The "Nintendo Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
It amazes me every time I see someone say how the Gamecube is kewl because it is 'small and portable', and that none of the other consoles are. What planet are you on?
Every console is portable. PCs with their monitors and cables are not portable, but consoles are. The fact that the Gamecube is marginally smaller than other consoles does not mean it's the only portable console - it means it is marginally smaller, and that's all. They are all still very portable.
You seem to class the smallest console as the only console that is portable.
It's like saying only cars that can go over 200mph can move.
What will you lot say when someone releases a console that is smaller than the Gamecube? Will the Gamecube all of a sudden not be portable, just like the Xbox and PS2 now? The Dreamcast was also very small, yet no-one claimed that as a selling point. Why not? Because it already had enough selling points that were much more valid - first 128-bit console, only console with working online games, first true next-gen console etc. etc.
The Dreamcast didn't need half-@rsed pointless and trivial selling points like 'it's so small you can take it anywhere!' because that is true of ALL consoles.
Perhaps the fact that Nintendo fans claim the size of the console makes it portable or not and then claim this as a selling point should not come as a surprise, as the majority of Nintendo fans are aged to suit the console? If Nintendo build a console to look like a dinky toy, and then make games to suit my little sisters, I suppose they can't complain when their fan-base is so young that they come up with lame positive points like the size of the console.
Step over the the Microsoft, Sony or Sega forums and you see things like 'specifications' and 'hardware' being talked about. This is because these are in fact adult consoles. No-one expects Nintendo fans to care about such things, as they are too obsessed with their cutesy little fluffy game characters to notice 'frame rate' or 'polygon count', but what they DO expect is that you appreciate that some people actually care about the POWER inside their console, and not just if it's small enough to fit down your Jap's eye or not.
At the end of the day if you lot want to sit there and get erections over your small consoles then you can do that, but don't try using it as a reason behind 'mine is better than yours' as it just makes you look stupid.
How many people have been unable to take their Xbox to another room because it was too big? None. Do you hang your Gamecubes on your eye-lashes to play on it, or do you stick it under your TV, exactly where you would stick an Xbox? How many people can take their Gamecube to places an Xbox cannot go? None. Why is this? Because SIZE DOESN'T MATTER.
Every console is portable. PCs with their monitors and cables are not portable, but consoles are. The fact that the Gamecube is marginally smaller than other consoles does not mean it's the only portable console - it means it is marginally smaller, and that's all. They are all still very portable.
You seem to class the smallest console as the only console that is portable.
It's like saying only cars that can go over 200mph can move.
What will you lot say when someone releases a console that is smaller than the Gamecube? Will the Gamecube all of a sudden not be portable, just like the Xbox and PS2 now? The Dreamcast was also very small, yet no-one claimed that as a selling point. Why not? Because it already had enough selling points that were much more valid - first 128-bit console, only console with working online games, first true next-gen console etc. etc.
The Dreamcast didn't need half-@rsed pointless and trivial selling points like 'it's so small you can take it anywhere!' because that is true of ALL consoles.
Perhaps the fact that Nintendo fans claim the size of the console makes it portable or not and then claim this as a selling point should not come as a surprise, as the majority of Nintendo fans are aged to suit the console? If Nintendo build a console to look like a dinky toy, and then make games to suit my little sisters, I suppose they can't complain when their fan-base is so young that they come up with lame positive points like the size of the console.
Step over the the Microsoft, Sony or Sega forums and you see things like 'specifications' and 'hardware' being talked about. This is because these are in fact adult consoles. No-one expects Nintendo fans to care about such things, as they are too obsessed with their cutesy little fluffy game characters to notice 'frame rate' or 'polygon count', but what they DO expect is that you appreciate that some people actually care about the POWER inside their console, and not just if it's small enough to fit down your Jap's eye or not.
At the end of the day if you lot want to sit there and get erections over your small consoles then you can do that, but don't try using it as a reason behind 'mine is better than yours' as it just makes you look stupid.
How many people have been unable to take their Xbox to another room because it was too big? None. Do you hang your Gamecubes on your eye-lashes to play on it, or do you stick it under your TV, exactly where you would stick an Xbox? How many people can take their Gamecube to places an Xbox cannot go? None. Why is this? Because SIZE DOESN'T MATTER.
Page:
Thing is Davvyboy - if you wanna go into Obi-Wan, I can mention Universal Studios on the GC. All consoles have crap games, GC is no exception.
You can't blame X-Box for having a game thats "an insult to Star Wars", try blaming the ones who made the game. Lucasarts have come up with loads of Star Wars games and theres plenty of crap ones as well as good ones.
You can't blame X-Box for having a game thats "an insult to Star Wars", try blaming the ones who made the game. Lucasarts have come up with loads of Star Wars games and theres plenty of crap ones as well as good ones.
Who said anything about Obi Wan?
Everyone knows that's a crap game and X Box owners don't boast about it being exclusive to their machine.
Everyone knows that's a crap game and X Box owners don't boast about it being exclusive to their machine.
Are you trying to say that Shenmue, Jet Set Radio, Crazy Taxi, Outrun, Toe Jam and Earl, House of the Dead 3 etc etc are not class games?
Tiltawhirl wrote:
> I'm not one to usually stick up for the X-Box but how can you say it's
> a cheap PC? have you actually seen al the class games coming out for
> it from Sega?
Since when has Sega been class act Funnily I remember the cd32 ad `to be this good would take sega ages` lolololololol
btw I just upgraded my puter i have an xp1800 athlon + six channel sound card thats brill for dvds too. The Xbox has 5x dvd I mean what a rip off The Ps2 has 4x and that was out two years before the Xbox my dvd is X16 max so P~ to BG
> I'm not one to usually stick up for the X-Box but how can you say it's
> a cheap PC? have you actually seen al the class games coming out for
> it from Sega?
Since when has Sega been class act Funnily I remember the cd32 ad `to be this good would take sega ages` lolololololol
btw I just upgraded my puter i have an xp1800 athlon + six channel sound card thats brill for dvds too. The Xbox has 5x dvd I mean what a rip off The Ps2 has 4x and that was out two years before the Xbox my dvd is X16 max so P~ to BG
Medal of Honour's coming out on GC later this year and there's some F1 game coming out quite soon for Cube.
i could be persuaded to buy an X BOX. Only just mind.
There are some class games out for the PC at the mo.
Ok, admittedly i cant think of many, but Grand prix 4 and Medal of Honor do spring to mind.
I bought my PC just under 2 years ago, and to run those games at full spec, i would be required to spend £1000s to upgrade it.
But instead, i can save money and buy an X BOX to do the same job.
There are some class games out for the PC at the mo.
Ok, admittedly i cant think of many, but Grand prix 4 and Medal of Honor do spring to mind.
I bought my PC just under 2 years ago, and to run those games at full spec, i would be required to spend £1000s to upgrade it.
But instead, i can save money and buy an X BOX to do the same job.
I'm not one to usually stick up for the X-Box but how can you say it's a cheap PC? have you actually seen al the class games coming out for it from Sega?
Page: