GCN vs Xbox

[TheGame]

Based off of what has been released in the past, what is going to be released this year, and off of hardware value(which is a better buy), which console do you think is simply better?

I'm not really looking to stir up a debate, I just would like to see what you think.

I couldn't really take a side on this... I'm leaning toward Xbox, but both consoles are arguably better than each-other imo.

[GameMaster]

Based off what has happened, X-Box.

Based on what is to happen, Gamecube.

I considered Gamecube's first year warm-ups.

[Jonbo298]

I agree with GameMaster. Last year was XBox's year. I think this year will be Gamecube's time. Great games are already out, with a lot more to follow.

[ominub]

i will have to say gamecube

[Jason1]

GameCube. What does X-Box have on the Horizion? Halo 2?

...

So many great games will be coming out this year for the Cube. Sadly, the XBox will still beat the Cube in sales because people are stupid.

[TheGame]

Originally posted by Jason1
GameCube. What does X-Box have on the Horizion? Halo 2?

...

lol... it's funny hearing people who have no idea what they are talking about.

So many great games will be coming out this year for the Cube. Sadly, the XBox will still beat the Cube in sales because people are stupid.

What makes them stupid?

(Note: The only reason I'm picking on you is you are pretty much the only one "bashing" Xbox w/o giving even half a reason)

[Crono]

Originally posted by Jason1
GameCube. What does X-Box have on the Horizion? Halo 2?

...

So many great games will be coming out this year for the Cube. Sadly, the XBox will still beat the Cube in sales because people are stupid.

Yeah, Halo 2 is Xbox's only game for 2003. :rolleyes: mmhmm...

How are people stupid? Is it their fault that Nintendo has only released a handful of GOOD GCN games (MP, AC and SSBM are the only ones so far IMO, everythign else sucked)? Is it their fault that Xbox gets advertised a lot more? Is it their fault GCN has a crappy online outlook? Is it their fault that overall Xbox is selling better, therefore the "good word" gets spread around faster for Xbox? If I was a casual gamer, Xbox would be a much better pick for me.

And as for your "so many" remark, I can only think of a few:
Wind Waker
Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles
Harvest Moon
Tales Of Phantasia
Soul Calibur 2
1080 if they can pull it off
... and everything else is some crappy game or some other port. Don't expect AC2 or the next Mario game to ocme out this year, because if they do, they will most likely be rushed games that will turn out disappointing.

[Joeiss]

Originally posted by Jason1
So many great games will be coming out this year for the Cube. Sadly, the XBox will still beat the Cube in sales because people are stupid.


You are such an idiot. LOL.






I would say Xbox because of some of the sweet Online games they got coming out.

[TheGame]

Originally posted by Joeiss
I would say Xbox because of some of the sweet Online games they got coming out.

Yeah, like NFL 2k4, NBA 2k4, NCAA 2k4, and NHL 2k4

jk ;)

[Joeiss]

What a comedian.

[DeathsHand]

I havn't played any Xbox games or anything, but based on games I WANT and games I want that aren't out yet, Xbox has NGC beat in both categories... *shrugs*

But I own an NGC and can't afford an Xbox... oh well... I couldn't miss out on Zelda anyways :p

[TheGame]

Originally posted by Joeiss
What a comedian.

Yeah I know :p

[Perfect Stu]

XBox urinates on Gamecube...

Xbox has the most impressive 2003/early 2004 lineup of any system on the market

-Halo 2
-Perfect Dark 2
-Fable
-Starcraft: Ghost
-B.C.
-Star Wars: KOTOR
-Deus Ex 2

What does Gamecube have to compete with that?

Zelda: WW? I'll give you that one...
FF:CC? Quite possibly...
Animal Crossing 2? To some people, maybe...but not for me
Mario Golf/Tennis? .....:unsure: Fun games, they may be...but nothing killer

[BlueFire]

Isn't StarCraft Ghost also going on GC? I'm just wondering.

[fingersman]

Yes it is.

Why don't you guys wait until after E3 or later down this year to make this comparsion??

Oh yeah BTW..............GC will own Xbox this year. Once Mario Kart Online is released this year. :p j/k heh heh heh heh.


But on a serious note here's a list of exclusive/good games that are coming for XBox
This list is based off of my opinion. The exclusive games will have an asterix next to them

Malice *

Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Tides of War ( if it improves on the PC version it'll be good)

Dino Crisis 3

B.C.

Star Wars: KOTOR

Deus Ex 2


Madden NFL 2004 ( don't play sports games but I know sports fans are waiting for this one)

Soul Calibur II

StarCraft: Ghost ( woot woot)

Halo 2 ( everyone's favourite game)*

Dead or Alive: Code Cronus*

Fable ( hopefully it will come out this year)*

Kameo: Elements of Power ( One of Rare's games)*

Suikoden III ( I saw this on a release list )

Ninja Gaiden ( this a game I want on GC damn)*

Perfect Dark ( most likely this will be online and own all)*

And I'm sure they are a few other greart games that will be announced for this year


now for the GC

Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker *( Nintendo's first big game)

1080° Avalanche* ( might be good if they fix that control that everyone is complaining about)

Splinter Cell

F-Zero GC* ( I'm not particularly hyped about this game but some people are)

Product Number 3 (P.N.03) ( not to sure if it will remain exclusive ...it could follow the way of Splinter Cell)

Soul Calibur II

Madden NFL 2004 ( providing EA doesn't cancel all the support)

Viewtiful Joe ( meh feel free to tell me to take this off)

Harvest Moon: A Wonderful Life ( this is one of the games I'm checking for so there)

StarCraft: Ghost

Dead Phoenix

Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles* ( this one should be good)

Mario Kart for GameCube* ( woot woot woot woot)

Star Fox Armada* ( woot woot)

Tales of Phantasia RPG ( another rpg Nintendo needs em)

Too Human

As you can see each system has a decent amount of great /exclusive games coming out this year but I guess people will pick one console over the next due to their preferences and in some cases.....their bais

[Jason1]

Originally posted by Perfect Stu
XBox urinates on Gamecube...

Xbox has the most impressive 2003/early 2004 lineup of any system on the market

-Halo 2
-Perfect Dark 2
-Fable
-Starcraft: Ghost
-B.C.
-Star Wars: KOTOR
-Deus Ex 2

What does Gamecube have to compete with that?

Zelda: WW? I'll give you that one...
FF:CC? Quite possibly...
Animal Crossing 2? To some people, maybe...but not for me
Mario Golf/Tennis? .....:unsure: Fun games, they may be...but nothing killer

Say whatever you want about me being an Idiot, but here is my honest opinoin, bash if you want.

Out of those games on the X-Box, the only ones that intrest me at all are Halo 2 and Perfect Dark 2. But knowing Rare, we wont see Perfect Dark 2 in early 2004. I really dont feel like going through my list of wanted Cube titles. There area lot, way more than 2. So IMO the Cube beats the XBox this year. But it wont sales wise, because the Cube's 3rd party titles dont sell, because all we Cube fans really want are Nintendo's own games. Im not much different, most of my games are Cube exclusive. But why should Nintendo be punished for making the best first party games? Thats exactly whats happening.

[Joeiss]

How are they being punished for making "the best" third party games? You Cube owner's are the people who are not buying third party games.

[DarkMaster]

Originally posted by Jason1
because all we Cube fans really want are Nintendo's own games. Im not much different, most of my games are Cube exclusive. But why should Nintendo be punished for making the best first party games? Thats exactly whats happening.
more the reason why Nintendo should leave video game console manufacturing and become a third, or even second, party developer for some other system. Their games are good now, imagine if 100% of their focus was on game development? surely the results would be grand and hence forth would not be a morbid decision.

they could become the greatest game developers in the world. It's just like Sega, the best games for most of the Sega consoles were first party developed. they lost money manufacturing consoles, so they became a company which only developed games, and right now they are producing some very fine titles.

I dont want to see Nintendo go down in a fit of stubborness "The day Nintendo stops producing video game consoles is the day they leave the video game industry" that quote does not sit well with me.

[fingersman]

As usual no one is paying attention to my lovely post that took me a couple of minutes to compose. :(

[Dyne]

Having both the Xbox and the Gamecube, and loving both of them to death, what I find myself playing more is the Gamecube. I don't know, Gamecube has that undefinable click you usually find in great products. The whole package is.. compact, yet delivers quality. And, games like Super Monkey Ball 2 or Metroid Prime just yearn to be played again and again. Xbox just does not have the complete package of what I'm looking for in games, but still has some excellent titles that I know are worth playing.

[Bond]

Originally posted by Jason1
Say whatever you want about me being an Idiot, but here is my honest opinoin, bash if you want.

Out of those games on the X-Box, the only ones that intrest me at all are Halo 2 and Perfect Dark 2. But knowing Rare, we wont see Perfect Dark 2 in early 2004. I really dont feel like going through my list of wanted Cube titles. There area lot, way more than 2. So IMO the Cube beats the XBox this year. But it wont sales wise, because the Cube's 3rd party titles dont sell, because all we Cube fans really want are Nintendo's own games. Im not much different, most of my games are Cube exclusive. But why should Nintendo be punished for making the best first party games? Thats exactly whats happening.
Xbox!!! Xbox!!! Xbox!!!

THE NAME OF THE CONSOLE IS Xbox!!!!

It is great that Nintendo consoles always have good 1st party support. Which makes for great games made by Nintendo. But if Nintendo consoles continue to only have good games from Nintendo, and those are the only games that sell, they will never be the #1 console in the market.

I am actually playing my GameCube more currently, because of SoA:L. But I have put more hours into my Xbox overall.

[BreakABone]

Originally posted by DarkMaster
more the reason why Nintendo should leave video game console manufacturing and become a third, or even second, party developer for some other system. Their games are good now, imagine if 100% of their focus was on game development? surely the results would be grand and hence forth would not be a morbid decision.

they could become the greatest game developers in the world. It's just like Sega, the best games for most of the Sega consoles were first party developed. they lost money manufacturing consoles, so they became a company which only developed games, and right now they are producing some very fine titles.

I dont want to see Nintendo go down in a fit of stubborness "The day Nintendo stops producing video game consoles is the day they leave the video game industry" that quote does not sit well with me.

Well as far as I could tell Nintendo has always enjoyed the hardware business because they get to tailor make the console to their liking, I mean how often is it that you find a 1st or 2nd party game on Nintendo that doesn't seem fit for it. As much as folks say the GCN controller is akward, almost every first and second party game I play/own seems to fit the layout of the controller perfectly as well as seems to take the systems faster load time into account. I mean how is it that most of Nintendo's 1st and 2nd part games have no load times compared to some of the 3rd party stuff.

And the fact of the matter there is nothing that is forcing Nintendo's hand, I mean their console still sells, most of the first party stuff hits around a million worldwide and well the GBA still makes them lots of money.

As for the real subject at hand, I ain't saying jack.

Yes it is.

Why don't you guys wait until after E3 or later down this year to make this comparsion??

Oh yeah BTW..............GC will own Xbox this year. Once Mario Kart Online is released this year. j/k heh heh heh heh.


But on a serious note here's a list of exclusive/good games that are coming for XBox
This list is based off of my opinion. The exclusive games will have an asterix next to them

Malice *

Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Tides of War ( if it improves on the PC version it'll be good)

Dino Crisis 3

B.C.

Star Wars: KOTOR

Deus Ex 2


Madden NFL 2004 ( don't play sports games but I know sports fans are waiting for this one)

Soul Calibur II

StarCraft: Ghost ( woot woot)

Halo 2 ( everyone's favourite game)*

Dead or Alive: Code Cronus*

Fable ( hopefully it will come out this year)*

Kameo: Elements of Power ( One of Rare's games)*

Suikoden III ( I saw this on a release list )

Ninja Gaiden ( this a game I want on GC damn)*

Perfect Dark ( most likely this will be online and own all)*

And I'm sure they are a few other greart games that will be announced for this year


now for the GC

Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker *( Nintendo's first big game)

1080° Avalanche* ( might be good if they fix that control that everyone is complaining about)

Splinter Cell

F-Zero GC* ( I'm not particularly hyped about this game but some people are)

Product Number 3 (P.N.03) ( not to sure if it will remain exclusive ...it could follow the way of Splinter Cell)

Soul Calibur II

Madden NFL 2004 ( providing EA doesn't cancel all the support)

Viewtiful Joe ( meh feel free to tell me to take this off)

Harvest Moon: A Wonderful Life ( this is one of the games I'm checking for so there)

StarCraft: Ghost

Dead Phoenix

Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles* ( this one should be good)

Mario Kart for GameCube* ( woot woot woot woot)

Star Fox Armada* ( woot woot)

Tales of Phantasia RPG ( another rpg Nintendo needs em)

Too Human


Malice isn't an Xbox exclusive as I believe there is a Ps2 version in the works as well, but for the purpose of Xbox vs GCN it is exclusive.

I believe Dino Crisi 3 is exclusive to the Xbox.

Harvest Moon: A Wonderfl Life is exclusive to the Cube as far as I could tell.

too Human is exclusive that much I know.

[fingersman]

Malice isn't coming to GC therefore it is 2/3 exclusive so there. :p

[Jonbo298]

Originally posted by BreakABone
Well as far as I could tell Nintendo has always enjoyed the hardware business because they get to tailor make the console to their liking, I mean how often is it that you find a 1st or 2nd party game on Nintendo that doesn't seem fit for it. As much as folks say the GCN controller is akward, almost every first and second party game I play/own seems to fit the layout of the controller perfectly as well as seems to take the systems faster load time into account. I mean how is it that most of Nintendo's 1st and 2nd part games have no load times compared to some of the 3rd party stuff.

And the fact of the matter there is nothing that is forcing Nintendo's hand, I mean their console still sells, most of the first party stuff hits around a million worldwide and well the GBA still makes them lots of money.

3rd party companies basically just take the most likely crappy looking PS2 version with the long load times and just chance the code. Sometimes a company will try and shorten it, but some don't want to waste time and would rather just rush a quick port to make more money. But I'm not saying all 3rd party companies are bad. Some take the time to make sure it looks halfway better.

[ZeroCool51]

Gamecube has Zelda enough said.

[Perfect Stu]

Originally posted by Jonbo298
3rd party companies basically just take the most likely crappy looking PS2 version with the long load times and just chance the code. Sometimes a company will try and shorten it, but some don't want to waste time and would rather just rush a quick port to make more money. But I'm not saying all 3rd party companies are bad. Some take the time to make sure it looks halfway better.

A lot of non-exclusive 3rd party games start with the PS2 hardware. But you see, PS2 has earned its position as that console. Third parties know, for the most part, that their games will sell much better on the PS2 than Gamecube. Does that mean the game won't push GC's hardware as far as it can go? In most cases, most definately...But why spend the most time with the GC hardware and have your game sell 100,000 copies instead of spending some more time with the PS2 hardware, have it sell 500,000-1,000,000 copies, and then port to Gamecube and have it sell 50-100,000 copies?

I am happy to see games like Splinter Cell made for the XBox hardware, then a 'port' that's made specifically for the PS2 hardware (and it looks pretty darn good for a PS2 game). That's a step in the right direction, for damn sure. Kudos to Ubisoft for the extra effort.

And BreakABone...why not comment? Controversy was one of your stronger points...don't abandon it ;)

[TheGame]

For this topic's sake... an exclusive is somthing that comes out on GCN/Xbox and isn't coming out for Xbox/GCN. Leave Ps2 out of it.

In this topic, NBA 2k4 is exclusive to Xbox because it ain't coming out for GC and Def Jam Vendetta is exclusive to GC because it ain't coming out for Xbox.

:)

[Shadow Fox]

Hmm...kinda hard to pit the two against each other, as IMO, both haven't lived up to their promises.

Xbox, for being the "hardcore" choice for the "mature" gamer, sure has seen alot of crap that just happened to be "exclusive". Kabuki Warriors, Kakuto Chojin, Bruce Lee, Azurik, Obi-Wan...I mean wtf? Then you finally get a game that uses the Xbox HD for more than just textures, and you end up with a mediocre platformer (Blinx) with unrealistic movements and uninspiring characters. Yawn.

True, Halo is a killer-app to end all killer apps...but didn't this game come out in 2001? Why is it STILL on top of the Xbox sales list? And why the hell was it outsold by Super Smash Bros: Melee nearly 2:1; a game that came out a month later with a much more child-friendly image? BTW, it's 2003, and Halo still retails for 49.99. Whoop-de-damn do.

Not that GCN has been an angel either. While there are alot less crappy exclusives, I'll have to admit personally that playing Die Hard: Vendetta, Universal Studios, Sum of All Fears, and SpongeBob Squarepants was utterly painful. I mean, there's this one game that sits Xbox on its ass graphically (StarWars Rogue Leader), and nothing much afterwards barring StarFox Adventures (complete with stutter checkpoints seen in Halo/Splinter Cell), and Metroid Prime.

RE/RE0 will get props when PS2/Xbox develop a game soley built around 3DS character models. Excellent they are, but RE4 on the horizon in full 3D, based on what I've seen this year, is impossible on both pieces of hardware. Could this possibly be the same company that re-released 5-6 year-old ports for $40?? You gotta be killing me.

Let's not mention hardware sales; as both systems combined are barely one quarter the size of the market leader (to be remain unnamed for the wishes of the thread starter):rolleyes:

So really, who's to rant on what? Who's to say what's better? They both suck IMO, and unless you didn't think anything of either console since launch you should feel the same way as far as expectations are concerned. End rant.

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...

[Perfect Stu]

SF's rant was interesting...to me it sounded like one giant "BAH!" which would seem appropriate to what he was trying to convey.

I'm disappointed with both XBox and Gamecube so far...but that doesn't mean things can't change. For Xbox...Why ignore (maybe that's the wrong word?) Halo 2, Fable, Perfect Dark 2, etc. based on the system's past (which you call utterly disappointing, to which many will argue against)? Rare is on board, and they have a past of VERY high quality games. Microsoft is more than likely giving them more of an opportunity to fully utilize their creativity. "The sky's the limit"...well, apparently in Rare's fairly recent past, Nintendo's franchises/restrictions have been the limit. Conker was a step in the right direction (in some areas)...Possibly we'll see some newer, more original ideas?

As for Gamecube...it's hard to say. "One man's trash is another man's treasure." To some, many (if not most, if not *gasp* all) of Nintendo's efforts are considered instant classics. Others will disagree completely. I think the problem with the system is that it gets TOO close to limiting the consumer to the Nintendo brand, and the Nintendo brand only. 3rd parties, for the most part, have chosen to unleash their big dawgs on one of the other two systems (Resident Evil being the big exception). If your gaming interests are primarly >NINTENDO<, the system has delivered to a certain extent, and I'm sure will deliver in coming years. Most gamers want more variety (the whole 'mature games' crap has been beaten to death one too many times...I'll stay away from that) in their system.

Luckily, as all gamers will agree, there's something out there for everyone. Be it mostly XBox, mostly Gamecube, mostly PS2 or mostly PC...pick and choose the games that fit your gaming interests, and try not to think much about the ones that don't.

[TheGame]

Well, you guys seem too look at them both much worse than me... The way I see it, GCN is better than I expected in some areas, but much worse in other areas.

GCN isn't the hybrid N64/Psx mix I wanted it to be... it seemed to get much better in the third party department, while messing with everything that made N64 great IMO.

I mean, Celda replaces Zelda... not a biggie in my opinion. But now the WWE Games N64 had are gone (and I spent the most time last generation on these games), and Perfect Dark is gone(still my fav home console FPS). But that's only two games, which is made up for by a LOT of original content and the addition of many third party games (especially sports games). Gamecube is lightyears better then N64 for it's first 1.5 years, but this generation the bar has raised.

GCN's raw hardware value gets killed by ignorant mistakes on the part of Nintendo. I'll admit, nobody foresaw Xbox being this big of a hit, but jesus... there are little things Nintendo could have fixed from the gate. Like memory cards for example... or actually giving online play a try.

Xbox on the other hand has A+ hardware, but it's severely lacking in the software side of things. At launch Xbox was simply better... there is no way around it. Xbox also offered much more variety, which gives a system a shelf life. For every genre there is, Xbox offered exclusive decent content. You just can't say that about Cube. Where are the fighting games, racing games, and FPSs?

But, Xbox's variety gets hurt by it's lack of extremely quality titles. From the launch til now, I must say that I'd pick the top 10 games to come out for GCN over the top 10 that game out for Xbox. As for the future...?

It looks like there will be no power greater than X. Nintendo will always have a good line-up on paper because of familiar names, but once you get past the brand names what is there?

Nintendo is just a big ball of potential and they are not doing and good with it... that's why I'd have to say I'm more disappointed in Gamecube. Nobody could doubt that MS isn't living up to the promise that was Xbox... but Everybody could doubt that Nintendo is living up to the promise that was gamecube.

[PuPPeT]

Come on people! any one who says Xbox PS2 or Xbox only has 2 good games coming out this year are real fanboy twats!


For me it's got to be the Xbox in 2003-2004, Gamecube may have lots of 1st party games on it (Not that Nintendo games are any better some 3rd party games now). But the fact is the Xbox has so many 3rd party devs on there side pluss all of Microsofts money that it is coming up with soom really kool software. Also don't right off Microsoft 1st party games so fast Microsoft owns some damn good devs now.

Bungie, Rare, Day 1 Studios, Presto Studios, Adrenium, Digital Anvil, Just Add Monsters, Blitz Games and more then 10 in house teams and 5 in Japan, There is more but i can't think of them.

Also Genki Co, Digital Illusions, Climax Group, Bizarre Creations, Big blue box, Intrepid Computer Entertainmen, Stormfront Studios, Progress Software, Dream Publishing, High-Voltage Software, Oddworld, Curly Monsters Ltd and Climax Group all working on games for them! not bad is it.

[BreakABone]

*Looks around and sees the fire is dying out in the thread*

I'm sure there is a lot more you folks can talk about in here, like the GCN's even decreasing 3rd party support or the fact that most Japanese companies are still shunning the Xbox or even Enter the Matrix or the new X-Men RPG.

[fingersman]

Originally posted by BreakABone
*Looks around and sees the fire is dying out in the thread*

I'm sure there is a lot more you folks can talk about in here, like the GCN's even decreasing 3rd party support .

But who should you blame for that? Nintendo, the third parties or the GC owners? I mean the third parties just want to make money and if their game isn't going atleast make the break even point what's the sense of making/porting it to the cube?

Then Nintendo fans don't want to purchase medicore/average third party games cause they want the Nintendo 1st party stuff.


And if your Nintendo, I'm sure you won't be decreasing the quality of your games and if you lower your license fee, and the games still don't sell, then you'll be making a lost.


I think the decreasing of third party support is directly related to the user base.......look at Sony alot of average games sell over 500,000. Now if your a third party and you know your game is average, what system will you want to put it on?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm but then again, I don't hear third party companies complain about how their games sell on Xbox and they don't have a real big lead in terms of user base.

I don't know. What do you guys think? Do you think the decreasing support has to with Nintendo quality, the user base or both?

[BreakABone]

Originally posted by fingersman
But who should you blame for that? Nintendo, the third parties or the GC owners? I mean the third parties just want to make money and if their game isn't going atleast make the break even point what's the sense of making/porting it to the cube?

Then Nintendo fans don't want to purchase medicore/average third party games cause they want the Nintendo 1st party stuff.


And if your Nintendo, I'm sure you won't be decreasing the quality of your games and if you lower your license fee, and the games still don't sell, then you'll be making a lost.


I think the decreasing of third party support is directly related to the user base.......look at Sony alot of average games sell over 500,000. Now if your a third party and you know your game is average, what system will you want to put it on?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm but then again, I don't hear third party companies complain about how their games sell on Xbox and they don't have a real big lead in terms of user base.

I don't know. What do you guys think? Do you think the decreasing support has to with Nintendo quality, the user base or both?

Well in my opinion, it's a mix of the fanbase, Nintendo and 3rd parties. I mean there is no single party here to blame, but they can all take some relief in knowing they are part of it. I mean well it's a long complex theory but eh.

[TheGame]

the way I see it... with sports games at least... It's a mix of Nintendo's fault, the fanbase's fault and the developer's own damn fault too! But it all boils back down to Nintendo.

Nintendo is the reason that Developers have to spend extra time on thier version of the game(because of memory card restraints), and it's also Nintendo's fault that they get the worst version of games that are meant to utilize online gaming.... that's Nintendo's step in it, then add the fact that 3rd party developers don't want to go the extra step with Gamecube (like no free CD with NBA Live, and buggy Sega sports titles). Also, on top of that, the fanbase shows no interest in buying non-exclusive games for GCN.

I think it's because most GCN owners own Ps2's or Xboxs also, and most third party games are just better on the dark side. I mean, if Nintendo get's the drop dead worst version, and they have the most stubborn userbase, how the hell are the third party games supposed to sell?

Nintendo is far from the lead, as is Xbox... the difference is, on Xbox at least, there is an effort given to make every third party game either Equal or better than thier Ps2 counterparts. Nintendo's third party games just don't do it.

Now, I'm not saying that a perfectly excecuted third party plan would have made sales increase, but I know it couldn't have hurt.

[gekko]

Originally posted by TheGame
[B]Nintendo is the reason that Developers have to spend extra time on thier version of the game(because of memory card restraints), and it's also Nintendo's fault that they get the worst version of games that are meant to utilize online gaming.... that's Nintendo's step in it, then add the fact that 3rd party developers don't want to go the extra step with Gamecube (like no free CD with NBA Live, and buggy Sega sports titles). Also, on top of that, the fanbase shows no interest in buying non-exclusive games for GCN.

Now, now, at least be reasonable.

Memory cards is Nintendo's fault. Online gaming is the developers fault, and the sales are either the fault of the fanbase, or the developer.

Gamecube getting the worst version of online games means nothing. The developers could put it online if they want to, they choose not to. Sega games are only online for Xbox, Madden is only online for PS2. The developers aren't putting in the time to make them online for all systems, and not all of the sports games are online either. World Series Baseball 2K3 isn't online, because it was too buggy. Practice makes perfect.

And for the low sales, is that because the GC owners don't like sports games, or because the developers are giving them a half-assed version of the game? If a GC owner, like myself, also has an Xbox, and wants NFL 2K3 (because no sane person would buy Madden). They have a choice between a buggy game with no online support, or a less buggy game that can be played online. Which do you expect them to choose? Unless developers put more time into making the GC version as good as the rest, they can't expect people to purchase it. GC fans are stubborn, yes. Developers should know a half-assed effort won't cut it.

[GameKinG]

Yes, it is partially the developers fault (other then Nintendo). I know they could make a better online service, but there are other means of online games for cube. Sega already has a system set for online cube games, yet they dont seem to put their own games on their.

Developers try to point the blame at cube for every problem, and sometimes its a little bit of cubes fault, but their is no reason they couldnt make a good sports game for cube thats equal with its other-console counter parts, except for the memory thing. I doubt many consumers take into consideration the controller for cube, some who do may actually love it. But they generally arent that analytical (if thats a word).

[BreakABone]

Well, I know that the Cube's sport issue isn't entirely Nintendo's fault, it's not entirely the developers' fault or the fanbase.

But what about other genres, I mean it's rumored that Eidos is looking to drop support (which I don't know about), THQ (which doesn't make many sports game) and some other people. What do you think the problem is therE?

And since this is a GCN vs Xbox debate, why is it that some developers won't even get near the Xbox or if they do give it very poor support?

[TheGame]

Originally posted by gekko
Now, now, at least be reasonable.

Memory cards is Nintendo's fault. Online gaming is the developers fault, and the sales are either the fault of the fanbase, or the developer.

Gamecube getting the worst version of online games means nothing. The developers could put it online if they want to, they choose not to. Sega games are only online for Xbox, Madden is only online for PS2. The developers aren't putting in the time to make them online for all systems, and not all of the sports games are online either. World Series Baseball 2K3 isn't online, because it was too buggy. Practice makes perfect.

Well, we got to look at the other consoles though... I mean, if Nintendo took all the same steps as Microsoft in making a "Nintendo Live" (;)) network you think Developers wouldn't jump on it and start supporting it.

Nintendo and online gaming just ain't meshing... Nintendo is giving less then a Sony effort and on a platform that hasn't really sold enough units to compare to Ps2.

Nintendo is getting out of online gaming exactly what they put in... damn near nothing. If nintendo gave online gaming more effort, much like Microsoft, they wouldn't have many problems.

And for the low sales, is that because the GC owners don't like sports games, or because the developers are giving them a half-assed version of the game? If a GC owner, like myself, also has an Xbox, and wants NFL 2K3 (because no sane person would buy Madden).

:lol:


They have a choice between a buggy game with no online support, or a less buggy game that can be played online. Which do you expect them to choose? Unless developers put more time into making the GC version as good as the rest, they can't expect people to purchase it. GC fans are stubborn, yes. Developers should know a half-assed effort won't cut it.

That's basically what I said... Well, EA didn't give an half assed effort (I mean, no buggyness), but hell, EA didn't even attempt to make the GCN version of games special in any way. As for Sega... sheesh, I'll put it like this, if they keep supporting GCN with buggy games like they have the whole 2k3 season, I'm glad they ditched GCN. I mean, Jesus, in NBA 2k3 you would be LUCKY to finish 5 straight games without the game freezing or the announcers screwing up.

3rd party Developers in general just don't make Nintendo a priority... But who's fault is that? Maybe we can blame Sony and MS for going the extra mile to ensure good support from third parties. ;)

[fingersman]

Originally posted by TheGame
Well, we got to look at the other consoles though... I mean, if Nintendo took all the same steps as Microsoft in making a "Nintendo Live" (;)) network you think Developers wouldn't jump on it and start supporting it.

Nintendo and online gaming just ain't meshing... Nintendo is giving less then a Sony effort and on a platform that hasn't really sold enough units to compare to Ps2.

Nintendo is getting out of online gaming exactly what they put in... damn near nothing. If nintendo gave online gaming more effort, much like Microsoft, they wouldn't have many problems.



3rd party Developers in general just don't make Nintendo a priority... But who's fault is that? Maybe we can blame Sony and MS for going the extra mile to ensure good support from third parties. ;)


Game point, set and match.
Come on guys be realistic....... how do you expect 3rd parties to jump on the bandwagon when the company( Nintendo) who makes the console hasn't shown much interest in it.
They have made no annoucement about major online support or a network ( thanks to that whole keep everything a secret else everyone will steal it attitude), so Nintendo 's future online look pretty blurry right now.

[BreakABone]

Originally posted by fingersman
Game point, set and match.
Come on guys be realistic....... how do you expect 3rd parties to jump on the bandwagon when the company( Nintendo) who makes the console hasn't shown much interest in it.
They have made no annoucement about major online support or a network ( thanks to that whole keep everything a secret else everyone will steal it attitude), so Nintendo 's future online look pretty blurry right now.

We are playing Tennis? COOLbeans.

As for the whole point on online gaming, it is true that Nintendo hasn't given it much effort (if any at all), but that doesn't mean folks can't make use of it, I mean Sega did, and wouldn't it be a bit wiser to release your game on a system with limited online support? I mean the market is a bit less crowded there so it has a better chance of standing out.

But no one has really answered my question, if the developers can't make the game to go online because of weak support, why can't they take advantage of some of the Cube's specific feature. I mean the only two I could think of are the "digital click" and the GCN/GBA connection, and like Nintendo and several other 3rd parties have shown the GCN/GBA connection has some flexibitliy to open up features on the Cube version that no other console could match.

[TheGame]

Originally posted by BreakABone
We are playing Tennis? COOLbeans.

As for the whole point on online gaming, it is true that Nintendo hasn't given it much effort (if any at all), but that doesn't mean folks can't make use of it, I mean Sega did, and wouldn't it be a bit wiser to release your game on a system with limited online support? I mean the market is a bit less crowded there so it has a better chance of standing out.

Not exactly true... Online game developers don't want to stand out. There could be one great online game for a console, but is that enough to go out and buy that modem adapter? Think about it... anybody who plays PSO aid $80 for the game, plus montly fees.

Now, on the same note, if there were 12 other games online, chances are that more people would buy modems, thus making the online gaming userbase bigger. I mean, no developer wants to be the one to initiate the online gaming experience unless it's a first party or they were paid to do it.

I mean, Ps2 had Madden 2003, NBA Live 2003, THPS4, and Everquest online... are these games really hurting each other? Nope. One guy may buy the modem for Madden, and the other for Everquest... but once they get the modem it opens them up to buy the other games at less of a hit on the wallet.

Kind of like consoles... is it safer to make a game for Ps2 or GCN? A racing game may stand out on GCN, but on Ps2 it has WAY more potential buyers.

But no one has really answered my question, if the developers can't make the game to go online because of weak support, why can't they take advantage of some of the Cube's specific feature. I mean the only two I could think of are the "digital click" and the GCN/GBA connection, and like Nintendo and several other 3rd parties have shown the GCN/GBA connection has some flexibitliy to open up features on the Cube version that no other console could match.

In this case, there is simply too much competition. How many games that use the link up feature are considerd bad? None I can think of. They are all just extremely marketable games, or simply good games.

Any ol third party couldn't really take adventage of it. Some will though, like in Splinter Cell. The fact is, if the game isn't a game that will sell extremely well, that feature is useless.

I mean, banking on a person who own a GBA owning a Cube... then a person owning a cube owning a link cable... and the person owning the link cable owning the GCN game... and then the person falling so deep in love with that game that they are willing to spend $40 on a GBA version...

Chances are slim. Games like Pokemon, Zelda, and Sonic could slip through that system easily... but any ol game just won't do that. Hell, even RE probably couldn't do it.

[BreakABone]

Originally posted by TheGame
Not exactly true... Online game developers don't want to stand out. There could be one great online game for a console, but is that enough to go out and buy that modem adapter? Think about it... anybody who plays PSO aid $80 for the game, plus montly fees.

Now, on the same note, if there were 12 other games online, chances are that more people would buy modems, thus making the online gaming userbase bigger. I mean, no developer wants to be the one to initiate the online gaming experience unless it's a first party or they were paid to do it.

I mean, Ps2 had Madden 2003, NBA Live 2003, THPS4, and Everquest online... are these games really hurting each other? Nope. One guy may buy the modem for Madden, and the other for Everquest... but once they get the modem it opens them up to buy the other games at less of a hit on the wallet.

Kind of like consoles... is it safer to make a game for Ps2 or GCN? A racing game may stand out on GCN, but on Ps2 it has WAY more potential buyers.
You have a valid point, and I was thinking along the same lines, but it really depends on how other folks look at it. The fact is an established online roster would encourage more developers to use the feature, but someone has got to start. And it doesn't look like it will be Nintendo any time soon.



In this case, there is simply too much competition. How many games that use the link up feature are considerd bad? None I can think of. They are all just extremely marketable games, or simply good games.

Any ol third party couldn't really take adventage of it. Some will though, like in Splinter Cell. The fact is, if the game isn't a game that will sell extremely well, that feature is useless.

I mean, banking on a person who own a GBA owning a Cube... then a person owning a cube owning a link cable... and the person owning the link cable owning the GCN game... and then the person falling so deep in love with that game that they are willing to spend $40 on a GBA version...

Chances are slim. Games like Pokemon, Zelda, and Sonic could slip through that system easily... but any ol game just won't do that. Hell, even RE probably couldn't do it.

Well with your previous logic, I assume t would be much easier to find a person who owns a GBA/GCN and link cable. I mean look at the games that take advantage of it, Metroid Prime, Animal Crossing, Sonic Adventure 2: Battle and some others. All those games have atleast broke the half a million mark in the US alone or are pretty close to it so I mean there is a chance that there is a large number of people who use it.

I mean Splinter Cell is doing, RayMan 3 is doing it and some other 3rd party games are, but I guess with your prior logic, it was because Nintendo actually supports it and yet won't toouch online gaming.

[Shadow Fox]

Originally posted by Perfect Stu
SF's rant was interesting...to me it sounded like one giant "BAH!" which would seem appropriate to what he was trying to convey.

I'm disappointed with both XBox and Gamecube so far...but that doesn't mean things can't change. For Xbox...Why ignore (maybe that's the wrong word?)Well, that defeats the purpose of my entire post, now doesn't it? While it wasn't exactly the topic's exact premise, I am utterly disappointed in both consoles from a retail and expectation standpoint. This is my take:

-Xbox promised online (way back in January 2k1) AT LAUNCH. That didn't happen, and when it did happen a year later, how many games are XboxLive capable? Barely more than PS2's online offering, which is FREE.

-GameCube promised great software, which it does have now, but was only limited to Rogue Leader and Super Monkey Ball at launch. Yawn.

And that's basically it in a nutshell, Stu. As for my positive assertions, I'll post that when I deem it relevant.Halo 2, Fable, Perfect Dark 2, etc. based on the system's past (which you call utterly disappointing, to which many will argue against)? Rare is on board, and they have a past of VERY high quality games. Microsoft is more than likely giving them more of an opportunity to fully utilize their creativity. "The sky's the limit"...well, apparently in Rare's fairly recent past, Nintendo's franchises/restrictions have been the limit. Conker was a step in the right direction (in some areas)...Possibly we'll see some newer, more original ideas?Somehow I doubt it. Rare will continue to cash in on their previous franchises, and then maybe it will produce a new product. Right now only 3 projects are confirmed from the team, and all three of them were once GameCube-specific.As for Gamecube...it's hard to say. "One man's trash is another man's treasure." To some, many (if not most, if not *gasp* all) of Nintendo's efforts are considered instant classics. Others will disagree completely. I think the problem with the system is that it gets TOO close to limiting the consumer to the Nintendo brand, and the Nintendo brand only. 3rd parties, for the most part, have chosen to unleash their big dawgs on one of the other two systems (Resident Evil being the big exception). If your gaming interests are primarly >NINTENDO<, the system has delivered to a certain extent, and I'm sure will deliver in coming years. Most gamers want more variety (the whole 'mature games' crap has been beaten to death one too many times...I'll stay away from that) in their system.We all know that this has actually been an improvement for Nintendo over N64 (GameCube really has had just as many 3rd party releases as Xbox over the course of 2002, and just as many overall titles). And yes, the 'mature games' crap has been beaten to death, and considering how false it is, one can deduce why.;)Luckily, as all gamers will agree, there's something out there for everyone. Be it mostly XBox, mostly Gamecube, mostly PS2 or mostly PC...pick and choose the games that fit your gaming interests, and try not to think much about the ones that don't. Hey, you forgot Macintosh and Linux!!! You fanboy!!!

Lol...;)

At any rate, GCN has proved to be a viable (though not as strong) third-party console, as has Xbox proved to be a viable first-party console (though also not as strong). That's about the only expectations I feel have been met. End rant 2.

-Official Ninja of [coming soon]...