The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
I for one can't wait to see if the Getaway can come up with the kind of gameplay and graphics that it reputes to have. Having seen the screenshots signs are very encouraging.
The thing is a friend of mine asked if there was going to be a GC version. A Gamecube disc would not be able to store 1 square mile of London let alone 20miles, so sorry mate you stick to your kiddie titles like Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon.
The thing is a friend of mine asked if there was going to be a GC version. A Gamecube disc would not be able to store 1 square mile of London let alone 20miles, so sorry mate you stick to your kiddie titles like Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon.
Page:
I find games on the PS2, and 1, are mostly above average, these are games which you wil play and enjoy and then never reach the end becuase of the repetitiveness which they use throught out the game, as it is quite good to begin with.
Then other games are no good at all, with bad graphics and gameplay.
With a few AAA titles, MGS was good but after completing it the 3rd time it is so boring becuase of the way you have to follow the game instead of the game following you, god im losing my mind.
I find this the same with xbox only a few more AAA games and less games altogether.
With the GC i find that games are usally very good or above average.
The thing is most games on the PS2, and some ports of them, feel rushed and like other games in that genre, alomst like the developer just used the rule book on making games on that genre.
Then other games are no good at all, with bad graphics and gameplay.
With a few AAA titles, MGS was good but after completing it the 3rd time it is so boring becuase of the way you have to follow the game instead of the game following you, god im losing my mind.
I find this the same with xbox only a few more AAA games and less games altogether.
With the GC i find that games are usally very good or above average.
The thing is most games on the PS2, and some ports of them, feel rushed and like other games in that genre, alomst like the developer just used the rule book on making games on that genre.
I struggle to think of one
Yet another crap post from Dave RJR.
What do you mean the Xbox and GC don't have many original titles? The xbox and GC has by far more original titles than the PS2 will ever have.
I struggle to think of 5 games i'd want from the PS2 games libary.
What do you mean the Xbox and GC don't have many original titles? The xbox and GC has by far more original titles than the PS2 will ever have.
I struggle to think of 5 games i'd want from the PS2 games libary.
DaveRJR, you seem to miss the fact that th GC has loads of original, exclusive titles. Far more than the PS2. The games on the PS2 aren't better by any means, there is just a larger choice of mediaocre games, so people think that it's great. There's a difference between quality and quantity.
Hmmm...I'm struggling to actually think of five games on the PS2 I'd want to play. Looks like another post of crap from Dave.
Asher D wrote:
> The games win console wars, not fancy specs.
So the XBox is way behind and could remain there then. If the games count more than power, won't matter how much so called power advantage it has, the xbox still won't get anywhere. With the normal few exceptions on GC and XBox (Halo, DOOM 3 when it arrives, etc), the most popular games are PS2 or multi format. Even multi format stuff usually (but not always) launches first on PS2. If these games were not any good, why do people keep buying them, etc. Anyways, I never have been totally convinced of the XBox advantage. GC, PS2, and XBox all have different bits and CPU's. A Pentium is nothing like the one inside the PS2 or GC, etc, so you can't say that just because the XBox is 733Mhz it has to be loads and loads better/faster.
> The games win console wars, not fancy specs.
So the XBox is way behind and could remain there then. If the games count more than power, won't matter how much so called power advantage it has, the xbox still won't get anywhere. With the normal few exceptions on GC and XBox (Halo, DOOM 3 when it arrives, etc), the most popular games are PS2 or multi format. Even multi format stuff usually (but not always) launches first on PS2. If these games were not any good, why do people keep buying them, etc. Anyways, I never have been totally convinced of the XBox advantage. GC, PS2, and XBox all have different bits and CPU's. A Pentium is nothing like the one inside the PS2 or GC, etc, so you can't say that just because the XBox is 733Mhz it has to be loads and loads better/faster.
I swear i heard from somewhere that one developer pushed the GC's hard ware between 15 million - 20 million.
This topic has been going on for too long.
This topic has been going on for too long.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> From the Nintendo website:
>
> Real-world polygon - 6 million to 12 million polygons/second (Peak)
> (Assuming actual game conditions with complex models, fully textured,
> fully lit, etc.)
>
>
> So that's 12 million tops with all FX turned on. 8 million lower than
> PS2, and - as they say - what games ever use raw polygons?
It was an estimate.
Some devellopers have managed to push it up 15 million in the early stages and think they can push it further.
> 20 million is quoted from an interview with Kazunori Yamauchi in an
> early issue of PSM2 magazine. Who should know better than the games
> developer?
An early issue.
Again, a possible estimate.
I'm not going to get into an argument because I can't prove that they're wrong, but every website/report seems to say something different.
> From the Nintendo website:
>
> Real-world polygon - 6 million to 12 million polygons/second (Peak)
> (Assuming actual game conditions with complex models, fully textured,
> fully lit, etc.)
>
>
> So that's 12 million tops with all FX turned on. 8 million lower than
> PS2, and - as they say - what games ever use raw polygons?
It was an estimate.
Some devellopers have managed to push it up 15 million in the early stages and think they can push it further.
> 20 million is quoted from an interview with Kazunori Yamauchi in an
> early issue of PSM2 magazine. Who should know better than the games
> developer?
An early issue.
Again, a possible estimate.
I'm not going to get into an argument because I can't prove that they're wrong, but every website/report seems to say something different.
> Asher D wrote:
> The games win console wars, not fancy specs.
>
Nasty Neighbour replied:
> No i wasnt saying it does
I posted randomly, do you actually think any un-noobs are actually reading any of this?
> The games win console wars, not fancy specs.
>
Nasty Neighbour replied:
> No i wasnt saying it does
I posted randomly, do you actually think any un-noobs are actually reading any of this?
why are so many people using GTA3 as a benchmark for graphics quality?
The graphics are actually quite average, though fairly impressive once pumped through a decent 3d accelerator for the PC.
Certainly not the best I've seen on any of the current generation of consoles.
Nevermind the fact that it is also lacking in gameplay in my opinion. I just wish you'd all get it out of your systems.
The graphics are actually quite average, though fairly impressive once pumped through a decent 3d accelerator for the PC.
Certainly not the best I've seen on any of the current generation of consoles.
Nevermind the fact that it is also lacking in gameplay in my opinion. I just wish you'd all get it out of your systems.
Page: