The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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 thought it was commonly known that the GC had a higher polygon count than the PS2?
Maverick42 wrote:
> The GameCube could easily handle the Getaway because it technically
> outstrips the PS2 by a long way.
Two possible reasons it couldn't:
1. Disc capacity. As with GTA3 and GTA Vice City, the game is streaed from disc. As there is something like 80 sq. km. of London photographed, I suspect there is a lot of data - possibly so much so that even with compression, it wouldn't fit onto one GC disc. Such games won't work simply because disc-swapping would ruin the game.
2. Polygon count. Disc problems aside, chances are London wouldn't be as detailed because of the low polygon count. While graphics do not make a game, there are some types of game that certainly benefit from the number of polys a machine can throw around. GT3, for example, while it would be possible to do on Gamecube, would not look anywhere near as good, simply because of the number of polygons involved; GC can push around 12m max, while GT3 pushes around 20m. (Yes, I know that GT3 always gets thrown up in these discussions, but that is just testament to the quality of the game.)
While I do like the GC, disc capacity and low poly count are what I believe to be its two most significant flaws.
> The GameCube could easily handle the Getaway because it technically
> outstrips the PS2 by a long way.
Two possible reasons it couldn't:
1. Disc capacity. As with GTA3 and GTA Vice City, the game is streaed from disc. As there is something like 80 sq. km. of London photographed, I suspect there is a lot of data - possibly so much so that even with compression, it wouldn't fit onto one GC disc. Such games won't work simply because disc-swapping would ruin the game.
2. Polygon count. Disc problems aside, chances are London wouldn't be as detailed because of the low polygon count. While graphics do not make a game, there are some types of game that certainly benefit from the number of polys a machine can throw around. GT3, for example, while it would be possible to do on Gamecube, would not look anywhere near as good, simply because of the number of polygons involved; GC can push around 12m max, while GT3 pushes around 20m. (Yes, I know that GT3 always gets thrown up in these discussions, but that is just testament to the quality of the game.)
While I do like the GC, disc capacity and low poly count are what I believe to be its two most significant flaws.
Dave RJR wrote:
> But 1.5Gb compared with 4.25 or 8.5Gb (single sided dvd only), must be
> a limiting factor when creating code. What about the next 2 years.
> Games will get bigger, and will use that space. Nintendo developers
> will struggle because of the 1.5Gb limit. What about the GC Resi - 2
> discs i thought.....
Look, if they managed to fit Zelda into 32mb, 1.5Gb is more than they'll ever need.
Disks only get filled up by FMV and Music.
Resident Evil has lots of this.
If Capcom had wanted to, they COULD have spent the time to compress these features and cram it onto one disk, but they found it easier to just put a second disk in.
Now is there anything wrong with that?
> But 1.5Gb compared with 4.25 or 8.5Gb (single sided dvd only), must be
> a limiting factor when creating code. What about the next 2 years.
> Games will get bigger, and will use that space. Nintendo developers
> will struggle because of the 1.5Gb limit. What about the GC Resi - 2
> discs i thought.....
Look, if they managed to fit Zelda into 32mb, 1.5Gb is more than they'll ever need.
Disks only get filled up by FMV and Music.
Resident Evil has lots of this.
If Capcom had wanted to, they COULD have spent the time to compress these features and cram it onto one disk, but they found it easier to just put a second disk in.
Now is there anything wrong with that?
Dave RJR wrote:
> PS2 does have some kiddie’s titles, like Jack & Daxter.
That's a quality title, I think you should check your definitions of kiddy games.
> There are some others too. GC has The mansion, and the Super Monkey Ball
> thing, and many more. But the GC does have a wider selection than N64,
Luigi's Mansion is for everybody, and I'd like to see a 10 year old or under complete Super Monkey Ball.
> but still not as much variety as PS2.
I think the two year head start had something to do with that.
> PS2 does have some kiddie’s titles, like Jack & Daxter.
That's a quality title, I think you should check your definitions of kiddy games.
> There are some others too. GC has The mansion, and the Super Monkey Ball
> thing, and many more. But the GC does have a wider selection than N64,
Luigi's Mansion is for everybody, and I'd like to see a 10 year old or under complete Super Monkey Ball.
> but still not as much variety as PS2.
I think the two year head start had something to do with that.
Dave RJR wrote:
> PS2 does have some kiddie’s titles, like Jack & Daxter. There are
> some others too. GC has The mansion, and the Super Monkey Ball thing,
> and many more. But the GC does have a wider selection than N64, but
> still not as much variety as PS2.
None of those games you mentioned are for kids you fool. Sure they looks slightly childish but their play is clever enough for adults... Tweenies, Teletubbies, Scooby Doo, Rugrats etc... are kids games... and Nintendo have only a handful compared to Sony's collection.
> PS2 does have some kiddie’s titles, like Jack & Daxter. There are
> some others too. GC has The mansion, and the Super Monkey Ball thing,
> and many more. But the GC does have a wider selection than N64, but
> still not as much variety as PS2.
None of those games you mentioned are for kids you fool. Sure they looks slightly childish but their play is clever enough for adults... Tweenies, Teletubbies, Scooby Doo, Rugrats etc... are kids games... and Nintendo have only a handful compared to Sony's collection.
PS2 does have some kiddie’s titles, like Jack & Daxter. There are some others too. GC has The mansion, and the Super Monkey Ball thing, and many more. But the GC does have a wider selection than N64, but still not as much variety as PS2.
The GameCube could easily handle the Getaway because it technically outstrips the PS2 by a long way. Oh, and how come you didn't mention any kiddy titles? Because the GameCube doesn't have any.
Ok I'll stick my kiddie titles up my ar$e, but not Mario, Zelda or Pokemon as they're not. Meanwhile why not stick your crap titles up your ar$e... hang on... not got a big enough ar$e?
Meka Dragon wrote:
> Only Agent Under Fire and Spiderman also appear on the PS2, and
> Spiderman was released at the same time on all formats.
And agent under fire has the added bonus of a 4 player mutli player game with bots, sure not as much as they could have made but better than an extra cheat or something like that.
> Only Agent Under Fire and Spiderman also appear on the PS2, and
> Spiderman was released at the same time on all formats.
And agent under fire has the added bonus of a 4 player mutli player game with bots, sure not as much as they could have made but better than an extra cheat or something like that.
About the size of games and every thing, i find its the type of game and how they design it makes a diffrence.
What i mean is that if they made a game and it revolved around 5 main levels but each level had 10 tasks, and you cant do the next one until you do the first one on level 2 kinda thing, then it would be smaller than a game with 20 levels but would last longer as it would have 50 tasks.
Im trying my best to put down on paper, err screen if you want, but it isnt as easy as i first thought.
What i mean is that if they made a game and it revolved around 5 main levels but each level had 10 tasks, and you cant do the next one until you do the first one on level 2 kinda thing, then it would be smaller than a game with 20 levels but would last longer as it would have 50 tasks.
Im trying my best to put down on paper, err screen if you want, but it isnt as easy as i first thought.
Page: