The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Fancy reading a post from an extremist Nintendo fan over the issue of hardware? Of course you do, this place would be so empty without me (Eminem begins to rap but is promptly shot by Limp Bizkit), and so time to be very biased, opinonistic and argumentative… just as you like it. A recent post from Turbonutter stated the reasons the “Dual Shock” Playstation 2 controller was superior to the Gamecube’s, yet his arguments were simply facts, stuff written on paper, he didn’t comment on the differences in size for buttons, change in the R and L buttons or the additional comfort the controller presents, it isn’t as simple as facts and figures. And this applies similarly to the hardware (I won’t go back over the controller issue), technically the X-box is the superior system, and the Playstation 2 improves over some parts of Cube, but as I say it isn’t that simple.
The major difference being who made the hardware, you can argue till the cows come home over the superior X-box technology but then it isn’t that amazing, it isn’t easily pulled off (they say it is but I can guarantee no one can max out the X-box specification limit) and it is designed by hardware experts. I’m not saying the Gamecube’s hardware wasn’t designed by experts but in fact a different sort. The best sound system devised for the N64 was set up by a company called Factor 5, a company owned by Lucas Arts that make exclusive Star Wars games for Nintendo (Rogue Leader). There talent with sound is evident from the titles they produce and they designed the tools and sound system for the Gamecube, MusyX. Now did a 3rd party developer design the sound interior to the X-box and Playstation 2? No, in fact some may argue a far superior company did and you maybe right, the sound quality may be better on the PS2 but then it was never designed for the developer, it was designed to be the best, not the easiest to use or implement unlike MusyX, which was designed by a developing house who have experience with sound and know full well how it should be done. And with the controller (ok so I lied) it is designed by Shiguru Miyamoto, who knows about the gaming world and how they should be played and in the best way possible (just look at his games), but the PS2’s pad was designed with many functions but there was nothing about the games themselves that caused certain ways of laying out the pad it was done by some guy who makes hardware thinking I know I’ll have two analogue sticks, in built rumble and analogue buttons and lay it out symmetrically, when in fact this is the wrong way to go about it. His/hers experience with making, designing and playing were evidently little as him/her didn’t do anything clever with the pad to make it more enjoyable to use they kept it very bland just so gamers won’t mind it and developers can use it easily… yet the Cube’s one was designed from a designers point of view (and the worlds best at that) and so everything was done from a perfect insight to the gaming world unlike the PS2 and X-box (the X-box in fact used gamers themselves but still didn’t get it right).
Sony has a particular advantage over format, DVD’s are partially Sony’s invention and so they do know how to make the format games are made on. They may be kicking themselves in the teeth with their own success, the popularity of DVD’s enable easy piracy (soon enough). And so Nintendo handed it over to Panasonic a company who are just as much experts as Sony and happen to be developing there own brand of DVD. And I’ll quote something said by a Sony fan playing on the Cube:
“Smart! Midi disc technology”
It was enough to make me smile, reducing loading times, combating piracy, looking smart, reducing console size, introducing new technology into the mainstream market and ok there size isn’t as large as a DVD but in the world of disc gaming that is completely unimportant no matter what Turbonutter says. It is a futuristic new gaming device, which I would love to see more frequently used next time as opposed to DVD’s. So whilst all those others claim to be the best, in reality Nintendo’s Gamecube is a far superior console. Yep it doesn’t look good down on paper but then all this flipper technology, new format, the console being designed by the developer effectively makes it the developers choice.
And with that in mind many many games can and will be done on the Gamecube due to its cleverly designed infrastructure that could never be done on the PS2 or X-box. Whilst PS2 gamers are waiting for Sony and co. to produce anything like that Tekken Demo used to show the console off, Gamecube gamers are playing Pikmin which surpasses what Gamecube’s 128 Mario’s demo did. Just bare that in mind when claiming the Gamecube’s inferiority to other consoles, it is never that simple. And now I wait for Turbonutter to turn up and disagree.
Here’s to the future.
Dringo.
