Knights of the Old Republic II....just finished....

Status
Not open for further replies.
Most people that say GameCube sux, never played it. For me, the clear winner in a Gamecube versus Playstation 2 battle to the death is GameCube, strictly for the reason that GameCube has the Zelda franchise(A dear franchise to my heart) And resident evi 4, which now is released for the PS2. Here's my expirience with the PS2 version, longer loading screens and a control scheme that makes it almost impossible to play on the PS2. Also, the gamecube and Xbox are easier to Multiplayer with in person and have alot more options for games in that department. PS2 seems geared to the loner basement gamer. There's also nothing like destroying a 12 year old kid playing Madden on XBOX live. Nothing leaves you with a better feeling than that.

-Rance-
 
vindicator said:
Most people that say GameCube sux, never played it. For me, the clear winner in a Gamecube versus Playstation 2 battle to the death is GameCube, strictly for the reason that GameCube has the Zelda franchise(A dear franchise to my heart) And resident evi 4, which now is released for the PS2. Here's my expirience with the PS2 version, longer loading screens and a control scheme that makes it almost impossible to play on the PS2. Also, the gamecube and Xbox are easier to Multiplayer with in person and have alot more options for games in that department. PS2 seems geared to the loner basement gamer. There's also nothing like destroying a 12 year old kid playing Madden on XBOX live. Nothing leaves you with a better feeling than that.
Click to expand...

Though I'm a big fan of the GC myself, you skip over far too many strengths of the Playstation series. The PS3 will be backwards compatible, just as the PS2 was - meaning that the console technically has thousands of games available at launch. It also has several franchise games not available to the GC (Metal Gear Solid, the "offical" Final Fantasy series, Front Mission, others I cant think of at the moment) and can play other forms of media as well as online gaming, both of which the GC lacks.

I was severely disappointed in the Gamecube because of the games it put out. There were a number of really great games put to it - Super Smash Bros Melee, F-Zero - but Nintendo seemed to keep shooting it's self in the foot by making it a more "kid friendly" console, as well as other mismanagements which were corrected too late in the system's life. I had high hopes and staunch respect for that little box that sits ontop my PS2 but it got a lot less use than I had expected.
 
Lt.Death100 said:
Me, every time I try to play a console I get frustrated by the simple gameplay and go right back to the PC.:)
Click to expand...

That's a pretty invalid remark. There are lots of great strategy games for consoles and handhelds, and plenty of PC games that are simplistic and lame. No silly across-the-board statement like that is accurate. All it does is speak to your inexperience with different platforms.
 
Yeah... I used to think console games are all dumb and simple, but then I realised that this opinion ceased to be valid about three console generations ago (if it was valid in the first place - Herzog Zwei came before Dune 2, after all). Truth is, these days you're more likely to find dumb and simple games on the PC than on the console - console developers are working for a bigger market, so they can actually risk messing around with the gameplay, which most PC developers would be scared to do, for fear that nobody would buy their game.
 
ChrisReid said:
That's a pretty invalid remark. There are lots of great strategy games for consoles and handhelds, and plenty of PC games that are simplistic and lame. No silly across-the-board statement like that is accurate. All it does is speak to your inexperience with different platforms.
Click to expand...

Isn't Age of Empires showing up for DS too, speaking of strategy games?
 
ChrisReid said:
That's a pretty invalid remark. There are lots of great strategy games for consoles and handhelds, and plenty of PC games that are simplistic and lame. No silly across-the-board statement like that is accurate. All it does is speak to your inexperience with different platforms.
Click to expand...
OK, now that I think about it it is pretty invalid. But you still have to admit that alot of the best stuff is on the PC(Spore, Black and White 2, etc.)
 
Lt.Death100 said:
OK, now that I think about it it is pretty invalid. But you still have to admit that alot of the best stuff is on the PC(Spore, Black and White 2, etc.)
Click to expand...

Listing two random upcoming PC releases is supposed to be your evidence that the best stuff is on PC? Both games might be good, but I'm not at all interested in either one. Simply looking at the total numbers of games made for each system, more of the best stuff is released for non-PC gaming products. No single platform can claim to have even a large plurality of the best games being made today.
 
Black and White 2 isn't upcoming it's released, and I listed those 2 games because no console can do as good a rts as on the PC. And about that more non-pc stuff, honestly I've played those games and I think they're crap. Everybody else can believe what they want.
 
Lt.Death100 said:
no console can do as good a rts as on the PC
Click to expand...

Actual shots from the upcoming LOTR Battle for Middle Earth sequel on the Xbox 360:




 
Last edited by a moderator:
Another point worth mentioning is that just because a console cannot create an RTS experience as good as a computer can doesn't mean it isn't a complete writeoff as a gaming platform.
 
It's funny that the modern crowd denigrates consoles complaining about RTSes -- back in my day the holier than thou argument was that RTS games were pop trash compared to turn based ones.

Consoles vs. PCs in 2006 is an odd argument because it's completely invalid today... but I really think that it does have a legitimate origin. Fifteen years ago we pseudointellectual video gamers had some reason to look askance at consoles -- we were playing complex adventure games and the console people were playing Street Fighter.

It's not true anymore: PC games trend stupider to try and pick up the massive audience required to sell a game today and console games have a built in user base and increased level of technology that lets them both reach a technologicaly parity with and experiment in terms of gameplay more than the PC does.

Choosing between the PC and the Playstation version of 'Gun' isn't the same thing as choosing between Space Quest 2 and Super Mario Brothers -- I don't see how you can build an argument around this anymore.

All that said, your argument about RTS isn't even accurate. Quarto already mentioned that consoles *invented* the genre... and they've also done a perfectly passable job of following PCs. Consoles did a fine job porting various Dunes and Command and Conquers over the years... and that was before the aforementioned tech parity that exists today (heck, I'll argue that the Genesis port of Dune 2, Battle for Arrakis, requires more thinking than its dad, the popular father of the genre, did).
 
I was afraid you were going to say something like that. Personally, I think the Halo series is great, but it is certainly not a representative for all the games available now and in the past.
 
Lt.Death100 said:
One more point is that the gamepad doesn't have nearly as many buttons as a PC keyboard which limits the controls you can use.
Click to expand...
I don't think that point has any substance to it. Yes, gamepads do not have as many buttons as a keyboard does, but it does not limit your control in the game. You say you've played Halo 2. How did the gamepad limit your control in that game or any other?

Bandit LOAF said:
Mmkay, now find a modern game that has a text parser.
Click to expand...
I think I am too young for this comment.
 
d3r3k said:
I don't think that point has any substance to it. Yes, gamepads do not have as many buttons as a keyboard does, but it does not limit your control in the game.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and there's no reason why they couldn't do an original text-input Space Quest or something on a console. The Dreamcast and PS2 both had official first-party boards. The PS2 and XBox 360 both have USB ports right in the front and games take advantage of standard USB keyboard input. Other consoles can do this with an adapter.
 
To be perfectly fair about LOTR BFME2 Chris, it is also coming out for PC.

My opinion on consoles vs PC, is just that some genres as a whole may be better on one due to control issues, (strategy, FPS's for me Halo2 is just way too hard for me to play without a mouse) but the other will win in different genres.

Strategy games as a whole, you don't see a lot of Real time ones on consoles cuz of the controls, but that doesn't mean some people find a game pad easier to use than a mouse. They've done it in the past but it's just harder to easily control. If it's Turn Based, it really doesn't matter it would seem, coming down to personal preference.

If we're talking platformers, sports or fighting games, the advantage has to go to the Consoles. Not that it isn't possible to get a game pad for your pc, but you don't see a lot of these games for PC as opposed to the consoles.

I myself don't own a console. I used to go crazy and get all the new ones but the newest I have is the N64...where I have the Original Command and Conquers and Starcraft on it, but also have those on PC. Though looking at some of the new games, like Kill Zone, I wish I had a console sometimes. *shrug* It's a preference thing these days as more and more PC games are ported for consoles too. A few years ago I would have said Consoles were on the way out, now they're definetely here to stay it seems.

Also to kinda get back into the Star Wars gaming thing. Check out empireatwar.com. It just looks like it's going to amazing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top