Ok, I just bought a PS2. I love it, think it’s great-yada yada. Anyway I’ve been hearing about the Xbox and the Gamecube, the things I’ve been hearing seem to be that both those systems will wipe the floor with the PS2. I’m wondering what others have heard and what opinion everyone has.
The X-Box will be more powerful than the PS2,but the Gamecube will be about the same as the PS2. Check out some gaming mags for more information.
It’s expected that Gamecube will survive primarily on Mario, Zelda, and Metroid. Xbox is more powerful than either system, and also easier to program for. It will also be including a HDD (Which will be added to the PS2 eventually as well).
Personally, I am not at all impressed with PS2 games. The graphics are barely better than the original PS, and there have not been any games that have really captivated my attention.
Also, the DVD capabilities are well below par of current commercial systems and computer DVD drives. However, at least it is cheaper than current TV DVD units.
Oh Bullshit. The PS2 DVD capabilities are at least on par with any other low to mid-range home standalone DVD player. Every review I have read has stated this (Sony themselves state this and they make decent home A/V equipment) and with my own eyes there’s no difference between it and my standalone DVDI sold (A 1 year old Toshiba). Maybe, maybe on a HD TV you could see a difference between it and a $600 DVD player, but the average schmoe with an average TV won’t.
Graphics barely better than a PS1? Yeah… sure. :rolleyes:
I will say that up until recently they were barely equal to a Dreamcast but they are now surpassing it.
Both X-Box and GC are to be more powerful than the PS2. It gets to a point that the machine where the developer support lies will declare the winner. 1 month ago I would have said X-Box without hesitation but I am not so sure anymore. I don’t think it will be Gamecube.
Actually, I just read the Microsoft may possibly be buying SEGA. If they do, X-Box will definetly have another boost to help be on top.
bernse, I have personally witnessed low performance levels of the PS2’s DVD unit. I have experienced skipping of sound and/or video, which is the biggest problem I had with it. I don’t know what you think, but I think any DVD player that skips at all is not worth it. If this DVD unit was sold all by itself, no one would buy it. It is only nifty because it gives the PS2 just one more use for it.
As for the graphics: They are hardly spectacular. PS2 was touted as having cutting edge graphics for the future. The majority of PS2 games released so far are half-assed, heavily pixelated, badly programmed with poor gameplay and chunky polygonal objects. Pretty sad graphical performance so far in my opinion.
I already have a computer, why should I get an X-Box? If I want to play PC games, I’ll play them on my PC.
I have to go with Gamecube because of all the great first-party games that I will not be able to get anywhere else, Zelda, Mario, etc… Also, the Cube is going to have way more third party support than the N-64 ever did. Not to mention all the amazing second party games that won’t be available on any system but the cube. Sega will also be supporting the Cube.
As far as power goes, the Cube and X-box are pretty even. If the X-box is more powerful it is not by much.
Wrong-O. The 'Box has a much faster processor (almost twice as fast?), more RAM, more HD space. The biggest advantage the Gamecube has is that it will be less expensive than either the PS2 or the X-Box (I seriously doubt Sony can get the price of the PS2 significantly below $299 by the time the others are released). Additionally, since the Gamecube will be using its own personal format of game disks (smaller versions of DVD disks that have about the same amount of space), the drive should be more reliable and faster.
However, this specialized type of disk will make it impossible for the 'Cube to play DVD’s. The X-Box can play DVD’s, but you need to buy a special controller to do so (oh, horrors, an extra $30 expenditure).
The bottom line is that the PS2 is good, but the fact remains that it was released a year earlier than the other systems. There’s no way it can match up with raw power. And, to date, the PS2 games haven’t been able to utilize the full graphical capabilities of the system, which explains why the graphics haven’t appeared that great.
Finally, the whole “X-Box will only play PC games” is utter baloney. Spend a few seconds to check the roster of projected games for the 'Box before you make such a blatantly ignorant statement. Silent Hill 2, anyone?
My 10 year old has been studying the results of E3 in LA - a conference held recently that compared the entertainment systems coming on the market(Sony’s PS2, Microsoft’s debut, XBox, and Nintendo’s Gamecube & Gamecube Combo). It depends on what you want and what you play. Nintendo boasts “it’s all about the games” promising titles: Metroid Prime, Eternal Darkness,Phantasy Star Online. Microsoft games have totally cool graphics, and Sony games showcases alot of Japanese animé. I have no Idea how any of it plays, but I’m signing up for the Gamecube that’s due out on Nov. 5th (My kid’s recommendation). Clue me in - the only other systems I’ve used are PS1 and Atari 2600! (Adventure rules!!)
The statistics that Microsoft put out about the X-Box’s power are grossly exaggerated. The polygon numbers that they put out are laboratory figures with no effects textures or anything running. These numbers will NEVER be able to occur in an actual game. Nintendo, on the other hand released actual achievable polygon numbers with effects and textures included. Check out screenshots and polygon numbers for Star Wars Rogue Leader: Rogue Squadron II for a jaw-dropping demo of the power of the Gamecube.
You can’t compare the processors and memory of the Cube and X-box like that, by the way. They are competely different types. It’s apples and oranges. Like itel processors and apple processors, the clock speed of the chips is irrelevent when trying to compare actual speeds.
The architecture of the two systems is completely different also. The x-box is put together just like a pc, whereas the Cube is totally different, and more efficient.
So don’t give me this dismissive “wrongo” crap, bub. It’s not cut and dry.
By the way, the Gamecube was the favorite at E3 with PS2 coming in second and the X-box a distant third.
The gamecube also has the best controller. All reports I heard were that it was the most comfortable controller ever, it just melts into your hands. Unlike the x-box controller, which, as I’ve heard is cumbersome and unwieldy.
Wrongo. The Xbox is not built like a PC at all. It may use hardware similar to PC hardware, but not quite.
This site compares the hardware performances of each system. You find your evidence that the Xbox’s numbers are grossly exaggerated.
As for the controllers - I’ve got to try them both. And you know what? The PS2 controller was definitely the most cumbersome of the three. The Gamecube is comfortable, but some of the controls are in awkward positions (Not too bad, and I do agree it is the best layed out). However, the Xbox controller is VERY nicely designed, using input from gamers.
I kinda look at it this way:
PS2:Made for the die hard PS gamers with better graphics, it has the same controller for christ sake. The games are going to get better as the manufactures get a better handle on the system.
Game Cube:Better graphics, better controller but still hampered by the fact it is Nintendo. Don't get me wrong I loved the N64, but the games always seemed to be made for people under the age of 15.
X-box:Better graphics of the group, but I'm a little worried about the support for the system. If you don't like PS/PS2 go for the X-box.
Nobody is wrong, these systems will be amazing, I say buy them all or check them out, and buy the one that suits your needs the best. The die hard gamers will say their game system is better than yours. Just smile, nod your head, and walk away you are not going to be able to convince them otherwise.
The only time I had a DVD ever skip a badly scratched disk. Other than that, never. Maybe the unit you saw was damaged?
I will agree the majority of games that have been released haven’t pushed the system (I would say GT3 is the first real one) I would hardly call the others a “heavily pixilated – chunky polygons”. I am a pretty die hard gamer. I own virtually every console from an Intellivision to a PS2 and a pretty top end PC (1.2Ghz/384MB RAM/V5500 soon to be a GF3). I am very impressed by what a PS2 box can do for its price.
Perhaps you can give me a few examples of those pixilated messes you elude to?
For those that want a Gamecube and still want to play DVD and cds,Nintendo and Panasonic are going to release a Gamecube/DVD player in one. No word on the price, but it will be released soon after the GC. Also,Nintendo has announced that it will be making a wireless controler.
And since Sega went software only, now Sega games will be availible on GC. Crazy Taxi has been confirmed as well as other cool title like Resident Evil: Zero(A prequil to the first),Universal Studios: Theme Park Creator(think Roller coaster tycoon),and many others. If I had to choose,I would take GC.
A passing programmer wanders by, and overhears
Picking himself off the floor, he feels he must ask:
I take it you don’t spend your working day pissing about with Microsoft libraries and documentation, then?
“Xbox is more powerful than either system, and also easier to program for.”
Yeah, do you want to explain to me how 65,000 Microsoft people who can’t make a stable operating system are gonna make a stable game system?
By the time the Xbox comes out you’ll be able to make your own computer like it with twice as much power for half as much money. Also, there’s gonna be another game system on the horizon at that time that is gonna have 10x as much power as the Xbox.
Frankly, I’m just gonna by the system that has the games I like with the characters I like.
You can always get better graphics but you can’t get more depth in the games, so I don’t think the airheads there at MS are going to come up with much depth but we see.
XBox is from Microsoft. That’s enough of an argument to convince me that the performance claims are bogus, the system is buggy, and the games will empathise style over substance. The only XBox game that’s impressed me so far is Halo, and I attribute that largely because the developer (Bungie) was originally a Mac developer before they were assimilated.
As for the other two, I’m still having a hard time taking Gamecube seriously. I have nothing against cute games, but I worry that – as with the Nintendo 64 – the Gamecube will be oversaturated with them to the exclusion of anything else. Of the titles shown so far, only Metroid and Wave Race stand out, but they’re not enough to get me excited.
So, yeah, while it’s not an easy victory for Sony, if I had to pick one machine to get, it’d be the PlayStation 2. There are already some good titles out for it (Midnight Club Street Racing and Twisted Metal Black come to mind), and there are a lot of titles on the horizon that really pique my interest – I’d gladly get a PS2 just to play WipeOut: Fusion and Metal Gear Solid 2, for instance. And while Sega is now making software for all of the consoles, I note that their most popular titles appear to be PS2 exclusives (Crazy Taxi, Shenmue, and Virtual Fighter 4).
Of course, first I have to have the budget to buy one ofthese new systems first…
Well, I am not a programmer so I can’t say how easy it is going to be to program.
BUT…
I don’t think its unreasable to think that since the hardware for the X-Box console is “static”, I would think that should go a long way to help make it simpler to develop a far more stable “OS”.
I will once again put in my little disclaimer though that I have never had problems with Win98SE stability.
You know, no matter how many times I’ve seen impressive graphics in a PS2 commercial, I’m always astounded at how crude they look when I sit down and actually play one in the store. I can’t help but think “Is this the system that helped kill the Dreamcast? How?!” Of course, the only games I’ve actually seen running are Gran Turismo 3 and that stupid snowboarding game. At the best, it’s only a small, incremental improvement over the DC. But then again, if the system lives, I assume the graphics will improve.
I’ve heard impressive things about both the Gamecube and the XBox–whatever happens it’ll be interesting to watch Nintendo and MS slug it out. Both have impressive stats and a great software line-up.
This is quite possible. This was the only unit that I’ve tried DVD’s on, so I may be wrong here. However, it was brand new out of the box. Maybe a flaw in a certain shipment?
I don’t know the title, but it was a racing game. It was horribly rendered, pixelated, and had a heavy fog. However, I’m assuming this is the worst game out there, because this is the game specifically I was thinking of when I wrote about how the graphics were hardly better than PS1. This is most likely due to game developer laziness.
Gary, I’ve programmed with C++. A little difficult, maybe. However, every article I’ve read is that the PS2 is by far more difficult to program for than either Gamecube or Xbox. I can look up cites, if you want.
Windows XP.
And where do you get these numbers?
MS isn’t making all the games.
:rolleyes:
Biased opinions a fact they do not make.