The major difference being who made the hardware, you can argue till the cows come home over the superior X-box technology but then it isn’t that amazing, it isn’t easily pulled off (they say it is but I can guarantee no one can max out the X-box specification limit) and it is designed by hardware experts. I’m not saying the Gamecube’s hardware wasn’t designed by experts but in fact a different sort. The best sound system devised for the N64 was set up by a company called Factor 5, a company owned by Lucas Arts that make exclusive Star Wars games for Nintendo (Rogue Leader). There talent with sound is evident from the titles they produce and they designed the tools and sound system for the Gamecube, MusyX. Now did a 3rd party developer design the sound interior to the X-box and Playstation 2? No, in fact some may argue a far superior company did and you maybe right, the sound quality may be better on the PS2 but then it was never designed for the developer, it was designed to be the best, not the easiest to use or implement unlike MusyX, which was designed by a developing house who have experience with sound and know full well how it should be done. And with the controller (ok so I lied) it is designed by Shiguru Miyamoto, who knows about the gaming world and how they should be played and in the best way possible (just look at his games), but the PS2’s pad was designed with many functions but there was nothing about the games themselves that caused certain ways of laying out the pad it was done by some guy who makes hardware thinking I know I’ll have two analogue sticks, in built rumble and analogue buttons and lay it out symmetrically, when in fact this is the wrong way to go about it. His/hers experience with making, designing and playing were evidently little as him/her didn’t do anything clever with the pad to make it more enjoyable to use they kept it very bland just so gamers won’t mind it and developers can use it easily… yet the Cube’s one was designed from a designers point of view (and the worlds best at that) and so everything was done from a perfect insight to the gaming world unlike the PS2 and X-box (the X-box in fact used gamers themselves but still didn’t get it right).
Sony has a particular advantage over format, DVD’s are partially Sony’s invention and so they do know how to make the format games are made on. They may be kicking themselves in the teeth with their own success, the popularity of DVD’s enable easy piracy (soon enough). And so Nintendo handed it over to Panasonic a company who are just as much experts as Sony and happen to be developing there own brand of DVD. And I’ll quote something said by a Sony fan playing on the Cube:
“Smart! Midi disc technology”
It was enough to make me smile, reducing loading times, combating piracy, looking smart, reducing console size, introducing new technology into the mainstream market and ok there size isn’t as large as a DVD but in the world of disc gaming that is completely unimportant no matter what Turbonutter says. It is a futuristic new gaming device, which I would love to see more frequently used next time as opposed to DVD’s. So whilst all those others claim to be the best, in reality Nintendo’s Gamecube is a far superior console. Yep it doesn’t look good down on paper but then all this flipper technology, new format, the console being designed by the developer effectively makes it the developers choice.
And with that in mind many many games can and will be done on the Gamecube due to its cleverly designed infrastructure that could never be done on the PS2 or X-box. Whilst PS2 gamers are waiting for Sony and co. to produce anything like that Tekken Demo used to show the console off, Gamecube gamers are playing Pikmin which surpasses what Gamecube’s 128 Mario’s demo did. Just bare that in mind when claiming the Gamecube’s inferiority to other consoles, it is never that simple. And now I wait for Turbonutter to turn up and disagree.
Here’s to the future.
Dringo.
Page:
Oh dear! This amounts to little more than a console wars newbie topic that says "Xbox is best because it is more powerful".
There are 2 problems:
1) I could come up with reasons why the Xbox spec is better, and you could counteract with why the GC is better. The fact is that it DOESN'T MATTER! The DC was easier to develop for than the PS2, but which one lasted longer? Meanwhile the GC and Xbox are "more powerful" than the PS2 but which is selling far better? More importantly, which has the best games. Answer: none of them! Ok, so you may prefer Ninty exclusive games (I do), but others may prefer realistic racers, fighters etc, making their console of choice the Xbox or PS2. All 3 consoles are great in different respects, and a console wars topic will never get anywhere!
2) Had a newbie done this, we'd all be shouting abuse.
Sonic
There are 2 problems:
1) I could come up with reasons why the Xbox spec is better, and you could counteract with why the GC is better. The fact is that it DOESN'T MATTER! The DC was easier to develop for than the PS2, but which one lasted longer? Meanwhile the GC and Xbox are "more powerful" than the PS2 but which is selling far better? More importantly, which has the best games. Answer: none of them! Ok, so you may prefer Ninty exclusive games (I do), but others may prefer realistic racers, fighters etc, making their console of choice the Xbox or PS2. All 3 consoles are great in different respects, and a console wars topic will never get anywhere!
2) Had a newbie done this, we'd all be shouting abuse.
Sonic
Oh dear! This amounts to little more than a console wars newbie topic that says "Xbox is best because it is more powerful".
There are 2 problems:
1) I could come up with reasons why the Xbox spec is better, and you could counteract with why the GC is better. The fact is that it DOESN'T MATTER! The DC was easier to develop for than the PS2, but which one lasted longer? Meanwhile the GC and Xbox are "more powerful" than the PS2 but which is selling far better? More importantly, which has the best games. Answer: none of them! Ok, so you may prefer Ninty exclusive games (I do), but others may prefer realistic racers, fighters etc, making their console of choice the Xbox or PS2. All 3 consoles are great in different respects, and a console wars topic will never get anywhere!
2) Had a newbie done this, we'd all be shouting abuse.
Sonic
There are 2 problems:
1) I could come up with reasons why the Xbox spec is better, and you could counteract with why the GC is better. The fact is that it DOESN'T MATTER! The DC was easier to develop for than the PS2, but which one lasted longer? Meanwhile the GC and Xbox are "more powerful" than the PS2 but which is selling far better? More importantly, which has the best games. Answer: none of them! Ok, so you may prefer Ninty exclusive games (I do), but others may prefer realistic racers, fighters etc, making their console of choice the Xbox or PS2. All 3 consoles are great in different respects, and a console wars topic will never get anywhere!
2) Had a newbie done this, we'd all be shouting abuse.
Sonic
Tellah wrote:
> If a game has a dominant button, then you are dictating how that game
> should be played.
Yes, I'd agree with that.
Simple comparison is European and Japanese games. Most Japanese PS2 games use circle to select/confirm and X to cancel, whereas in Europe and the US it's the other way around.
On most PS2 games, you are given the option of configuring the controller to something more suited to your preference, if the default is not to your liking.
but this is getting remarkably similar to Turbo's thread, which I said I'd have no more part of. So I'll shut up now!
> If a game has a dominant button, then you are dictating how that game
> should be played.
Yes, I'd agree with that.
Simple comparison is European and Japanese games. Most Japanese PS2 games use circle to select/confirm and X to cancel, whereas in Europe and the US it's the other way around.
On most PS2 games, you are given the option of configuring the controller to something more suited to your preference, if the default is not to your liking.
but this is getting remarkably similar to Turbo's thread, which I said I'd have no more part of. So I'll shut up now!
Also, I'd like to add that there are more games that DON'T have a dominant button than those that do.
In well executed driving games, accelerating is as important as breaking. In Fighting games, punches are as important as kicks. In boxing games, body shots are as important as those to the face. In 3rd person games like Tomb Raider jumping is as important as firing.
You often have the choice of jumping over an opponent, running past an opponent, firing at an opponent etc. All these choices should be upto the gamer, not the way the pad dictates.
In well executed driving games, accelerating is as important as breaking. In Fighting games, punches are as important as kicks. In boxing games, body shots are as important as those to the face. In 3rd person games like Tomb Raider jumping is as important as firing.
You often have the choice of jumping over an opponent, running past an opponent, firing at an opponent etc. All these choices should be upto the gamer, not the way the pad dictates.
Strafex wrote:
> The reason why everyone's stuck with it?
> Well despite the fact that it was horrible to work with
WAS being the operative word.
Several developers have said: You WILL struggle to produce a high quality title for PS2 if you try to take the easy route of simply porting games from another platform. If you design a game for PS2 from the ground up, you will get far better results.
Practically all of the PS2's top games have been designed on it, for it -and it shows.
Porting games is a cop-out, trying to maximise profit for minimum effort. Sure, the industry is all about money - but go for the quick-fix and it often backfires. A port usually results in a shoddy game, which won't sell well. (I don't own it, but apparently the port of Crazy Taxi from DC to PS2 was SO exact that it even had the same pop-up!)
The same even applies for different territories on the same machine. Take Capcom's titles, for example. They produce many excellent games, but - until Maximo - never even attempted to optimise PAL versions. Hence massive borders. Again, this is simply a cop-out. With Maximo, they proved that not only COULD they do it, but also the game doesn't have to suffer as a result.
Designing for PS2 gives a better game, and consequently more sales.
There are exceptions to the rule though - GTA3 being the biggest example. Not designed specifically for PS2 (using Criterion's Renderware platform, available for all systems), it was a massive seller. The thing with this game, though, is that while not being developed specifically for PS2, they put a hell of a lot of effort into it.
Now that the series is PS2-exclusive, I would hope that they'll be re-designing some areas to get the best out of the machine - hopefully overcoming some of the graphical glitches which existed.
Poor games - on any platform - are only the result of lazy developers, and not the hardware.
> The reason why everyone's stuck with it?
> Well despite the fact that it was horrible to work with
WAS being the operative word.
Several developers have said: You WILL struggle to produce a high quality title for PS2 if you try to take the easy route of simply porting games from another platform. If you design a game for PS2 from the ground up, you will get far better results.
Practically all of the PS2's top games have been designed on it, for it -and it shows.
Porting games is a cop-out, trying to maximise profit for minimum effort. Sure, the industry is all about money - but go for the quick-fix and it often backfires. A port usually results in a shoddy game, which won't sell well. (I don't own it, but apparently the port of Crazy Taxi from DC to PS2 was SO exact that it even had the same pop-up!)
The same even applies for different territories on the same machine. Take Capcom's titles, for example. They produce many excellent games, but - until Maximo - never even attempted to optimise PAL versions. Hence massive borders. Again, this is simply a cop-out. With Maximo, they proved that not only COULD they do it, but also the game doesn't have to suffer as a result.
Designing for PS2 gives a better game, and consequently more sales.
There are exceptions to the rule though - GTA3 being the biggest example. Not designed specifically for PS2 (using Criterion's Renderware platform, available for all systems), it was a massive seller. The thing with this game, though, is that while not being developed specifically for PS2, they put a hell of a lot of effort into it.
Now that the series is PS2-exclusive, I would hope that they'll be re-designing some areas to get the best out of the machine - hopefully overcoming some of the graphical glitches which existed.
Poor games - on any platform - are only the result of lazy developers, and not the hardware.
If a game has a dominant button, then you are dictating how that game should be played.
This is the disadvantage of a single game designer designing the pad.
Shigsy's games DO have a dominant button (Mario - Jump etc.).
When a game has the option of kick or punch etc. Then the GC pad is basically dictating what action the user should perform. The dominant button is punch, therefore use that more than kick.
What if I want to mainly kick the baddies teeth in instead of punch them?
This point is even more of a factor when options like weak, medium , strong, high, low punch / kick want to be introduced by the designer.
Please argue, but I feel this is a very valid and important limitation of the GC pad!
This is the disadvantage of a single game designer designing the pad.
Shigsy's games DO have a dominant button (Mario - Jump etc.).
When a game has the option of kick or punch etc. Then the GC pad is basically dictating what action the user should perform. The dominant button is punch, therefore use that more than kick.
What if I want to mainly kick the baddies teeth in instead of punch them?
This point is even more of a factor when options like weak, medium , strong, high, low punch / kick want to be introduced by the designer.
Please argue, but I feel this is a very valid and important limitation of the GC pad!
Your arguement here is down to personal preference. I have both a PS2 and Gamecube and both controllers are good controllers in my opinion but the PS2 one is better, just because it fits better in my hands and is easier to use.
Also in the original post you mentioned
"They may be kicking themselves in the teeth with their own success, the popularity of DVD’s enable easy piracy (soon enough)."
What? How do you work this out?
Sure you can copy them easily but the hardware and coding techniques in the software make this a very hard thing to do.
Also in the original post you mentioned
"They may be kicking themselves in the teeth with their own success, the popularity of DVD’s enable easy piracy (soon enough)."
What? How do you work this out?
Sure you can copy them easily but the hardware and coding techniques in the software make this a very hard thing to do.
The PS2 hard to program for. hehehe.
The games out there demonstrate this point is absolute rubbish. The only reason it WAS tricky to develop for in the beginning was because it was so revolutionary. i.e. it was ahead of it's time.
It had a very open architecture to allow games to go into any direction they wanted.
With all the middleware out there now, and the support from Sony themselves through new and improved development kits - this arguement is a low shot with no standing at all.
The games out there demonstrate this point is absolute rubbish. The only reason it WAS tricky to develop for in the beginning was because it was so revolutionary. i.e. it was ahead of it's time.
It had a very open architecture to allow games to go into any direction they wanted.
With all the middleware out there now, and the support from Sony themselves through new and improved development kits - this arguement is a low shot with no standing at all.
Tellah wrote:
> In my opinion nintendo have taken the Duel Shock, made the D-Pad and a
> couple of buttons inaccessable, made the rumble more of a quiver and
> made it harder for 3rd party developers to design for.
Nah. Sony took the Snes pad and added a couple of shoulder buttons.
The when the N64 came out, they tried to keep up by putting in a rumble and sellotaping two analgoue sticks to the original design.
As a result, the analogue sticks are in an awkward position because the D-Pad has the priority spot.
Nintendo know that the D-pad is less important than the analogue stick and put them in a correct place.
Also, Nintendo noticed that most games have a predominant button too (because they're Game Designers, not technology devellopers), and made one bigger slightly bigger than the rest to help newbies and beginners (especially good for new original games like Pikmin).
And if you're not a newbie gamer then you've OBVIOUSLY got the patience and dedication to adapt (it'll take less than a couple of days), why else do Xbox fans like their pad?
> In my opinion nintendo have taken the Duel Shock, made the D-Pad and a
> couple of buttons inaccessable, made the rumble more of a quiver and
> made it harder for 3rd party developers to design for.
Nah. Sony took the Snes pad and added a couple of shoulder buttons.
The when the N64 came out, they tried to keep up by putting in a rumble and sellotaping two analgoue sticks to the original design.
As a result, the analogue sticks are in an awkward position because the D-Pad has the priority spot.
Nintendo know that the D-pad is less important than the analogue stick and put them in a correct place.
Also, Nintendo noticed that most games have a predominant button too (because they're Game Designers, not technology devellopers), and made one bigger slightly bigger than the rest to help newbies and beginners (especially good for new original games like Pikmin).
And if you're not a newbie gamer then you've OBVIOUSLY got the patience and dedication to adapt (it'll take less than a couple of days), why else do Xbox fans like their pad?
LOL.
I like this fiction Dringo is coming up with to combat the facts! Sony designed the music capabilities of the PS2, whereas a software developer designed them for the GC. You therefore argue that the GC has better game music? Sony know more about music than any other company in the world, that is almost certainly fact. Game music is not a bunch of beeps and bloops anymore. It's all streamed off the CD, and can be reproduced exactly as the musicians intended on all 3 new consoles.
It's down to the musicians that are used, and the bands that are licensed. It's therefore the company that has the most contacts in the music industry that will produce the best game music. You try telling me that's Nintendo and not Sony!
The GC pad is very good, but it's not a revolution in gaming by ANY stretch of the imagination. It's like argueing apples over pears, i.e. not worth it.
In my opinion nintendo have taken the Duel Shock, made the D-Pad and a couple of buttons inaccessable, made the rumble more of a quiver and made it harder for 3rd party developers to design for.
I like this fiction Dringo is coming up with to combat the facts! Sony designed the music capabilities of the PS2, whereas a software developer designed them for the GC. You therefore argue that the GC has better game music? Sony know more about music than any other company in the world, that is almost certainly fact. Game music is not a bunch of beeps and bloops anymore. It's all streamed off the CD, and can be reproduced exactly as the musicians intended on all 3 new consoles.
It's down to the musicians that are used, and the bands that are licensed. It's therefore the company that has the most contacts in the music industry that will produce the best game music. You try telling me that's Nintendo and not Sony!
The GC pad is very good, but it's not a revolution in gaming by ANY stretch of the imagination. It's like argueing apples over pears, i.e. not worth it.
In my opinion nintendo have taken the Duel Shock, made the D-Pad and a couple of buttons inaccessable, made the rumble more of a quiver and made it harder for 3rd party developers to design for.
Page: