Viewing Thread:
"Another reason why Gamecube isn't doing that well in the UK...."

This retarded piece of writing is taken from the Times newspapers, reivew of what's to come in 2003 for gaming.

"Nintendo is still something of an unknown quantity. It will certainly be pushing for more Gamecube sales in 2003, but will adopt a typically low key approach to promotion. Gamecube is aimed at children and Nintendo will not worry about trying to improve its popularity with older gamers. Some industry rumours suggested that if Nintendo's Gamecube failed it would simply make games alone - but that is to underestimate this player. This is Nintendo afetr all the folk who still have the handheld market to themselves and couldn't bank profits fast enough for 2 years as Pokemon ruled the world.

Gamecube titles to look out for include Disneys Sports Football, Super Bust-a-move 3000 and Dragons Lair 3D"

Complete and utter retards, either they're being payed by Sony to say all this bullshi-t or they really know nothing.

I feel like writing in and tearing them apart for being such complete nonces. The list of 'games to look out for' says it all really.

Complete morons.

Jak and Daxter is a quality game for the PS2, and it's exclusive. Yes, kids do get their parents to buy games that are for older people, and this is why i think that there are alot of rated games. If a games company makes their game an 18, the kids are going to think that it's "cool" to have the game, whether it's good or not. I don't thin kthat there should be a fixed rating, i think that every game should have the age restriction that is just a warning, and isn't fixed.

( . )Juicy Melons( . ) wrote:
> Firstly, i don't think there's anything wrong with a console being
> "kiddy". After all, it would be hard for a gamer to say that
> he isn't still a touch "kiddy" to be playing computer games
> in the first place. But computer games were made for the younger
> people in the world, the first computer games were "kiddy".
> Games have evolved and become scarier or nastier than they were,
> that's just what ahppens in time. Games need to evolve to get more
> people interested in the market. I have a PS2 and a GC, and the GC is
> a bit more "kiddy" than the PS2. But i bought my GC because
> it was different to the PS2 in many ways, rather than the X-Box which
> tries to be like the PS2 in almost every way. It is true that the GC
> is "kiddy", but the games aren't. The Resident Evil series
> isn't "kiddy", it's got to scare alot of people. I think
> that critics are biased so that they look good. I've done this alot of
> times. Say if you were the referee in a match between Manchester
> United and Stoke, you're going to be on Manchesters' side so that more
> people will like you. The GC will shine next year, more than any of
> the other consoles. Due to the release of some massive titles. But the
> reason for the PS2 being so popular is the amount of developers they
> have working for them. There are so many to name, let alone Sony
> themselves. Nintendo have themselves, and a few others, like Sega
> working on games. Nintendo will also come out on top because they make
> games to make people happy, and enjoy playing the games. Microsoft,
> and a few of the developers at Sony, make games for the money. It
> would be wrong to say that Nintendo aren't out there to make money,
> but their main interest is to make people enjoy playing their games.

And its mostly the "kiddies" who go out and get there parents to get rated 18 GTA3. Also PS2 with the backing of PS1, sony's consoles have always been considered the "cool" consoles, and its quite ironic that the kids dont always go for the GC, as they think its "kiddy".

But even if some GC games are "kiddy" at least they do it properly and make em' fun! Name one "kiddy" game exclusive to the Xbox of PS2 that is actually good?

well?

There isnt any!

Firstly, i don't think there's anything wrong with a console being "kiddy". After all, it would be hard for a gamer to say that he isn't still a touch "kiddy" to be playing computer games in the first place. But computer games were made for the younger people in the world, the first computer games were "kiddy". Games have evolved and become scarier or nastier than they were, that's just what ahppens in time. Games need to evolve to get more people interested in the market. I have a PS2 and a GC, and the GC is a bit more "kiddy" than the PS2. But i bought my GC because it was different to the PS2 in many ways, rather than the X-Box which tries to be like the PS2 in almost every way. It is true that the GC is "kiddy", but the games aren't. The Resident Evil series isn't "kiddy", it's got to scare alot of people. I think that critics are biased so that they look good. I've done this alot of times. Say if you were the referee in a match between Manchester United and Stoke, you're going to be on Manchesters' side so that more people will like you. The GC will shine next year, more than any of the other consoles. Due to the release of some massive titles. But the reason for the PS2 being so popular is the amount of developers they have working for them. There are so many to name, let alone Sony themselves. Nintendo have themselves, and a few others, like Sega working on games. Nintendo will also come out on top because they make games to make people happy, and enjoy playing the games. Microsoft, and a few of the developers at Sony, make games for the money. It would be wrong to say that Nintendo aren't out there to make money, but their main interest is to make people enjoy playing their games.

Have you even heard of Zelda or Metroid?

notice how they mentioned the three kiddiest games possible on this years release date! I think they forgot Resident evil 0, star wars bounty hunter, Xlll, hitman 2 and LOTR the two towers.

The Times is okay. It's some of the writers that are annoying. About five people work on the games section, and around two are completely biased to PS2, one doesn't know the first thing about games, and the final two are actually quite good. These two can tell a bad and a good game apart. These are the two that did the following things:

1. Awarded the GameCube the 'Best Designed Console' award.
2. Gave Mario Sunshine and Resident Evil 5 Stars.
3. Recognised Vice City as not being 'utterly amazing'.

And more. Also, let's appreciate that if someone's view differs from yours, it doesn't mean they're biased. But when someone says it's likely the GameCube will fail (ignoring the great Christmas sales it got worldwide, how it matched the PS2 in Japan and how it has managed to overtake the X-Box again in the US) and there are very few upcoming games.. well.. just kick 'em :D.

What the monkeys? They said Harry Potter 2 and Pikmin were the Gamecube highlights? Jesus, That just takes the mick, I mean come on Pikmin is great, But that came out at the launch of the machine. Are they forgetting:-

Super Mario Sunshine
Eternal Darkness
Star Wars: Rogue Leader 2
Super Smash Bros Melee
Super Monkey Ball
Resident Evil
Luigis Mansion
Rocky
Starfox Adventures
Mario Party 4

Thats just naming a few of the brilliance on the Gamecube.

Look, I'll write the flippin article for them, 2003 Gamecube highlights?

Metroid Prime
Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
Animal Crossing
Resident Evil Zero
F-Zero GC
Starfox Armarda
Mario Golf
Driver 3
Pro Evo Soccer 2

And thats again only naming a few. Heck the times newspaper is probably written by monkeys, Who smoke.

I too am beginning to hate the Times' and Sunday Times' gaming coverage.

They recently decided to give each console a mark out of 5. Not only is the whole idea complete nonsense to anyone who knows anything about games, but predictably, the PS2 got 5/5, while X-Box and GC both got 4/5.

At the same time, they looked at a "variety" of games for each platform.

PS2 - GTA3, MGS2, Fifa 2003 (and maybe a couple of others)
GC - Harry Potter 2, Pikmin, and something else that sounded childish.

This is a ridiculous set of games to choose. They omitted to mention that Fifa and Harry Potter are actually available on all three major platforms.

Every other Sunday, they have YET ANOTHER article about how brilliant GTA3 is.

They claim that Pikmin is, "by far the best game currently available for Gamecube" (this was abou 2 weeks ago). Are they really that crazy? Do they play games for 20 seconds before rating them? What about SMS, SSBM, RE, ED, SFA...... - I'm not saying that Pikmin is poor, but it is not "by far" the best game on the console. This is alongside 2 line "reviews" of games like SMS and RE, giving them both scores something like 2/5.

With press coverage like this, no-one stands a chance against Sony. A friend's parents almost decided not to buy a GC for Christmas, because the Times had said that it "wasn't as good" as the PS2.

Personally, I don't believe that newspapers should bother writing articles about this, unless they really have researched far more than they have at the moment.

Incidentally, the newspaper also has a very poor view of gaming in general. I remember a particular Culture issue this year, in which a 5 page detailed review of a particular film (maybe Lord of the Rings?), was followed by a remark that, "Sites such as gamespot.com have reviews which go into obsessive detail about almost every game released!". Why do games, and particularly non-Sony games end up looking so bad?

Finally, I don't mean to say that the PS2 isn't a great console. But I do say that it is complete ridiculous to say outright, on many occasion that, without a doubt, it is the only console worth buying.

The Times is owned by a conglomerate.

Not sure which though.

I can't believe people are still shocked by what papers say about games.

Yes. They are stupid and retarded. It's tradition.

I remember when one heralded Spice World as a classic.
Another one said that Nintendo's Gamecube might not fare too well after its previous console, the Saturn was seen off by strong competition from Sega...


You just have to laugh really! :-D