The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Bollards.
Why can't you see it's exactly the same as the DualShock 2 but with less features? Let's run through this:
· D-pad - check
· Two analog sticks - check
· Four main buttons - check
· Shoulder buttons - check
· Rumble - nope
· Full analog on ALL buttons - nope
· 4 shoulder buttons - nope
· Analog sticks as sensitive as the DualShock 2 - nope
· Ability to drop for storeys and still work perfectly - nope
Excuse me if I'm wrong but surely if it's the SAME shape with the SAME layout but with less functions, that makes it worse? Oh no, sorry, I'm missing out the facts that it's purple and made by Nintendo, that automatically makes it far superior, I'm terribly sorry.
I dare any of you to prove to me that the GameCube controller is better than the DualShock 2 - and saying that "it's more comfortable" is a cop-out.
> Turbonutter wrote:
> Has any decent games mag given any game 100%? I doubt it severely, because no game is perfect
Well, in one ancient mag I saw, Xenon 2 (yes Xenon 2!) was given 100%
Apparently it had the most superior gameplay, sound and graphics around.
It was obviously not a 'decent' mag!
I got used to the GC control in less than a minute. And its fantastic. Dual Shock, its fine, it does the job. But nothing, "Special" if you know what I mean, I feel that the GC control has had alot of time/money/effort put into it. Making it "Special" but hey, argue away...
> Sibs wrote:
> Turbonutter wrote:
> The DualShock is way more technologically advanced than any other
> controller on earth - how can it be living in the past? Why change
> perfection?
>
> People who believe something is perfect are the reason things don't
> progress. You can never get anything which is perfect...
>
> Wow! I just typed a whole topic explaining that about perfection most
> probably whilst you were typing your reply...spooky
Great minds think alike... hmm, on second thoughts... ;-)
Anyway, I don't find new controllers a problem. I got used to the GC controller in a matter of minutes while playing in HMV, Got kind of used to the Xbox controller in a relatively short time (not as quick as GC, but still pretty short), and when I first played a PSX I got used to it quite quick, all but the four shoulder buttons, usually because I forget there are actually 4 while playing and always end up hitting the top one... but I don't play on a PSX or PS2 often...
> OK, so not perfection, but pretty damn close.
>
> Why bother improving something that's really quite funning good? The
> DualShock 2 is familliar to gamers. Nintendo tried improving on the
> N64 controller and failed.
Really?
The Dualshock 2 is familiar to me as being an uncomfortable controller to use. A Sony fan known as "Edgy's Brother" (can't remember his username on here) has even admitted to me he prefers the GameCube controller as it is so much more comfortable.
Just like nearly everyone I know (including myself) he thinks the Z-button is pointlessly placed being next to the R-button. If they wanted dual-shoulder buttons they may as well have called them R1, R2, L1, L2. (Don't start on copyright crap)
The claim that Nintendo failed to improve on the N64 controller is absolue tosh! To use every single control comfortably on the N64 would require three hands, which I, being one of many mutants on this planet, don't have. The GameCube controller allows you to reach most (the Z button could've been better placed as a trigger on the right handle) of the buttons without having to look to see what you're doing, and without having to move your hands/stretch too much. That's what makes it better than the N64 controller.