The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Ohhhh, the single mindedness of PlayStation fans, it makes me sick. I'm not saying that there aren't Ninty and - god damn them - Pokemon fans, but I'm really starting to resent PlayStation - holics.
Example - "The PS2 is the best console of the next generation"
"No it isn't, it has the worst technology and some aspects are quite flawed."
"Yeah, but it has better games."
"Name some."
"SSX Tricky, Tony Hawks 3..."
"On GC and Xbox, on GC and Xbox..."
"But the GameCube and Xbox don't have good games"
"Halo, Smash Bros., Unreal Championship, Star Wars Rogue Leader..."
"But the PS2 is best."
Oh dear. It seems that people get into the wrong frame of mind. "PS2 is best, and nothing else is good". Definitely the wrong frame of mind. In the next-gen console race, Nintendo has got a great console which isn't held back by complicated architecture, high costs and obsessive anti-aliasing, and the Xbox is everything the PS2 is with that expensive Microsoft upgrade. Looks like this is one race that Sony can't win...
Or can they? Despite being less of a console than the others, Sony have such a massive fan base, and such a massive head start on the competition, that it may just end up to be like the previous console race.
The PlayStation was the technologically inferior console, yet by having such a massive base of cheap, fun games, became a massively popular hit. The N64 had much greater visuals, but because of that unjustified and biased view that Nintendo is 'just for kids', sold appallingly, coupled with the extreme prices. £65 for an N64 game anyone? Nah, everyone with both consoles will go for 2 PlayStation games anyday.
However, the Dreamcast was really good, and had all the qualities that made the PlayStation great. However, it arrived 4 years too late, and by this time Sony had established its multi-million fan base and had managed to dissuade all potential consumers away from Sega's really nice machine. Result? We all know it.
(PS. Now is the time to snap up a cheap Dreamcast. £70 for a DC and 2 games? Ridiculously cheap. Buy now!)
And it is entirely possible that the same will happen to Nintendo and Microsoft if they don't pull their act together. The PlayStation 2 was, and still is, a much, MUCH broadcasted console. Ask an adult in a shopping mall, and chances are that they have heard of the PS2, if not actually have one in their home. It is totally the opposite in the case of Nintendo and the GameCube. Some people know of the Xbox, but the GameCube? Nope.
A wise move by Nintendo was to advertise the GameCube on the back of the GameBoy Advance box. A+ for Nintendo, as the GBA is one of the fastest selling consoles ever. In fact, if it wasn't for the GameBoy, Pocket and Colour, Nintendo would probably be sharing its grave with Sega.
What is wrong with all of this, is that Sony don't deserve the staggering profits they make. They don't have any good in-house games, and put ridiculous prices on add-ons. Nintendo, while infamous for delays, make great games, with a passion, and always deliver something fun, innovative and truly great. Microsoft have got the heart for the console business. True, in essence they are only in it for the money, but even so, they have got all the backing needed to keep a hydroelectic dam stable, and trust me, thats a lot.
My last point to make, is that Sony does need to pull its act together. There are a very small amount of great games around on the PS2, no true must-haves, whereas the competition have must-have titles available from day 1. Many of the PS2's games are not PS2-only, and exclusive is the wrong word to describe it.
Exclusive = first, not, as many people are fooled by false advertising, 'only on that console'.
The PlayStation 2 is a great console for variety and price.
The GameCube is a great console for quality and price.
The Xbox is a great console for variety and quality.
From every angle, it is a win-win situation, yet many-a-person go for the PS2, merely because of advertisement. For the next-gen race, public awareness is everything. This isn't meant as a rip on the PS2, but it is just showing how Sony has played its cards right up until now, and how not to play the gaming game.
My advice to everyone wanting a new console:
Buy everything. That way you'll have a non-biased view, and can experience all great things gaming.
Remember: You only dis what you don't have. The DC is great, albeit with a massive anti-DC following.
Go on, its gaming, and gaming is great. Have fun with your next gen consoles, and do a little research into what you're buying. Don't fall under the rock-slide of Sony advertising, buy what YOU want, not what they do.
Have fun...
Example - "The PS2 is the best console of the next generation"
"No it isn't, it has the worst technology and some aspects are quite flawed."
"Yeah, but it has better games."
"Name some."
"SSX Tricky, Tony Hawks 3..."
"On GC and Xbox, on GC and Xbox..."
"But the GameCube and Xbox don't have good games"
"Halo, Smash Bros., Unreal Championship, Star Wars Rogue Leader..."
"But the PS2 is best."
Oh dear. It seems that people get into the wrong frame of mind. "PS2 is best, and nothing else is good". Definitely the wrong frame of mind. In the next-gen console race, Nintendo has got a great console which isn't held back by complicated architecture, high costs and obsessive anti-aliasing, and the Xbox is everything the PS2 is with that expensive Microsoft upgrade. Looks like this is one race that Sony can't win...
Or can they? Despite being less of a console than the others, Sony have such a massive fan base, and such a massive head start on the competition, that it may just end up to be like the previous console race.
The PlayStation was the technologically inferior console, yet by having such a massive base of cheap, fun games, became a massively popular hit. The N64 had much greater visuals, but because of that unjustified and biased view that Nintendo is 'just for kids', sold appallingly, coupled with the extreme prices. £65 for an N64 game anyone? Nah, everyone with both consoles will go for 2 PlayStation games anyday.
However, the Dreamcast was really good, and had all the qualities that made the PlayStation great. However, it arrived 4 years too late, and by this time Sony had established its multi-million fan base and had managed to dissuade all potential consumers away from Sega's really nice machine. Result? We all know it.
(PS. Now is the time to snap up a cheap Dreamcast. £70 for a DC and 2 games? Ridiculously cheap. Buy now!)
And it is entirely possible that the same will happen to Nintendo and Microsoft if they don't pull their act together. The PlayStation 2 was, and still is, a much, MUCH broadcasted console. Ask an adult in a shopping mall, and chances are that they have heard of the PS2, if not actually have one in their home. It is totally the opposite in the case of Nintendo and the GameCube. Some people know of the Xbox, but the GameCube? Nope.
A wise move by Nintendo was to advertise the GameCube on the back of the GameBoy Advance box. A+ for Nintendo, as the GBA is one of the fastest selling consoles ever. In fact, if it wasn't for the GameBoy, Pocket and Colour, Nintendo would probably be sharing its grave with Sega.
What is wrong with all of this, is that Sony don't deserve the staggering profits they make. They don't have any good in-house games, and put ridiculous prices on add-ons. Nintendo, while infamous for delays, make great games, with a passion, and always deliver something fun, innovative and truly great. Microsoft have got the heart for the console business. True, in essence they are only in it for the money, but even so, they have got all the backing needed to keep a hydroelectic dam stable, and trust me, thats a lot.
My last point to make, is that Sony does need to pull its act together. There are a very small amount of great games around on the PS2, no true must-haves, whereas the competition have must-have titles available from day 1. Many of the PS2's games are not PS2-only, and exclusive is the wrong word to describe it.
Exclusive = first, not, as many people are fooled by false advertising, 'only on that console'.
The PlayStation 2 is a great console for variety and price.
The GameCube is a great console for quality and price.
The Xbox is a great console for variety and quality.
From every angle, it is a win-win situation, yet many-a-person go for the PS2, merely because of advertisement. For the next-gen race, public awareness is everything. This isn't meant as a rip on the PS2, but it is just showing how Sony has played its cards right up until now, and how not to play the gaming game.
My advice to everyone wanting a new console:
Buy everything. That way you'll have a non-biased view, and can experience all great things gaming.
Remember: You only dis what you don't have. The DC is great, albeit with a massive anti-DC following.
Go on, its gaming, and gaming is great. Have fun with your next gen consoles, and do a little research into what you're buying. Don't fall under the rock-slide of Sony advertising, buy what YOU want, not what they do.
Have fun...
Page:
Ant wrote:
Which means the PS2 has the best
> game in the world, and the others don't.
Best game in the world?
Ha ha ha I would hardly call a game with 20 minute long cut scenes the best game in the world. Shouldn't you play it first before you start calling it 'the bestest game in the whole wide world'
Which means the PS2 has the best
> game in the world, and the others don't.
Best game in the world?
Ha ha ha I would hardly call a game with 20 minute long cut scenes the best game in the world. Shouldn't you play it first before you start calling it 'the bestest game in the whole wide world'
First party titles
WaveRace: Blue Storm
Luigi's Mansion
Third party titles
Star Wars Rogue Leader Rogue Squadron II (LucasArts) Exclusive
Sonic Adventure 2 Battle (Sega) Exclusive
Super Monkey Ball (Sega)
ISS2 (Konami)
ESPN Winter Sports (Konami)
Tony Hawk Pro Skater 3 (Activision)
Spiderman (Activision)
Tarzan Untamed (Ubi Soft)
Batman Vengeance (Ubi Soft)
Donald Duck Quack Attack (Ubi Soft)
Crazy Taxi (Acclaim)
Burnout (Acclaim)
Dave Mirra Freestyle BMX (Acclaim)
NHL Hitz (Midway)
Gauntlet Dark Legacy (Midway)
Universal Studios (Kemco)
Batman (Kemco)
Tetris World (THQ)
2002 FIFA World Cup (EA SPORTS)
Ant just for you there's the Gamecube launch titles, hmmm don't really think the consoles made just made up of Nintendo style platformers.
WaveRace: Blue Storm
Luigi's Mansion
Third party titles
Star Wars Rogue Leader Rogue Squadron II (LucasArts) Exclusive
Sonic Adventure 2 Battle (Sega) Exclusive
Super Monkey Ball (Sega)
ISS2 (Konami)
ESPN Winter Sports (Konami)
Tony Hawk Pro Skater 3 (Activision)
Spiderman (Activision)
Tarzan Untamed (Ubi Soft)
Batman Vengeance (Ubi Soft)
Donald Duck Quack Attack (Ubi Soft)
Crazy Taxi (Acclaim)
Burnout (Acclaim)
Dave Mirra Freestyle BMX (Acclaim)
NHL Hitz (Midway)
Gauntlet Dark Legacy (Midway)
Universal Studios (Kemco)
Batman (Kemco)
Tetris World (THQ)
2002 FIFA World Cup (EA SPORTS)
Ant just for you there's the Gamecube launch titles, hmmm don't really think the consoles made just made up of Nintendo style platformers.
Ant wrote:
Roque Squadron looks good, but it's
> based on the old movies where as I prefer Episode 1.
*sniggers*
You are having a laugh aren't you?
Roque Squadron looks good, but it's
> based on the old movies where as I prefer Episode 1.
*sniggers*
You are having a laugh aren't you?
MGS2 for X-Box has been canned by the way.
Which means the PS2 has the best game in the world, and the others don't.
Also, of all the GC launch games I see no must have titles. Not in my opinion, anyway, which is biased against Mario, StarFox, Donkey Kong, Luigi etc.
Roque Squadron looks good, but it's based on the old movies where as I prefer Episode 1.
Which means the PS2 has the best game in the world, and the others don't.
Also, of all the GC launch games I see no must have titles. Not in my opinion, anyway, which is biased against Mario, StarFox, Donkey Kong, Luigi etc.
Roque Squadron looks good, but it's based on the old movies where as I prefer Episode 1.
PS2 lacks quality??
Bollards. MGS2 will be the best game ever, and it's single platform.
The PS2 is currently the ONLY next-gen console out, and it's bringing out some amazing games, whether they be on other consoles or not.
What else does the GC offer that has quality?? Mario?? Star Fox Adventures?? Nooooo thanks.
X-Box?? At least the PS2 doesn't crash or blow up every half an hour.
I'd rather not have a console that is mainly made up of Nintendo-style platformers, which meand for me that the PS2 actually offers more quality.
Bollards. MGS2 will be the best game ever, and it's single platform.
The PS2 is currently the ONLY next-gen console out, and it's bringing out some amazing games, whether they be on other consoles or not.
What else does the GC offer that has quality?? Mario?? Star Fox Adventures?? Nooooo thanks.
X-Box?? At least the PS2 doesn't crash or blow up every half an hour.
I'd rather not have a console that is mainly made up of Nintendo-style platformers, which meand for me that the PS2 actually offers more quality.
bingbong wrote:
> You say that the PS2 is inferior to the gamecube but ii actaully outperfoms the
> other consoles (well at least the gamecube) in at least 1 area. Like the PS2 can
> shift far more polygons than the gamecube at 1 time.
The X-Box shifts 125 million polygons
The PS2 shifts 66-75 million polygons
The GC shifts 6-12 million polygons
The GC figures are what a game would use. The PS2 and X-Box offer false data. Ok so its not false but these are raw polygon figures, on un-textured, no effects e.t.c. NO game would use this type of polygon. So once effects are added in the polygons soon drop down to some where in the region of what the GC can do.
All 3 consoles are about equal in performance, its hard to tell as there different architectures can be compared directly.
> You say that the PS2 is inferior to the gamecube but ii actaully outperfoms the
> other consoles (well at least the gamecube) in at least 1 area. Like the PS2 can
> shift far more polygons than the gamecube at 1 time.
The X-Box shifts 125 million polygons
The PS2 shifts 66-75 million polygons
The GC shifts 6-12 million polygons
The GC figures are what a game would use. The PS2 and X-Box offer false data. Ok so its not false but these are raw polygon figures, on un-textured, no effects e.t.c. NO game would use this type of polygon. So once effects are added in the polygons soon drop down to some where in the region of what the GC can do.
All 3 consoles are about equal in performance, its hard to tell as there different architectures can be compared directly.
I totally agree.
If the PS2 and DC had gone head-to-head, without any brand names being involved, the DC would have won by miles. The PS2 was released (and still has), too many second rate games with jaggu edges, and unoriginal ideas.
The problem was that the DC was competing with the IMAGE of the PS2 (ie, completely photorealistic graphics that we were PROMISED by Sony), and not the actual quality of the console, which was very different.
The PSX beat the saturn because it was cheap to develop for, easy to develop for, and the Saturn was expensive and difficult to develop for in comparisson. Now the PS2 is the most expansive and hardest to develop for thanks to Sony's lackluster dev kits and "revoltionary" hardware setup. The reason it's been supported is because of the PSX's success... and almost that alone!
And no we're far down the road of the PS2's launch, and we still get second rate games, so many of which use middleware (prewritten games engines) that they're similar to an extent of very little originallity.
Oh, and bear in mind... I have a PS2.
Sonic
If the PS2 and DC had gone head-to-head, without any brand names being involved, the DC would have won by miles. The PS2 was released (and still has), too many second rate games with jaggu edges, and unoriginal ideas.
The problem was that the DC was competing with the IMAGE of the PS2 (ie, completely photorealistic graphics that we were PROMISED by Sony), and not the actual quality of the console, which was very different.
The PSX beat the saturn because it was cheap to develop for, easy to develop for, and the Saturn was expensive and difficult to develop for in comparisson. Now the PS2 is the most expansive and hardest to develop for thanks to Sony's lackluster dev kits and "revoltionary" hardware setup. The reason it's been supported is because of the PSX's success... and almost that alone!
And no we're far down the road of the PS2's launch, and we still get second rate games, so many of which use middleware (prewritten games engines) that they're similar to an extent of very little originallity.
Oh, and bear in mind... I have a PS2.
Sonic
just read half of that and it's safe to say the other half is more rambling gibber, The PS2 has great games today not tommorow!!!!!!
My advice for the trouble hearted - go for PC. More expensive, but more rewarding. Remember, you can only use these forums thanks to PCs (Internet TVs can't be servers)
Game quality depends on Developer prowess. But which console gets the good games depends on who's quickest to sign up developers.
I wrote exactly that all consoles are great, for different reasons.
GO NINTY - GET THOSE ORANGE CONSOLES. WOOOOHOOOOOO!!!!
There you go, replies to every post :D
Game quality depends on Developer prowess. But which console gets the good games depends on who's quickest to sign up developers.
I wrote exactly that all consoles are great, for different reasons.
GO NINTY - GET THOSE ORANGE CONSOLES. WOOOOHOOOOOO!!!!
There you go, replies to every post :D
bingbong wrote:
> You say that the PS2 is inferior to the gamecube but ii actaully outperfoms the
> other consoles (well at least the gamecube) in at least 1 area. Like the PS2 can
> shift far more polygons than the gamecube at 1 time.
Theoretically, yes, physically, no.
The PS2 has to actually process all of the lighting, particle effects, drastically reducing the polygon count. The GameCube has most of these features built-in, which means that the polygonal power is reserved for the pure visuals alone. Trust me, the GameCube visuals look one hell-of-a-lot better than those of the PS2.
> You say that the PS2 is inferior to the gamecube but ii actaully outperfoms the
> other consoles (well at least the gamecube) in at least 1 area. Like the PS2 can
> shift far more polygons than the gamecube at 1 time.
Theoretically, yes, physically, no.
The PS2 has to actually process all of the lighting, particle effects, drastically reducing the polygon count. The GameCube has most of these features built-in, which means that the polygonal power is reserved for the pure visuals alone. Trust me, the GameCube visuals look one hell-of-a-lot better than those of the PS2.
Page: