GameCube vs. Xbox: 30 rounds bare-knuckle boxing - May 26, 2001 - Drew Cosner
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this column are those of the participants and the moderator, and do not neccessarily reflect those of the GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive material afoot. I want to open the first gay Taco Bell. Don't say we didn't warn you.
To paraphrase good ol' Chris, not much to say here. The E3 discussion continues on, and if you have a problem with that, tough crap. (Aren't I the hardass?)
| Those postscripts will get you everytime |
|
In reference to Chris' topic,
Having now seen about as good a glimpse of gamings future as I expect to see for some time, I've got a pretty good idea of what consoles I'm going to purchase. Last batch around, it was N64 first, and then later the Playstation for Square RPGs. That will most likely be the situation again. Buy a Nintendo system that came our later first, and then the Sony system with the exciting Final Fantasy title when it arrives. The GameCube has proven itself to be a more than viable platform, and in all honesty, were the Playstation 2 released at the same time as the XBox and gameCube, I think the GameCube would be the top console for a long time. As is, it is the console of which I have no doubts of purchasing. The games, developing environment, and Nintendo's history of quality and apparent future of intelligence clinches it.
As for the other two...like I said, I will likely go with the PS2, despite it's hardware limitations (never thought I'd say that., it has a large install base, which means companies will develop lots of games for it, and some of them are bound to be good. Plus, I'll be able to play FFX and XI. The X-Box has some nice potential, from what I've seen (in just about only one title: Project Eden), but it's E3 showing, call it good or bad, has me worried. You'd think a system that's coming at out the same time as competition would be farther along, espcially if it's also equally easy to develop for. But, by the time I get my secondary system, there should be a clearer idea of the future of the X-Box and PS2 versus each other.
~Lord Byron
PS. People, go check out information on the X-Box game Project Eden, produced by a satelite of the makers of Black and White. After looking at the gameplay, and graphics, tell me you don't want that game, and that it isn't what we've all been wanting all along.
(predicts I'll get more of a response from my PS. than from the rest of my letter)
|
I pretty much feel things will boil down similarly to the last console generation: Sony will enamour older gamers with third-party offerings, gaining the first-place position. Meanwhile, Nintendo will entice younger gamers and those gamers who enjoy pure Nintendo gameplay, earning a second-place spot, although I suspect it will be a much closer second place than last time.
Then we have Microsoft, who gets to join the ranks of "pathetic also-ran." Say what you will about the console's promise, the grade-A games just aren't there in the quantities necessary to ward off the one-two punch of Sony and Nintendo come the holiday season. It's telling that many major chains are hardly giving the Xbox even a nod of consideration when calculating their stocking and sales ratios. More on this later in the column.
| GBA ROCKS |
|
I think Chris more or less said it all: the PS2 and the GC both look great,
and are more or less complementary, so I'll be getting both when money
permits. Quite simply, by the time I'll have money to pay for them, both
systems will be out with a good amount of games I can't wait to play
By default, that leaves the X-Box out in the cold, which, Matt Blackie's
ranting aside, is MS' failure at this point in the console race. Before E3, I
wasn't impressed with Nintendo's line up, and was one of the people who
wondered if it was going to be "too kiddy." Nintendo convinced me that I was
wrong, but MS wasn't able to attract my attention. I'd normally feel sorry for
people who worked hard on the X Box (assuming MS can't turn the current
situation around), but they do work for MS- the king of the capitalist
competition ethic. If they lose this race because their competitors can
capture gamer's minds and wipe away their doubts and MS can't, then MS has
simply for once failed at what it does best. And it's not like Sony and
Nintendo didn't have problems of their own which were just as bad as "anti-MS
sentiment" to overcome.
In short, Sony and Nintendo have both shown me games I can't wait to play. So
I'll be buying a GC and a PS2 when money permits.
Oh, and the GBA is obviously going to rock.
-Davon
|
Simple enough.
| Nintendo will conquer the world |
|
Hey Drew,
Someone wrote to Chris the other day about how he couldn't decide which system that he wanted to save his money for. Well, I know which one I'm going to be saving for: GameCube. Everyone doubted what Nintendo had in store until E3. Now the mainstream press has done a complete 180 in their view of the upcoming console wars. Heck, even MSNBC (yes, that 'M' stands for Microsoft) has posted articles that are praising the GameCube. But even they are not without their reasons.
Nintendo has finally achieved the happy equilibrium for the gaming industry. They have sat down and evaluated each and every one of their past mistakes and have corrected them in some form or fashion. Cartridges? A thing of the past. Now, all three players in this war are on level playing field. Graphics? We've already seen plenty of examples from E3 that hardware specs aren't everything. Most of the XBox games couldn't hold a candle to the GCN games that were on display. Let's face it folks... there is no longer anything standing in the way of Nintendo.
But on the other hand, you have the Sony crowd screaming "But we have Final Fantasy!" Well, there are a couple of reasons why that argument doesn't hold water. 1) Squaresoft has already expressed interest in going multi-platform on more than one occasion and 2) there's always that "tiny" little issue about the new Final Fantasy games becoming "interactive movies" instead of games. Frankly, I can do better than live without that sort of experience. Oh yeah, I won't forget about MGS2. It is going to be one killer app, I'm sure of that. But it is already in the minority. The hardware:software ratios for the PS2 are horrible. The last time I heard the number, I think it was 1:3 and that same article said that 1:6 was 'healthy'. That doesn't sound like the comfortable #1 console to me. How bout you?
And lastly, there will always be that group of people that still think that the GCN will be "kiddy." Like I said in a previous letter, I am very pleased that I can now laugh in their faces when those words come out of their mouths. Nintendo can undoubtedly keep their stranglehold on the younger demographic. Now it is only a matter of reaching out to the older ones. And I don't believe that any honest person could deny that Nintendo is already doing a fine job of that. Even their launch lineup is going to be very well-balanced. There will be games for kids, games for everyone, and games for adults. What more could you ask for in a gaming console? And for that matter, why would you spend your money on anything else?
Espyonage, hoping that he will still be printed even though he has two things going against him - saying something bad about FF and writing a letter that is two effin long
|
I do agree that if Nintendo is going to be able to pull out the first-place spot, it's going to be thanks to the lengths the company went to in avoiding past mistakes. We've already seen that Nintendo can support an entire console almost entirely by itself; now that the software model is substantially more affordable, I'm confident we'll see far more third-party offerings, especially once Nintendo's own software moves systems off the shelves.
However, I'm going to have to disagree with you about Sony's position, even being the Nintendo whore that I am. Sony has gotten enough PS2s into homes that third-parties are plenty interested in jumping on board, development difficulties be damned. Having seen and played some of the better PS2 offerings at the past E3, I can't argue that there are going to be some awesome, awesome games for the system. And even if companies do start going multi-platform, as you suggest about Square, the fact is that the PS2 will still see these games long before other consoles.
And just to address your comments about FFX: I had my reservations, as well. Then I saw it in action at E3. The environments are brilliant, evoking a sense of wonder I haven't felt since first popping in FFVII and watching the camera pan in on Midgar. The game oozed atmosphere even from the short gameplay demo and movies on display. And the graphics have to be seen in motion to be believed. They really are that good. Okay, so the random battles still suck, but I've been won over. That even big, evil, asshole Drew resorts to clipped fanboy-mode writing should tell you something about the game.
| Let's define fantasy |
|
"The magic of animation is that it makes you believe in fantasy. What's the
point of attempting to recreate reality by animation? What you get is the
worst of all worlds." Well there you have it, quoted by a professional
journalist. It's rather ironic, one of Square's selling point for this movie
was how real it was, and as you can see from the general response, too real
isn't always a good thing. I just hope whoever came up with the hideous
character design gets his ass fired.
-Weltall, wants fantasy, not reality
|
Ah yes, the "fantasy" intelligentsia strike again. For people so pharisaic about fantasy's "true" definition, I'm always amused that none of them seem to understand the exact definition of the word. And since I'm too lazy and too stupid to define it in my own words, here's a definition stripped straight from dictionary.com:
The creative imagination; unrestrained fancy.
Simple enough. But since I'm aware that people will point out that they're using the term "fantasy" in reference to a genre rather than the actual meaning of the word, more important is the following secondary definition:
Fiction characterized by highly fanciful or supernatural elements.
I appreciate your attempts to look down on fellow RPG players because of your own personal definition of what qualifies something as fantasy, really I do. After all, nothing's better for the ego than the belief that, for whatever reason, everybody else is dumber than you or just doesn't "get it." However, by the very definition of fantasy, even things like Final Fantasy VII and FF: The Spirits Within are works of fantasy.
To provide backing for my argument will require FF:TSW spoilers, so if you've been keeping away from those, don't read this paragraph. Capisce? The entire premise of FF:TSW revolves around the accidental release of supernatural beings that have reached a state of evolution wherein they can internalize energy by devouring the life forces of other creatures. That's fantasy. Conversely, a movie like, say, Soldier, where everything revolves around futuristic technology and events is science fiction. Now, you could argue that the Final Fantasy movie is a scifi/fantasy hybrid, and I'd buy that. But saying the film isn't fantasy at all because it doesn't have knights and dragons is wrongheaded to say the least.
Okay, people on spoiler patrol can start reading again.
Addressing your post from Ain't It Cool, my first and most obvious comment would be this: just because a "professional" wrote it doesn't automatically make it doctrine. Frankly, I couldn't disagree more. Yes, there's an obvious element of "doing it just because we can" to the FF movie. However, CG, as with any new form of expression, will be exploited differently by different people. Trying to assign specific uses to anything of that sort strikes me as exceedingly narrowminded. It's entirely possible that somewhere down the road CG will reach a point where it really is cheaper, more flexible, and just as realistic as actual actors. Movies like the Spirits Within are the initial baby-steps towards reaching that eventual goal.
| Just what kind of gamer are you, anyway? |
|
This column used to be much better when everybody was actually playing games.
Seems like everybody is so busy talking about e3 every single day that nobody
has bothered to play any games. With that said, I am gonna go now and finish
Megaman legends 2 and start on another game.
Lunaticsoul .. the guys that belives megaman legends 2 would be the perfect
game engine to steal for a 3d metroid.
|
No offense, but you'd have to be nuts to think that people aren't going to want to talk about the biggest industry show of the year until the topic has been thoroughly exhausted. A major part of being a gamer is looking forward to the games to come, and E3 is the best time to see said games. If you don't get excited by E3, you're obviously not a true gamer! Oh! Get out of here, not-true-gamer! And take your bags with you!
| A tad pricey |
|
Hey Drew,
As for the current consoles, here's how I see it:
PS2- The second generation titles are coming out now in Japan, and we'll be
seeing some really cool things from Sony soon. With their online gaming
plans forming up, expect to see a focus on games that now last longer, and
those that don't (ZOE, the Bouncer) will feature online extras at the very
least.
Gamecube- Nintendo will make money how they always have, by making games that
focus on gameplay and general fun, not adding blood or special graphical
features. Pikmin and the things from Rare will now look great and play
great, giving the Big N a big edge. The price is also very right.
Xbox- Uh...well, they'll have Halo, a game that was considered to be a
revolution when it was first revealed over 2 years ago. Now, all I see is a
FPS with a bit of Half-Life mixed with driving a few vehicles. Should I be
excited, or just go buy Red Faction for the PS2 right now?
--The Steve
|
These viewpoints definitely mirror the general attitude of the gaming public right now. Which pisses off the writer of the following letter.
| All I'm saying is give Xbox a chance |
|
Punky Drewster,
So I just figured I'd offer a brief response, to Saint7, at least, and
anyone else (seemed to be a lot, according to Chris) who might have
misunderstood me. I'm not gonna really turn this into a debate, just
offer a few points of clarification.
I in fact agree rather wholeheartedly with Saint7's point, but he
actually seemed to have misrepresented the point I was trying to make
myself. He thinks I'm arguing from the specific (MS, X-Box) to the
general (any game company), and I'm not. If, say, Square (or Enix or
Capcom or Nintendo) makes a crap game and no one plays it and it does
poorly, well, that's their own fault. But if Square were to make an OK
game, and there was a vast number of people who didn't play it
*specifically* because it was made by Square or because it was on a
particular console, then there's a problem with that, I think.
I guess we've all got our principles, but I still think that attacking
the X-Box this early is unwarranted. People said many of the same
things, I recall, about the PS2 when it was revving up for
launch--things like "None of these games really interest me" and "This
system is so mediocre". Barely six months later, the PS2 has become
mighty popular, and I think it's because people were, despite their
murmuring, willing to give Sony a chance. I just don't know if people
are willing to give MS the same chance.
-Matt Blackie
|
I'm not going to say you're wrong in your opinion; yes, just because MS is bungling pre-release build-up doesn't necessarily mean the console deserves to be passed off by gamers. However, looking at the evidence, it's pretty obvious that MS's mistakes are going to cost them dearly.
Sure, Sony didn't exactly have a sterling launch with the PS2, but the fact of the matter is that Sony could afford a slow start since there wasn't much next-gen competition at the time. Conversely, Microsoft is going to have to go head-to-head with a now-rampaging PS2 and a strong, strong GameCube lineup courtesy of Nintendo and its second-parties. If MS isn't prepared to blow the doors off of what Sony and Nintendo are doing come November, it's really up shit creek without a paddle, as my dear old mum used to say.
Unfortunately, Microsoft, both in presentation and attitude, is trying to manifest an aura of equal ground with Sony and Nintendo. That's quite simply not the case. MS needs to be willing to play the role of the underdog, and the company has shown an unwillingness to do so to this point.
Closing comments:
Okay, here's your topic for tomorrow: it's no secret that Nintendo's image is that of a "kiddy" company. What would it take for them to dispell that image in the minds of gamers? Pretend as though you're Arakawa or Yamauchi and let me know.
-Drew Cosner, 4th degree card-holder
|
|
|
|
