The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
I've titled this post "Xbox - an opinion". I was going call it "Xbox - a verdict" but that sounds conceited, and gives the impression that my thoughts are final and correct. That's not the case, so I stress that this is my *opinion*. You may agree, you may not; but don't rant at me about it. I do not care if you agree or disagree, I am simply giving my thoughts in the hope that you find them useful in deciding whether or not to buy one for yourself.
-----
I was looking at screens and videos of Halo on the Xbox all day yesterday, and got a strong urge to buy one.
So, after I got home from work, I went to my local Tesco's and bought one, together with a second controller, Halo and Project Gotham Racing.
I plugged everything in and powered it up. First thing you're presented with is the settings screen - very similar to the PS2's in what it offers, the main difference being that you can set 60Hz mode here, which is then used for all games - pretty cool. My major dislike about the menus and front-end is that it's all in shades of green, but that's just personal taste.
Other minor things I noticed were that (a) the machine is just as noisy as my PS2 (i.e. not very) and (b) there is a constant clickling sound from within - which I assume is the hard disk - but which you don't notice once a game is playing.
First game loaded up was Project Gotham Racing. This is the game that, according to Xbox magazine (not the official one) "makes GT3 look dump".
I can categorically say that this is not the case. The cars are well realised, but they just don't have the polish (no pun intended) that the cars in GT3 have. They're good, accurate models, but somehow don't have that 'real' look to them; they're more 'very lifelike cartoon' than photorealistic. The colours are bold and strong, rather than the subtleties of GT3.
Tracks are well designed, but the scenery again looks a little bland. There's plenty there, but the textures aren't particularly well detailed, with colour used in 'blocks'.
Replays are good, though again not up to GT3 standards. Reflections in the cars are a little blocky, and tend to move quite jerkily overy the surface of the car. And believe it or not, I did see pop-up in certain areas, and jaggies are just as evident here as in GT3; i.e. they are there, but are not significant. In terms of appearance, it probably falls somewhere between Ridge Racer V and GT3.
In terms of gameplay, it's good enough. The handling isn't anything like GT3, but then it's not supposed to be, as this is more of an arcade racer. It falls somewhere between GT3 and Burnout, I'd say. As with GT3, there are only 5 other cars in the race. Driver AI is also similar to GT3 in that cars will hit you if you're in their way - you can turn into a corner nice and smooth, and cars around you don't really deviate from their pre-determined racing line.
I have also found a fairly major bug! Quite frequently, when re-starting a race and having an automatic gearbox, the car suddenly goes into reverse gear and revs the engine without me touching a thing! Then when the countdown reaches "Go!" the car takes off backwards! I have found that some frantic pressing of the left (brake)and right (accelerate) trigger buttons solves the problem, but it gives the other cars one heck of a head start, and many times I've had to re-start the race again immediately.
Over all though, it's a solid arcade racer, similar to MSR on the Dreamcast. The only area this does have an advantage is the sound, because the music is presented as radio stations you can listen to, as in GT3 - but *real* radio stations, such as Capital FM and XFM. But in all honesty, I don't believe the over-all product is a patch on GT3.
Next up is Halo, the reason I bought the machine. The mother of all FPS games, apparently. And it really is rather good. You know how FPS games play, so I won't go into great details. What takes most getting used to is that you can only carry two weapons at any time, adding a significant strategy element to the game. As far as I have played, this hasn't really been an issue, as I've so far only had pistols and assault rifles in various forms; this may well become more of a factor later in the game.
At certain points you must control vehicles - so far I've only encountered the Warthog, and this is proving fairly difficult to control; you control acceleration with the left analogue stick, and steer by rotating the camera with the right analogue stick. Sounds easy, but wait until you try it... it's not!
While Halo certainly is a very good FPS game, I stand by my earlier claim that Edge magazine got it wrong; it's not 10/10 for me. The enemy AI is good - enemies duck for cover behind structures and shields - but it's not perfect; when they do come out, so far they have tended to run pretty much in straight lines and be fairly easy to kill. The main problem comes from the numbers that can attack at any one time. It is a very good game, but so far I wouldn't say that it is significantly better than Medal of Honour: Allied Assault or a few other PC FPS games. It certainly doesn't acheive anything that the PS2 (and probably Gamecube) couldn't do.
And finally, a few words on the controller. It is a little on the large side, and I find it a little painful after prolonged play. It's okay using the analogue sticks (though it feels very odd with them being offset as they are), but when needing to use the A, B, X or Y buttons, I find I have to re-adjust the grip of my right hand, otherwise it stretches the muscle between my thumb and forefinger, which eventually leads to cramp. I get the feeling that they could have reduced the size of the pad by about a third if they'd done away with that bloody great Xbox logo in the middle.
The A, B, X and Y buttons are also too close together for my liking, and I find myself distracted and having to look down at the pad to make sure I'm pressing the right one. When you consider the size of the pad, this seems quite ridiculous. Still, hopefully I'll get used to it.
The 'rumble effect' built into the pad is also not as good as that of the DualShock 2; it is very weak in comparison, and - for example - does not give the same level of feedback in PGR as the DualShock 2 does in GT3.
So, what about the over-all package?
Well, after my first play of both games, I was left feeling a little flat, not really knowing what to think. It certainly didn't 'wow' me as the PS2 did when I first got it. In fact, after an hour, I turned it off to watch some TV, and at one point contemplated returning it.
But after a few more hours playing time, I've pretty much decided against that, although I don't think I'll be buying any more games for it for a while; I'll just have to see what comes along. It *is* a good machine, but I've not yet seen anything that I don't believe could be done on the other platforms.
Others have mentioned that they plan to sell their PS2 to help fund an Xbox. That's their choice, but I would say don't be too hasty. Get some quality play time on some of the games available first, because you may not be as impressed as you think. I am lucky that I could afford an Xbox without trading in; I can tell you in all honesty now that, had I traded my PS2 for the Xbox, I would be kicking myself and regretting it severely.
This is my honest, unbiased opinion as an owner of both machines. Make of it what you will.
-----
I was looking at screens and videos of Halo on the Xbox all day yesterday, and got a strong urge to buy one.
So, after I got home from work, I went to my local Tesco's and bought one, together with a second controller, Halo and Project Gotham Racing.
I plugged everything in and powered it up. First thing you're presented with is the settings screen - very similar to the PS2's in what it offers, the main difference being that you can set 60Hz mode here, which is then used for all games - pretty cool. My major dislike about the menus and front-end is that it's all in shades of green, but that's just personal taste.
Other minor things I noticed were that (a) the machine is just as noisy as my PS2 (i.e. not very) and (b) there is a constant clickling sound from within - which I assume is the hard disk - but which you don't notice once a game is playing.
First game loaded up was Project Gotham Racing. This is the game that, according to Xbox magazine (not the official one) "makes GT3 look dump".
I can categorically say that this is not the case. The cars are well realised, but they just don't have the polish (no pun intended) that the cars in GT3 have. They're good, accurate models, but somehow don't have that 'real' look to them; they're more 'very lifelike cartoon' than photorealistic. The colours are bold and strong, rather than the subtleties of GT3.
Tracks are well designed, but the scenery again looks a little bland. There's plenty there, but the textures aren't particularly well detailed, with colour used in 'blocks'.
Replays are good, though again not up to GT3 standards. Reflections in the cars are a little blocky, and tend to move quite jerkily overy the surface of the car. And believe it or not, I did see pop-up in certain areas, and jaggies are just as evident here as in GT3; i.e. they are there, but are not significant. In terms of appearance, it probably falls somewhere between Ridge Racer V and GT3.
In terms of gameplay, it's good enough. The handling isn't anything like GT3, but then it's not supposed to be, as this is more of an arcade racer. It falls somewhere between GT3 and Burnout, I'd say. As with GT3, there are only 5 other cars in the race. Driver AI is also similar to GT3 in that cars will hit you if you're in their way - you can turn into a corner nice and smooth, and cars around you don't really deviate from their pre-determined racing line.
I have also found a fairly major bug! Quite frequently, when re-starting a race and having an automatic gearbox, the car suddenly goes into reverse gear and revs the engine without me touching a thing! Then when the countdown reaches "Go!" the car takes off backwards! I have found that some frantic pressing of the left (brake)and right (accelerate) trigger buttons solves the problem, but it gives the other cars one heck of a head start, and many times I've had to re-start the race again immediately.
Over all though, it's a solid arcade racer, similar to MSR on the Dreamcast. The only area this does have an advantage is the sound, because the music is presented as radio stations you can listen to, as in GT3 - but *real* radio stations, such as Capital FM and XFM. But in all honesty, I don't believe the over-all product is a patch on GT3.
Next up is Halo, the reason I bought the machine. The mother of all FPS games, apparently. And it really is rather good. You know how FPS games play, so I won't go into great details. What takes most getting used to is that you can only carry two weapons at any time, adding a significant strategy element to the game. As far as I have played, this hasn't really been an issue, as I've so far only had pistols and assault rifles in various forms; this may well become more of a factor later in the game.
At certain points you must control vehicles - so far I've only encountered the Warthog, and this is proving fairly difficult to control; you control acceleration with the left analogue stick, and steer by rotating the camera with the right analogue stick. Sounds easy, but wait until you try it... it's not!
While Halo certainly is a very good FPS game, I stand by my earlier claim that Edge magazine got it wrong; it's not 10/10 for me. The enemy AI is good - enemies duck for cover behind structures and shields - but it's not perfect; when they do come out, so far they have tended to run pretty much in straight lines and be fairly easy to kill. The main problem comes from the numbers that can attack at any one time. It is a very good game, but so far I wouldn't say that it is significantly better than Medal of Honour: Allied Assault or a few other PC FPS games. It certainly doesn't acheive anything that the PS2 (and probably Gamecube) couldn't do.
And finally, a few words on the controller. It is a little on the large side, and I find it a little painful after prolonged play. It's okay using the analogue sticks (though it feels very odd with them being offset as they are), but when needing to use the A, B, X or Y buttons, I find I have to re-adjust the grip of my right hand, otherwise it stretches the muscle between my thumb and forefinger, which eventually leads to cramp. I get the feeling that they could have reduced the size of the pad by about a third if they'd done away with that bloody great Xbox logo in the middle.
The A, B, X and Y buttons are also too close together for my liking, and I find myself distracted and having to look down at the pad to make sure I'm pressing the right one. When you consider the size of the pad, this seems quite ridiculous. Still, hopefully I'll get used to it.
The 'rumble effect' built into the pad is also not as good as that of the DualShock 2; it is very weak in comparison, and - for example - does not give the same level of feedback in PGR as the DualShock 2 does in GT3.
So, what about the over-all package?
Well, after my first play of both games, I was left feeling a little flat, not really knowing what to think. It certainly didn't 'wow' me as the PS2 did when I first got it. In fact, after an hour, I turned it off to watch some TV, and at one point contemplated returning it.
But after a few more hours playing time, I've pretty much decided against that, although I don't think I'll be buying any more games for it for a while; I'll just have to see what comes along. It *is* a good machine, but I've not yet seen anything that I don't believe could be done on the other platforms.
Others have mentioned that they plan to sell their PS2 to help fund an Xbox. That's their choice, but I would say don't be too hasty. Get some quality play time on some of the games available first, because you may not be as impressed as you think. I am lucky that I could afford an Xbox without trading in; I can tell you in all honesty now that, had I traded my PS2 for the Xbox, I would be kicking myself and regretting it severely.
This is my honest, unbiased opinion as an owner of both machines. Make of it what you will.
Page:
POPped for newcomer Tiko.
MetalGear2King wrote:
> not stricktly true, MGS2 delivered both eye shattering graphics with amazing
> enemy AI and so did AGENT UNDER FIRE!
Well yes that is true. I wouldn't say AUF had great graphics or AI but MGS2 has been voted the best game ever. So much time was spent trying to rectify problems to get it spot on. But please note that not even MGS2 is perfect. You may notice that dead guards dissapear after they have been found. Kojima obviously found this was the best way to takle the quality problem and as a result he found a way that made the game run superb with excellent ai while only having a problem that didn't effect the game.
> not stricktly true, MGS2 delivered both eye shattering graphics with amazing
> enemy AI and so did AGENT UNDER FIRE!
Well yes that is true. I wouldn't say AUF had great graphics or AI but MGS2 has been voted the best game ever. So much time was spent trying to rectify problems to get it spot on. But please note that not even MGS2 is perfect. You may notice that dead guards dissapear after they have been found. Kojima obviously found this was the best way to takle the quality problem and as a result he found a way that made the game run superb with excellent ai while only having a problem that didn't effect the game.
> (Prisoner of war has ace ai but not good graphics)
How do you know so much about this game, i thought it wasn't out till june. It looks a top game but i can't find much info on it, could you post some review addresses or something?
Cheers
Mark
How do you know so much about this game, i thought it wasn't out till june. It looks a top game but i can't find much info on it, could you post some review addresses or something?
Cheers
Mark
carrying on about the wreckless theme the only reason it has good graphics is because the console doesn't need to load all decent ai and what not there fore more power can be put into graphics....why do u think games with decent ai have to be not so good in the graphics department? Because they can't handle both (Prisoner of war has ace ai but not good graphics) It can happen vice versa too.....GT3 probably has demonstrated the best graphics on a game ever...but of course it had to pay with rubbish ai on other cars...luckily this wasn't a problem. So in the end the only real reason wreckles has good graphics is because that whats concentrated on.
Popper wrote:
> What a stange post from someone who claims not to enter into Console wars.
Oh yes, a real console wars post. Of course, I spent almost £420 on a console I didn't want, just to compare it unfavourably with PS2, no matter what I honestly think.
> Dont get me wrong, opinions are good, but they have to
> TRUELY unbiased when they are claimed to be unbiased.
Which they are.
> The Quote "i haven't seen anything the Xbox can
> do that the PS2 cant do" is utter rubbish.
No, it's not.
> Take Wreckless, for example. The particle effects,
> shadows, lens distortion, bump mapping and anti
> aliasing are things the PS2 simply cannot do.
Now THAT is utter rubbish, as has already been stated by Bonus and nh. Wreckless was the other game which persuaded me to buy an Xbox - at least on appearance. But then I read the reviews, and found it to be lacking in terms of gameplay, at least according to what I want in a game. If they can put those graphics in a game like GTA3, then I'll be impressed.
> As for the gameplay, that is a matter of personal taste.
Which is exactly what I said. The whole thing is my *personal opinion*, based on what I've seen now that I own both consoles.
Also, with regard to your other comment:
> This should have been posted in the X-Box forum, not the PS2.
The post was written primarily for FoG Chat originally, and copied here because a number of regulars in this forum don't venture over there. As a known PS2 fan, I felt that those people may benefit from - or at least like to read - an honest opinion of the Xbox from a Sony fan. I saw little point in posting in the Xbox forum because the regular users there are already pretty much convinced that the Xbox is "the best thing since sliced bread" - my post was for neutrals or 'uncertains' who were considering buying one.
I suggest you go back and re-read my original post, especially the first paragraph. Maybe take each word at a time, decipher its meaning, and then try making sense of it as a whole, as I think you are confusing 'bias' with 'preference'.
I own both machines, and have no need for *bias*. At this moment in time, I still *prefer* the PS2, and I still feel that it offers *me* more of the games I want to play.
I'm not trying to persuade anyone to buy a PS2, or not to buy an Xbox, because quite frankly I don't care. It doesn't affect me one way or the other, as I am unblinkered enough to allow myself to enjoy the best of both worlds.
There are few others willing to do the same, it seems.
> What a stange post from someone who claims not to enter into Console wars.
Oh yes, a real console wars post. Of course, I spent almost £420 on a console I didn't want, just to compare it unfavourably with PS2, no matter what I honestly think.
> Dont get me wrong, opinions are good, but they have to
> TRUELY unbiased when they are claimed to be unbiased.
Which they are.
> The Quote "i haven't seen anything the Xbox can
> do that the PS2 cant do" is utter rubbish.
No, it's not.
> Take Wreckless, for example. The particle effects,
> shadows, lens distortion, bump mapping and anti
> aliasing are things the PS2 simply cannot do.
Now THAT is utter rubbish, as has already been stated by Bonus and nh. Wreckless was the other game which persuaded me to buy an Xbox - at least on appearance. But then I read the reviews, and found it to be lacking in terms of gameplay, at least according to what I want in a game. If they can put those graphics in a game like GTA3, then I'll be impressed.
> As for the gameplay, that is a matter of personal taste.
Which is exactly what I said. The whole thing is my *personal opinion*, based on what I've seen now that I own both consoles.
Also, with regard to your other comment:
> This should have been posted in the X-Box forum, not the PS2.
The post was written primarily for FoG Chat originally, and copied here because a number of regulars in this forum don't venture over there. As a known PS2 fan, I felt that those people may benefit from - or at least like to read - an honest opinion of the Xbox from a Sony fan. I saw little point in posting in the Xbox forum because the regular users there are already pretty much convinced that the Xbox is "the best thing since sliced bread" - my post was for neutrals or 'uncertains' who were considering buying one.
I suggest you go back and re-read my original post, especially the first paragraph. Maybe take each word at a time, decipher its meaning, and then try making sense of it as a whole, as I think you are confusing 'bias' with 'preference'.
I own both machines, and have no need for *bias*. At this moment in time, I still *prefer* the PS2, and I still feel that it offers *me* more of the games I want to play.
I'm not trying to persuade anyone to buy a PS2, or not to buy an Xbox, because quite frankly I don't care. It doesn't affect me one way or the other, as I am unblinkered enough to allow myself to enjoy the best of both worlds.
There are few others willing to do the same, it seems.
And adding to bonus wreckless aint exactly an example most game would want to follow.
Popper wrote:
Take Wreckless, for
> example. The particle effects, shadows, lens distortion, bump mapping and anti
> aliasing are things the PS2 simply cannot do.
As for the gameplay, that is a
> matter of personal taste.
Hmmmm, the PS2 can't do particle effects?? You amuse me little man..................
The PS2 can't do shadows, even funnier................
No lens distortion????
Hmmmm, technically impossible for it to do AA???
Hmmmmm, well I hate to disappoint you, but all of the above are present in MGS2. Yes, all of the above, in one game, exclusive to the one console which can't do any of them, aha, cya later little man..................
Take Wreckless, for
> example. The particle effects, shadows, lens distortion, bump mapping and anti
> aliasing are things the PS2 simply cannot do.
As for the gameplay, that is a
> matter of personal taste.
Hmmmm, the PS2 can't do particle effects?? You amuse me little man..................
The PS2 can't do shadows, even funnier................
No lens distortion????
Hmmmm, technically impossible for it to do AA???
Hmmmmm, well I hate to disappoint you, but all of the above are present in MGS2. Yes, all of the above, in one game, exclusive to the one console which can't do any of them, aha, cya later little man..................
Popper wrote:
Take Wreckless, for
> example. The particle effects, shadows, lens distortion, bump mapping and anti
> aliasing are things the PS2 simply cannot do.
Woopie - It looks better than ? PS2 game.
As for the gameplay, that is a
> matter of personal taste
Gameplay is what games are all about, not fancy graphics. If you actually read Wookies post properly it is a very unbiased opinion - yes he makes comparisons but that is not bias. His statemenst about Wreckless are based on reading reviews etc. I have read many previews and reviews and the basic opinion is the same and that is that Wreckless is not meeting it's original potential in terms of GAMEPLAY.
Take Wreckless, for
> example. The particle effects, shadows, lens distortion, bump mapping and anti
> aliasing are things the PS2 simply cannot do.
Woopie - It looks better than ? PS2 game.
As for the gameplay, that is a
> matter of personal taste
Gameplay is what games are all about, not fancy graphics. If you actually read Wookies post properly it is a very unbiased opinion - yes he makes comparisons but that is not bias. His statemenst about Wreckless are based on reading reviews etc. I have read many previews and reviews and the basic opinion is the same and that is that Wreckless is not meeting it's original potential in terms of GAMEPLAY.
What a stange post from someone who claims not to enter into Console wars.
This should have been posted in the X-Box forum, not the PS2.
Dont get me wrong, opinions are good, but they have to TRUELY unbiased when they are claimed to be unbiased.
The Quote "i haven't seen anything the Xbox can do that the PS2 cant do" is utter rubbish.
You obviously are basing your opinions on the small amount of games you own.
Take Wreckless, for example. The particle effects, shadows, lens distortion, bump mapping and anti aliasing are things the PS2 simply cannot do.
As for the gameplay, that is a matter of personal taste.
This should have been posted in the X-Box forum, not the PS2.
Dont get me wrong, opinions are good, but they have to TRUELY unbiased when they are claimed to be unbiased.
The Quote "i haven't seen anything the Xbox can do that the PS2 cant do" is utter rubbish.
You obviously are basing your opinions on the small amount of games you own.
Take Wreckless, for example. The particle effects, shadows, lens distortion, bump mapping and anti aliasing are things the PS2 simply cannot do.
As for the gameplay, that is a matter of personal taste.
Page: