The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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:
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
>
> Which, of course, is why it got so much more support from all areas
> than the easier-to-develop-for N64.
The N64 wasn't exactly develloper friendly, but the PS2 is supposedly worse than the Saturn!
The reason why everyone's stuck with it?
Well despite the fact that it was horrible to work with, the hype on it was so great that it was garaunteed to sell a bundle and if you want to sell a lot of copies, you have to go for the most popular console.
> The fact is, developers are still learning new tricks to push the
> machine further and further, and have further to push it than other
> platforms. PS2 games have improved more over the first two years than
> PSone games did, and they will continue to improve up until the next
> incarnation of the machine.
That's because the first PS2 games were being completely outclassed by Dreamcast games.
> Simple fact: Sony's two-year-old hardware not only stands up well
> against newer platforms, but also has more scope for improvement. It
> will remain the market leader of this generation. Everyone else if
> fighting for second place.
Market leader, big seller, money maker, but still a pain to work with.
> And if we assume your comments about PS3 to be true, it doesn't bode
> well for the competition when we hit the next generation, either!
But then again, if it was all about good powerful hardware then the Xbox would be leading the market. I know that the PS3 will be more powerful, but how much will more power revolutionise gaming.
Nintendo have recognised that the Gamecube is all they need until the next major break-through in technology, and they don't expect that for atleast 6 years. As powerful and great as the PS3 might be, whether the devellopers manage to use this power to make it worth shelling out for remains to be seen.
>
> Which, of course, is why it got so much more support from all areas
> than the easier-to-develop-for N64.
The N64 wasn't exactly develloper friendly, but the PS2 is supposedly worse than the Saturn!
The reason why everyone's stuck with it?
Well despite the fact that it was horrible to work with, the hype on it was so great that it was garaunteed to sell a bundle and if you want to sell a lot of copies, you have to go for the most popular console.
> The fact is, developers are still learning new tricks to push the
> machine further and further, and have further to push it than other
> platforms. PS2 games have improved more over the first two years than
> PSone games did, and they will continue to improve up until the next
> incarnation of the machine.
That's because the first PS2 games were being completely outclassed by Dreamcast games.
> Simple fact: Sony's two-year-old hardware not only stands up well
> against newer platforms, but also has more scope for improvement. It
> will remain the market leader of this generation. Everyone else if
> fighting for second place.
Market leader, big seller, money maker, but still a pain to work with.
> And if we assume your comments about PS3 to be true, it doesn't bode
> well for the competition when we hit the next generation, either!
But then again, if it was all about good powerful hardware then the Xbox would be leading the market. I know that the PS3 will be more powerful, but how much will more power revolutionise gaming.
Nintendo have recognised that the Gamecube is all they need until the next major break-through in technology, and they don't expect that for atleast 6 years. As powerful and great as the PS3 might be, whether the devellopers manage to use this power to make it worth shelling out for remains to be seen.
Strafex wrote:
> when it became clear that the PS2 is most awkward console to devellop for EVER.
Which, of course, is why it got so much more support from all areas than the easier-to-develop-for N64.
What utter crud! This argument ceased to be an issue many, many months ago, after developers completed their first games.
I'm not saying tht soome didn't find it hard. But if developers still find that two years, then quite frankly they may as well give up now.
The fact is, developers are still learning new tricks to push the machine further and further, and have further to push it than other platforms. PS2 games have improved more over the first two years than PSone games did, and they will continue to improve up until the next incarnation of the machine.
Simple fact: Sony's two-year-old hardware not only stands up well against newer platforms, but also has more scope for improvement. It will remain the market leader of this generation. Everyone else if fighting for second place.
And if we assume your comments about PS3 to be true, it doesn't bode well for the competition when we hit the next generation, either!
> when it became clear that the PS2 is most awkward console to devellop for EVER.
Which, of course, is why it got so much more support from all areas than the easier-to-develop-for N64.
What utter crud! This argument ceased to be an issue many, many months ago, after developers completed their first games.
I'm not saying tht soome didn't find it hard. But if developers still find that two years, then quite frankly they may as well give up now.
The fact is, developers are still learning new tricks to push the machine further and further, and have further to push it than other platforms. PS2 games have improved more over the first two years than PSone games did, and they will continue to improve up until the next incarnation of the machine.
Simple fact: Sony's two-year-old hardware not only stands up well against newer platforms, but also has more scope for improvement. It will remain the market leader of this generation. Everyone else if fighting for second place.
And if we assume your comments about PS3 to be true, it doesn't bode well for the competition when we hit the next generation, either!
Dringo wrote:
> 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
"his arguments were simply facts" ?
Must be wrong, then! Can't have people claiming that facts are the truth... let's make up something more convincing! :-)
> 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
"his arguments were simply facts" ?
Must be wrong, then! Can't have people claiming that facts are the truth... let's make up something more convincing! :-)
Nicely put Dringo. I think I might've said this once before:
Sony made their machine based their highest, most advanced technology.
In theory, its power was almost limitless (as Turbonutter has been preaching for the last few years) but when it came to practice, it was so awkward and difficult to use that the potential wasn't even scratched and it was even being out performed by the Dreamcast (for the first 6 months atleast).
Sony have learnt from their mistakes and develloper friendly hardware is one of the main points of their PS3 plans.
But at the end of the day, Sony specialise in advancing technology, so they adavnced technology, but their lack of experience as games designers proved a flaw when it became clear that the PS2 is most awkward console to devellop for EVER.
Microsoft. They're a bit more experienced on the software side and their Xbox interface made it nice and easy for devellopers to convert games designed on a PC.
It shows that MS had not tried a console before.
They simply put the most expensive PC parts in a box and made it a console.
This isn't really a bad thing, but it obviously made the console VERY expensive meaning MS had to sell it at £300 and STILL make a big loss.
And when the sales weren't huge, they had to cut it and make an even BIGGER loss.
Other little things show too. I personally haven't got a problem with the pad but a lot of other people seem to.
And the fact that they had you using the right analogue stick to "look" in Halo shows that they've OBVIOUSLY never played a console FPS before...
Still, as all games are develloped on PC's, MS's set up proved very suitable. They designed their console from a specs and business point of view.
Now Nintendo is the only company out of the 3 who is entirely based around games. A console designed for games designers by games designers, like the Dreamcast was, and that's why it's proved so popular among devellopers like Capcom and Yuji Naka.
That's why the Gamecube doesn't simply work in theory, it works in practice too.
Sony made their machine based their highest, most advanced technology.
In theory, its power was almost limitless (as Turbonutter has been preaching for the last few years) but when it came to practice, it was so awkward and difficult to use that the potential wasn't even scratched and it was even being out performed by the Dreamcast (for the first 6 months atleast).
Sony have learnt from their mistakes and develloper friendly hardware is one of the main points of their PS3 plans.
But at the end of the day, Sony specialise in advancing technology, so they adavnced technology, but their lack of experience as games designers proved a flaw when it became clear that the PS2 is most awkward console to devellop for EVER.
Microsoft. They're a bit more experienced on the software side and their Xbox interface made it nice and easy for devellopers to convert games designed on a PC.
It shows that MS had not tried a console before.
They simply put the most expensive PC parts in a box and made it a console.
This isn't really a bad thing, but it obviously made the console VERY expensive meaning MS had to sell it at £300 and STILL make a big loss.
And when the sales weren't huge, they had to cut it and make an even BIGGER loss.
Other little things show too. I personally haven't got a problem with the pad but a lot of other people seem to.
And the fact that they had you using the right analogue stick to "look" in Halo shows that they've OBVIOUSLY never played a console FPS before...
Still, as all games are develloped on PC's, MS's set up proved very suitable. They designed their console from a specs and business point of view.
Now Nintendo is the only company out of the 3 who is entirely based around games. A console designed for games designers by games designers, like the Dreamcast was, and that's why it's proved so popular among devellopers like Capcom and Yuji Naka.
That's why the Gamecube doesn't simply work in theory, it works in practice too.
Good post Dringo.
The GameCube is a very advanced console, but if the quality of its games isn't up to scratch then it won't really make it big with its DVD features. Fair enough, it's does make you proud having a console that combats piracy and reduces loading times, but at the end of the day it still depends on the quality of the games.
Shigsy may be making games and pads that suit him, but may not meet the needs of the real buyers. Nonetheless, the GameCube has outsmartened both the PS2 and X-box, being one of the technologically advanced consoles on the market. You just need to squint at it and straight away you'll see it's potential.
In my opinion, the "revolutionary" console chart goes like this:
1) PS2 - It's just a thing I have with Sony!
2) GameCube - It's sleek, stylish and has a big future set in the games market.
3) X-box - It may be the most powerful console on the globe, but it doesn't matchup to Sony and Nintendo's technological potential.
Good post, Dring!
:-)
The GameCube is a very advanced console, but if the quality of its games isn't up to scratch then it won't really make it big with its DVD features. Fair enough, it's does make you proud having a console that combats piracy and reduces loading times, but at the end of the day it still depends on the quality of the games.
Shigsy may be making games and pads that suit him, but may not meet the needs of the real buyers. Nonetheless, the GameCube has outsmartened both the PS2 and X-box, being one of the technologically advanced consoles on the market. You just need to squint at it and straight away you'll see it's potential.
In my opinion, the "revolutionary" console chart goes like this:
1) PS2 - It's just a thing I have with Sony!
2) GameCube - It's sleek, stylish and has a big future set in the games market.
3) X-box - It may be the most powerful console on the globe, but it doesn't matchup to Sony and Nintendo's technological potential.
Good post, Dring!
:-)
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: