The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
picture this -
EDGE, christmas issue 2001 front cover states "F**K why EDGE swears by microsofts new console"
EDGE, Chrstmas issue 2002 fornt cover states "F**CKED - why EDGE swears microsofts console is becoming the new Dreamcast.
oh how i laughed, one year on its becoming obsolete, does this worry u x box fans?,,,, it should
EDGE, christmas issue 2001 front cover states "F**K why EDGE swears by microsofts new console"
EDGE, Chrstmas issue 2002 fornt cover states "F**CKED - why EDGE swears microsofts console is becoming the new Dreamcast.
oh how i laughed, one year on its becoming obsolete, does this worry u x box fans?,,,, it should
Page:
Strafex wrote:
> Besides, WookieE is spelt with 2 e's you nonse! :-D
Haaaaaaallelujah!
> Besides, WookieE is spelt with 2 e's you nonse! :-D
Haaaaaaallelujah!
Savatt78 wrote:
> Wookie is the only person on here who seems to come up with a half
> decent arguement against the X-Box. Most others are desperately
> trying to put it down with anything they can twist to make their
> console come out on top.
Ahem, *cough*!
ONLY?
Besides, WookieE is spelt with 2 e's you nonse! :-D
> Wookie is the only person on here who seems to come up with a half
> decent arguement against the X-Box. Most others are desperately
> trying to put it down with anything they can twist to make their
> console come out on top.
Ahem, *cough*!
ONLY?
Besides, WookieE is spelt with 2 e's you nonse! :-D
Savatt78 wrote:
> I take it you wanted to get your point accross there Wookie - jesus.
> ;-))
Just a bit. :-)
> Anyway, as far as I see, companies like Sega actually tried things
> with the DC. You don't see too many other consoles doing that. Now
> Microsoft are doing the same.
What did they/are they trying? I don't really see any major differences between any of them in terms of software. They're all boxes that play games. So I presume you're talking hardware.
> PS2 has a hard drive coming of course, but with the extra wad of cash
> you need to buy it along with online capabilities, it really is going
> to turn out a bit of a con.
It's not a con at all. Two years ago when PS2 was released, the addition of a HD and online ability were already planned; they were in development before PS2 was released - that's why it had the expansion bay.
The prohibiting factor was cost - HD's were far more expensive two years ago - even for the 8GB unit in the Xbox, let alone the 40GB unit planned for PS2. If Xbox had launched at the same time, I can guarantee you that it would have either (a) had no HD or Ethernet port, or (b) cost around £500.
It must not be forgotten when these things are discussed that, not only do MS have a 2-year advantage in technology, but also a 2-year advantage in basic costs - which have fallen considerably.
> Sony has basically hit its peak now and theres very little that can be
> done with it hardware wise to make new little ideas in games.
I disagree (surprise surprise). PS2 games are improving drastically all the time. A year ago, people said that GTA3 pushed the machine to its limits. This year, we have Vice City which is much larger, includes much more gameplay, and looks far better. Other games are further pushing the machine, as they will be doing again next year.
The PS2's hardware has much more to give. They were still dragging more and more from the PS1 five years into its life, and the PS2 is a far more complex and capable machine. I expect PS2 games to keep improving right up until the eventual release of PS3.
> I take it you wanted to get your point accross there Wookie - jesus.
> ;-))
Just a bit. :-)
> Anyway, as far as I see, companies like Sega actually tried things
> with the DC. You don't see too many other consoles doing that. Now
> Microsoft are doing the same.
What did they/are they trying? I don't really see any major differences between any of them in terms of software. They're all boxes that play games. So I presume you're talking hardware.
> PS2 has a hard drive coming of course, but with the extra wad of cash
> you need to buy it along with online capabilities, it really is going
> to turn out a bit of a con.
It's not a con at all. Two years ago when PS2 was released, the addition of a HD and online ability were already planned; they were in development before PS2 was released - that's why it had the expansion bay.
The prohibiting factor was cost - HD's were far more expensive two years ago - even for the 8GB unit in the Xbox, let alone the 40GB unit planned for PS2. If Xbox had launched at the same time, I can guarantee you that it would have either (a) had no HD or Ethernet port, or (b) cost around £500.
It must not be forgotten when these things are discussed that, not only do MS have a 2-year advantage in technology, but also a 2-year advantage in basic costs - which have fallen considerably.
> Sony has basically hit its peak now and theres very little that can be
> done with it hardware wise to make new little ideas in games.
I disagree (surprise surprise). PS2 games are improving drastically all the time. A year ago, people said that GTA3 pushed the machine to its limits. This year, we have Vice City which is much larger, includes much more gameplay, and looks far better. Other games are further pushing the machine, as they will be doing again next year.
The PS2's hardware has much more to give. They were still dragging more and more from the PS1 five years into its life, and the PS2 is a far more complex and capable machine. I expect PS2 games to keep improving right up until the eventual release of PS3.
I take it you wanted to get your point accross there Wookie - jesus. ;-))
Anyway, as far as I see, companies like Sega actually tried things with the DC. You don't see too many other consoles doing that. Now Microsoft are doing the same.
PS2 has a hard drive coming of course, but with the extra wad of cash you need to buy it along with online capabilities, it really is going to turn out a bit of a con.
Sony has basically hit its peak now and theres very little that can be done with it hardware wise to make new little ideas in games.
Anyway, as far as I see, companies like Sega actually tried things with the DC. You don't see too many other consoles doing that. Now Microsoft are doing the same.
PS2 has a hard drive coming of course, but with the extra wad of cash you need to buy it along with online capabilities, it really is going to turn out a bit of a con.
Sony has basically hit its peak now and theres very little that can be done with it hardware wise to make new little ideas in games.
Dammit!
Savatt78 wrote:
> That wouldn't matter so much but the console itself was basically an
> updated PS1 with a DVD player. So it didn't really have a lot of
> potential to look forward to.
Sorry, Sav, but that's nonsense. You may as well say that Dreamcast was just an updated Megadrive and that Gamecube is just an updated N64, and Xbox is equivalent to a 2-year-old PC.
PS2 is massively different to PS1, and as for potential - I can't even begin to find words to say how ridiculous a statement that is.
> That wouldn't matter so much but the console itself was basically an
> updated PS1 with a DVD player. So it didn't really have a lot of
> potential to look forward to.
Sorry, Sav, but that's nonsense. You may as well say that Dreamcast was just an updated Megadrive and that Gamecube is just an updated N64, and Xbox is equivalent to a 2-year-old PC.
PS2 is massively different to PS1, and as for potential - I can't even begin to find words to say how ridiculous a statement that is.
Savatt78 wrote:
> That wouldn't matter so much but the console itself was basically an
> updated PS1 with a DVD player. So it didn't really have a lot of
> potential to look forward to.
Sorry, Sav, but that's nonsense. You may as well say that Dreamcast was just an updated Megadrive and that Gamecube is just an updated N64, and Xbox is equivalent to a 2-year-old PC.
PS2 is massively different to PS1, and as for potential - I can't even begin to find words to say how ridiculous a statement that is.
> That wouldn't matter so much but the console itself was basically an
> updated PS1 with a DVD player. So it didn't really have a lot of
> potential to look forward to.
Sorry, Sav, but that's nonsense. You may as well say that Dreamcast was just an updated Megadrive and that Gamecube is just an updated N64, and Xbox is equivalent to a 2-year-old PC.
PS2 is massively different to PS1, and as for potential - I can't even begin to find words to say how ridiculous a statement that is.
Savatt78 wrote:
> That wouldn't matter so much but the console itself was basically an
> updated PS1 with a DVD player. So it didn't really have a lot of
> potential to look forward to.
Sorry, Sav, but that's nonsense. You may as well say that Dreamcast was just an updated Megadrive and that Gamecube is just an updated N64, and Xbox is equivalent to a 2-year-old PC.
PS2 is massively different to PS1, and as for potential - I can't even begin to find words to say how ridiculous a statement that is.
> That wouldn't matter so much but the console itself was basically an
> updated PS1 with a DVD player. So it didn't really have a lot of
> potential to look forward to.
Sorry, Sav, but that's nonsense. You may as well say that Dreamcast was just an updated Megadrive and that Gamecube is just an updated N64, and Xbox is equivalent to a 2-year-old PC.
PS2 is massively different to PS1, and as for potential - I can't even begin to find words to say how ridiculous a statement that is.
Savatt78 wrote:
> That wouldn't matter so much but the console itself was basically an
> updated PS1 with a DVD player. So it didn't really have a lot of
> potential to look forward to.
Sorry, Sav, but that's nonsense. You may as well say that Dreamcast was just an updated Megadrive and that Gamecube is just an updated N64, and Xbox is equivalent to a 2-year-old PC.
PS2 is massively different to PS1, and as for potential - I can't even begin to find words to say how ridiculous a statement that is.
> That wouldn't matter so much but the console itself was basically an
> updated PS1 with a DVD player. So it didn't really have a lot of
> potential to look forward to.
Sorry, Sav, but that's nonsense. You may as well say that Dreamcast was just an updated Megadrive and that Gamecube is just an updated N64, and Xbox is equivalent to a 2-year-old PC.
PS2 is massively different to PS1, and as for potential - I can't even begin to find words to say how ridiculous a statement that is.
I do hope the Microsoft X-box fails it will single handidly destroy both Sony, Nintendo and the game industry if it doesn't. The games on the system are good, i concur with J42, Microsoft probably at a push has better 3rd party support but not second party because Nintendo have way too many 2nd party games. Anyway Microsoft are here to kill Sony because they are treading on the toes of the PC, i tell you if Microsoft cut software prices i'll be calling me old mate bin laden pronto.
Page: