was "64 bit" but certainly no where near the power of the N64!
Comparing machines based on "bits" is like comparing TV screens on Size!
Sonic
The Jaguar was "64 bit" but certainly no where near the power of the N64!
Comparing machines based on "bits" is like comparing TV screens on Size!
Sonic
Turbonutter wrote:
> Because companies have been struggling to get up to 32 bit up until the PS days.
No, the Jaguar exceeded it first......
> Because companies have been struggling to get up to 32 bit up until the PS days.
No, the Jaguar exceeded it first......
Because companies have been struggling to get up to 32 bit up until the PS days. At that time, it actually was a viable measure of power, because the difference between 8, 16 and 32 bit was noticable. Unfortunately, the public came to see it as a measure of console advancement. Therefore, the term "128bit" is more of a buzzword, because it's useless.
okay then....why do we have more than 32-bit?
Even if you do have 32bit tellies (which are stupid), they still can't display 64bit, 128bit or 256491348946516bit!
Dringo wrote:
> ===SONICRAV---> wrote:
On the
> point of comparing GBAs and PS1s, this
> is absurd! As someone said, the Xbox and
> DC are both 128 bits, but to say
> they are equally as powerful is
> useless.
When it comes to consoles, the
> power comes from the mixture of CPU
> clock speed (or MIPS are better), and
> the architecture being used!
You see,
> the PS1 and GBA both have 32 bit
> CPUs, BUT the PS1 has it's own soundboard,
> vector processors, 3d graphics
> chips... all of which the GBA doesn't.
It's
> like saying, I'm a
> photographer, let's compare a £10 disposable camera
> with a
> £3000 IRS APS Cannon Super-good camera... after all, they both just
>
> takes photos and stivk them on a negative....
Still 32 bit :D
Too much is made of this "BIT" number. There's far much more behind the power of a console that this alone. The fact is though, it's just easier for those of us who don't understand the science behind computers to have a specific reference to the general power of a console.
> ===SONICRAV---> wrote:
On the
> point of comparing GBAs and PS1s, this
> is absurd! As someone said, the Xbox and
> DC are both 128 bits, but to say
> they are equally as powerful is
> useless.
When it comes to consoles, the
> power comes from the mixture of CPU
> clock speed (or MIPS are better), and
> the architecture being used!
You see,
> the PS1 and GBA both have 32 bit
> CPUs, BUT the PS1 has it's own soundboard,
> vector processors, 3d graphics
> chips... all of which the GBA doesn't.
It's
> like saying, I'm a
> photographer, let's compare a £10 disposable camera
> with a
> £3000 IRS APS Cannon Super-good camera... after all, they both just
>
> takes photos and stivk them on a negative....
Still 32 bit :D
Too much is made of this "BIT" number. There's far much more behind the power of a console that this alone. The fact is though, it's just easier for those of us who don't understand the science behind computers to have a specific reference to the general power of a console.
===SONICRAV---> wrote:
On the
> point of comparing GBAs and PS1s, this is absurd! As someone said, the Xbox and
> DC are both 128 bits, but to say they are equally as powerful is
> useless.
When it comes to consoles, the power comes from the mixture of CPU
> clock speed (or MIPS are better), and the architecture being used!
You see,
> the PS1 and GBA both have 32 bit CPUs, BUT the PS1 has it's own soundboard,
> vector processors, 3d graphics chips... all of which the GBA doesn't.
It's
> like saying, I'm a photographer, let's compare a £10 disposable camera
> with a £3000 IRS APS Cannon Super-good camera... after all, they both just
> takes photos and stivk them on a negative....
Still 32 bit :D
On the
> point of comparing GBAs and PS1s, this is absurd! As someone said, the Xbox and
> DC are both 128 bits, but to say they are equally as powerful is
> useless.
When it comes to consoles, the power comes from the mixture of CPU
> clock speed (or MIPS are better), and the architecture being used!
You see,
> the PS1 and GBA both have 32 bit CPUs, BUT the PS1 has it's own soundboard,
> vector processors, 3d graphics chips... all of which the GBA doesn't.
It's
> like saying, I'm a photographer, let's compare a £10 disposable camera
> with a £3000 IRS APS Cannon Super-good camera... after all, they both just
> takes photos and stivk them on a negative....
Still 32 bit :D
Hey sonic, how do you find out bogomips under Windows?
Page: