# Game console purchase



## twyg (Apr 18, 2002)

Ok, a friend of mine is very interested in purchasing a new game console, and isn't sure what she wants. 

Here's what I told her.

Xbox - Great graphics, just like a powerful pc. Still waiting for a really "fun" game though (not a first person shooter, or a sports game, or an RPG)

PS2 - Decent graphics, Lots and lots of games, but you may get a game that stinks and end up wasting your mulah. Really good games on the system

Gamecube - Decent graphics (better than PS2) seems to be a plethora of "fun" games as well as the hard core gamer fare. Also seems much "cleaner" for all ages games.

Where can I point her to let her compare? I can't seem to find a web site that lays down all the options...

Later

P.S. she has no interest in First person shooters, sports games or RPG's. She just wants a nice light gaming experience that she can have fun with. Basically she's not a power gamer.


----------



## voice- (Apr 18, 2002)

If you take away FPSs, sports(all) and RPGs you don't really have a lot left, do you?
I'd say go for the GameCube.
Xbox is a rip-off, really. It can't really match the others in terms of speed, and it's self-destructive. Apparently it heats so fast(because of they way stuff is stacked in there) that the warranty of the Intel processor runs out after about 10 minutes of gameplay.
The only real advantage the Xbox holds is graphics, and graphics alone do not make good games. (Buying out Bungie does )
Then we're down to 2. The Playstation with its perfect controller and heap of games versus the GameCube, the small power-system she seems to want...


----------



## voice- (Apr 18, 2002)

That said, I do hold a grudge to Nintendo because of their old designs on N64s. this can't be coincident...






This looks a lot like this:









Here are the colors all together
And the imac colors:








Starting to see a pattern?

Then there's the cube wich founa a design of its own with an idea 'borrowed' from Apple:













_(Pictures from apple-history.com and nintendo.com)_


----------



## Valrus (Apr 18, 2002)

I'd say go for the GameCube, especially if she can already play DVDs - that's basically what the extra $100 for a PS2 is for. No Xbox. That's the Evil Empire right there, and I just can't countenance that. 

-the valrus


----------



## rinse (Apr 18, 2002)

Another vote for the gamecube here... I got one for Xmas... i love it!


----------



## BlingBling 3k12 (Apr 18, 2002)

i'll be the 3rd guy

*XBOX!*

okay, the DVD add on is $30, but compared to the PS2's DVD Playback, it is FAR better...

also, my gameplay is far better in Tony Hawk 3 for XBOX than it is on my friend's PS2...

the XBOX doubles as a Music Entertainment Center... rip your CD's onto the XBOX... i have 19 CD's on there, along with compilation CD's that I have created (you must use a CD-RW and just finalize the session, not the whole CD)

the gameplay is excellent... the graphics are great, sound quality is EXCELLENT (on my dolby 5.1 surround sound  )

the GAMECUBE pisses me off... the damn controller is so freaking hard to manipulate, it's not even worth working with... the games are pretty stupid (c'mon... enough with this mario and pokemon sh*t... it's getting old and the games are getting more boring)

the PS2 is alright in my opinion, the option to use Linux with it is pretty cool, but otherwise it's just "OK" in my book

and maybe it's just me, but my XBOX hasn't gotten VERY hot, but don't tell me that the PS2 NEVER gets hot after gameplay



> It can't really match the others in terms of speed



733 MHz isn't fast enough? 8 GB isn't big enough? the RAM could be increased to 128 or 256 easily... but 64 MB seems to work pretty damn good...



> graphics alone do not make good games


i beg to differ... 


go there for more... http://www.macosx.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14847&highlight=console


----------



## divibisan (Apr 18, 2002)

I'd recomend the PS2

While the X-box has better graphics, other than Halo there are no real good games for it.

The gamecube is $100 cheaper, but it is less powerful, you cant watch DVDs, it uses small 1.4 GB disks vs. 4.7 GB DVD's w/ the PS2 and xbox, there are less games for it, has worse online support (there will be support, but nintendo will wait and see how sony and microsoft do with it before implimenting it)

The PS2 has the best controler of the 3 and by far the best games. Except for first party games, nearly all GC and X-Box games are ports of PS2 games or are coming to the PS2

The GC also uses a ridiculus 500k memory card!! half a megabyte! To make a frachise mode in a football game it takes up an entire $15 memory card just for that!

Also, if you get a PS2 you also get a PS1so you'll never have a shortage of quality games to play.  The PS2 has the larges selection of games and no matter what she likes the best there will be plenty of good games of that type on the PS2 as opposed to the GC which has 1 decent game out now (SSB:M) and the X-box with much fewer games and which is aimed at older, more hardcore gamers. There seem to be fewer light games on the xbox than on any other system.

If your worried about getting a bad game always check review sites like ign.com, gamespot.com and gamespy.com


----------



## divibisan (Apr 18, 2002)

> the XBOX doubles as a Music Entertainment Center... rip your CD's onto the XBOX... i have 19 CD's on there, along with compilation CD's that I have created (you must use a CD-RW and just finalize the session, not the whole CD)



What's the point of that? Use your computer for that, thats no reason to buy a game console



> my gameplay is far better in Tony Hawk 3 for XBOX than it is on my friend's PS2...



What do you mean the gameplay? THPS3 is a port. The gameplay is the same, the graphics may be better, but the gameplay is the same


----------



## voice- (Apr 19, 2002)

Bling, like Mac to Wintel, both PS2 and GCN can get a lot faster than the X-Box. Also, I don't think this friend of twyg would want a computer/console, and from the excluded games(FPS, Sport and RPG) I believe Nintendos "kiddish" games will fit her needs just fine.


----------



## dricci (Apr 19, 2002)

X-Box? No way. Money into the monopolists pocket right there. Sorry, Bill, my money isn't going towards XP and PocketPC support.

PS2 is good because of the legacy games and the newer games.. And it has a Firewire port. Not sure what it's used for, though. Also, maybe they'd be able to settle for a PS 1? There's still a large selection of games just for that.

GameCube would be great for "kiddish" type games, and the graphics aren't that bad.


----------



## themacko (Apr 19, 2002)

I've got an XBox and love the damn thing!  I'm a big EA Sports fan, so I have the usual NHL 2002, Madden 2002 and Triple Play 2002 and Halo, that game rocks.  That's just my opinion, I thought I'd toss it in here.


----------



## rinse (Apr 19, 2002)

Bling, I disagree with your opinion on the gamecube controller completely. I feel the XBox's gigantic controller is a freaking mess of buttons and is about twice as large as it has to be. Playstations controller is about as UNergonomically designed as you can get.

As for your opinion on Gamecube's games not being good, I feel you are misguided here as well... No one matches Nintendo and it's second party system in creating deep immersive gameplay with excellent play control and level design. No one.

That said, yes, Xbox has some good games (Halo is pretty damn fun, DOA3 is maybe the best fighting game i have played) and some really over hyped ones... Jet Set Radio Future is way overrated IMHO. I have this sneaky hunch that Xboxs games are going to go further and further into the FPS, real time strategy and fighting genres (three types of games i can get tired of very quickly.) as the developer base is largely going to be PC developers with plans of releasing windoze versions of the titles 

As for lack of DVD suipport... who needs it! I dont want to watch DVDs on a game console. I want to watch DVDs on my full featured DVD player with optical audio out.

For those that care about innovative gameplay, quality graphics and a proven track record of success, I say Gamcube all the way!


----------



## phatsharpie (Apr 19, 2002)

Good price, good graphics, good gameplay, good games and exclusive games... Now that Resident Evil is exclusive on the console, Final Fantasy is coming back to it, there is no reason to get any other console!

Okay, okay, if they ported Silent Hill and GTA to the platform, there would be no reason for any other console.

-B


----------



## xoot (Apr 19, 2002)

I wish Apple starts making a game console... 

Even though i've only played on a Nintendo 64 and a PS 1 (and that was a long time ago) I would recommend a GameCube. Even though it doesn't have lots of games, I think that the aspect that we are looking for here are "cleaner" games. Anyone disagree with me? 

P.S.:I think you should have started a poll, twyg.


----------



## twyg (Apr 19, 2002)

I think you're right... 
:shrug:

Oh well, she wanted a good amount of options, so hey, looks like it worked out well!

btw, Microsoft will be releasing a "Gamepad S" model gamepad for x-box soon. It's much smaller, and while the same shape, the buttons now match the 90º square of the PS controller, and the joysticks have the same "soft" feel as the PS 2 joysticks. 

There is also an adapter for x-box that allows you to use a N64, PS or PS2 controller.

If anyone wants further info please e-mail me... 

Visualize whirled peas...


----------



## divibisan (Apr 19, 2002)

> I feel the XBox's gigantic controller is a freaking mess of buttons and is about twice as large as it has to be. Playstations controller is about as UNergonomically designed as you can get.



I agree with you partially, the xbox controler sucks. The PS2 controler is by far the best though. The control sticks are better, it has more buttons, all of the buttons are analog (as opposed to only the sholder buttons) and the d-pad is great (the GC's is the same as the GBA, way too small for anyone with even medium hands to use).



> I would recommend a GameCube. Even though it doesn't have lots of games, I think that the aspect that we are looking for here are "cleaner" games.



While the GC has clean games, thats almost all it has. The PS2 has clean games too as well as all types of games. That way if she decides to try other types of games she will be able to.\



> Now that Resident Evil is exclusive on the console, Final Fantasy is coming back to it, there is no reason to get any other console!



Thats no true, while the main RE games are GC exclusive, a game called Resident Evil Online is coming to the PS2, I assume that it is a online, multiplayer version of RE (what else could it be) regardless, she is looking for 'clean' games, RE is the farthest thing from that there is. While a Square affiliate is making games for nintendo, they are making them for the GBA. While there may be some games for the GC, there will be very few, if any. The FF games are most likely going to stay on the PS2:


> as far as FFX, XI and XII are concerned, they are to be played on PS2


Additionally, Sony owns 19% of square and is unlikely to let them make GC games, regardless, FF will always be on the PS2 so that's no reason to buy a GC


----------



## divibisan (Apr 19, 2002)

> For those that care about innovative gameplay, quality graphics and a proven track record of success,



What do you mean innovative Gameplay? except for pikamin all of nintendo's planed games are sequals (Mario 22, Starfox adv. (a zelda OOT clone, it even has the same interface), zelda 15, super smash bros 2, remake of RE 1) The graphics are not better than the PS2, the new mario game looks the same as on the N64. Track record of success? The N64 was a flop and Nintendo only stayed in buisness because of the Gameboy which had a monopoly on the handheld game market (hmmm... what company does that sound like?)



> As for lack of DVD suipport... who needs it!



It's another feature. What if you didn't have a dvd player or you had two tvs, you could watch dvds on both, or if you had a old, bad dvd player



> And it has a Firewire port. Not sure what it's used for, though.



You can use it to network multiple PS2s to play multiplayer without split screen


----------



## phatsharpie (Apr 19, 2002)

> _Originally posted by divibisan _
> *
> 
> What do you mean innovative Gameplay? except for pikamin all of nintendo's planed games are sequals (Mario 22, Starfox adv. (a zelda OOT clone, it even has the same interface), zelda 15, super smash bros 2, remake of RE 1) The graphics are not better than the PS2, the new mario game looks the same as on the N64. Track record of success? The N64 was a flop and Nintendo only stayed in buisness because of the Gameboy which had a monopoly on the handheld game market (hmmm... what company does that sound like?) *



I think it's illogical to think that simply because the sames are sequels it would not offer innovative game play. Look the Super Marion on Super Nintendo and N64 - true, the N64 version is a "sequel" but can you say the game play between the two isn't drastically different? Thus the sequel (N64) was able to offer innovative gameplay over its predacessor (SNES). Thus it's total possible that the GC Mario Sunshine would present innovative gameplay. Furthermore, all screen shots of Zelda on GC so far shows it to be a drastic departure from previous games.

True, Nintendo does have a monoploy in the handheld market, but how it got there and how it maintained that market is vastly different from Microsoft. MS is able to maintain its market leadership by forcing OEM hardware makers (Dell, Gateway, etc.) to sign exclusive distribution contracts. In other words, if any clone makers decide to to bundle Linux or other OSes, they would lose their distribution right for Windows, a death knoll for PC makers! However, Nintendo simply has the best handheld game machine out there. They are able to convince game makers to make games for their hardware and able to convince buyers to buy them. They DON'T FORCE anyone to user their hardware/software. So I think your comparison is totally flawed.

Also, although N64 was a flop compared to its pre-launch expectations, it was still a relative success. It was definitely the most family friendly console - and that's not a big loss. Nintendo still made tons of cash (thanks to Pokemon mainly)!

The GameCube is an awesome machine, and it's very likely to be quite successful. Despite what people may have said, it is NOT inferior to the PS2. The PS2's power lies in is "Emotion Engine", an AltiVec like vector processing unit. Without it, the performance of the PS2 is mediocre, but it is VERY difficult to develop PS2 games effectively using EE. Ask any game developer, they all gripe about how hard it is to develop for PS2. It is easy to develop for the GC, and just that alone it would attract more developers to the GameCube.

Nintendo isn't happy about losing its market share to Sony, and it's got TONS of cash. People who write off Nintendo have to realize how powerful and wealthy the corporation is, and it would be wrong to think that they would simply fade away. There is no doubt that it is ready for a comeback, so look out!

-B


----------



## divibisan (Apr 19, 2002)

> So I think your comparison is totally flawed



I wasn't comparing their ways of keeping their monopoly, I was comparing the fact that their products are not all that good (the GBA is good, but the older versions were horrible), but anyone who tries to enter the market is immediately crushed by the Gameboy's monopoly



> but it is VERY difficult to develop PS2 games effectively using EE. Ask any game developer, they all gripe about how hard it is to develop for PS2.



It is hard, but developers have still managed to make some inredible games with it, hard as it is. Imagine how good the games will be once they get used to it and better developing tools come out that make it easier to use it effectively. Also, the difficulty is not all that bad. If a developer has to make a significant investment in a game they are less likely to make really bad games.



> People who write off Nintendo have to realize how powerful and wealthy the corporation is,



If power and money are enough to make a great console the x-box should be killing every other console



> I think it's illogical to think that simply because the sames are sequels it would not offer innovative game play. Look the Super Marion on Super Nintendo and N64 - true, the N64 version is a "sequel" but can you say the game play between the two isn't drastically different? Thus the sequel (N64) was able to offer innovative gameplay over its predacessor (SNES). Thus it's total possible that the GC Mario Sunshine would present innovative gameplay.



I agree, not all sequels are the same, but most nintendo sequels are.  Mario 64 has the same basic game play as all other Mario games except it is in 3d. In M64 you have simple objectives, but that's not enough to call it drasticly different, aside from that, the game play is the same except in 3d
Another example, Zelda, same except in 3d-Star Fox adv. , Banjo Kazooie-Donkey Kong-Banjo Tooie -Conker's Bad Fur day (I never played it, but that's what I heard, correct me if i'm wrong)


----------



## phatsharpie (Apr 19, 2002)

> _Originally posted by divibisan _
> * I wasn't comparing their ways of keeping their monopoly, I was comparing the fact that their products are not all that good (the GBA is good, but the older versions were horrible), but anyone who tries to enter the market is immediately crushed by the Gameboy's monopoly
> *



Yeah... I agree. But let's be realistic... The GameBoy was release in the late eighties, and other than the color refresh, it's essentially unchanged for almost 20 years! So essentially, the original GB design was spectacular! Of course, if we are comparing newer handhelds, the GBA rocks! I think it's far better than anything else that's out there.




> *It is hard, but developers have still managed to make some inredible games with it, hard as it is. Imagine how good the games will be once they get used to it and better developing tools come out that make it easier to use it effectively. Also, the difficulty is not all that bad. If a developer has to make a significant investment in a game they are less likely to make really bad games.*



In theory I agree with you. But the truth is that if to exploit a console's capabilities is a hard task, and the developer is a multiplatform supporter, they simply develop for the lowest common denominator. In essence, they go for the crappiest resolution and gameplay they can get away with. Think why XBox has so many mediocre games? It's because people just port to it whatever they have developed for the PS2. Even though the XBox may have superior GPU, people don't exploit it. Halo is the only must have game for it, because it exploits the machine's powers. The PS2 has amazing graphics capabilities, but the fact that developers are only starting the make their games look really good AFTER PS2's been out for over a year shows that how difficult it is to exploit and code for the console.



> *If power and money are enough to make a great console the x-box should be killing every other console*



True. But MS is entering a brand new market, and it fame (and infamy) is a curse upon itself. Nintendo is different. It's at its home turf. Think about it, even though Square is ~20% owned by Sony, it is willing to divert resources (even though through a "third party") to develop for GC and GBA, it does show that Square seens tremendous potential in the GameCube. After all, why would you even risk biting the hand the feeds you unless the alternative looks really promising?

Also, I think the Square factor is a little less threatening now. They sunk way too much money into the FF film, and now they are desperate to recoup their loss... I think FF the movie's flop would definitely affect Square's confidence negatively, so it'll be interesting to see what they do next.



> *I agree, not all sequels are the same, but most nintendo sequels are.  Mario 64 has the same basic game play as all other Mario games except it is in 3d. In M64 you have simple objectives, but that's not enough to call it drasticly different, aside from that, the game play is the same except in 3d
> Another example, Zelda, same except in 3d-Star Fox adv. , Banjo Kazooie-Donkey Kong-Banjo Tooie -Conker's Bad Fur day (I never played it, but that's what I heard, correct me if i'm wrong) *



True, but look at Quake, Quake II, and Quake III, the premise is the same, the missions are pretty much the same, yet the sequels are also wildly popular! How about Half-Life? When it came out it looked like just any other FPS clone, yet its game play was dramatically different (it ROCKED). What I am saying is, how it appears and how the characters are controlled says nothing about the actual game play itself. Nintendo is fighting mad, so you know they spending resources on their new games like never before. 

Anyway, when it comes down to it, the PS2 is amazing, the GC is amazing, and the XBox is... Well, XBox. Any console would blow your perception on what is possible with a console away, it just comes down to what games you like better, and what mega-multi-national corporation you want to support! 

-B


----------



## divibisan (Apr 19, 2002)

> the GBA rocks! I think it's far better than anything else that's out there.



Yes it is because no one is willing to devote the resources to make something better because the GBA would crush it anyway by sheer numbers



> The GameBoy was release in the late eighties, and other than the color refresh, it's essentially unchanged for almost 20 years! So essentially, the original GB design was spectacular!



When it first came out it was good, but ir remained unchanged for almost 20 years and it got hopelessly outdated. Because of their monopoly, nintendo didn't need to update or improve their product. I can guarantee you that if they had a competeter in that market the Gameboy would have been updated more frequently and we would have gotten a better product.



> Think why XBox has so many mediocre games? It's because people just port to it whatever they have developed for the PS2.



Yes, but that's not the PS2's fault. These large companies make rushed, forulaic, mediocre games for the PS2 and port them directly to the, admittedly more powerful xbox.



> the fact that developers are only starting the make their games look really good AFTER PS2's been out for over a year shows that how difficult it is to exploit and code for the console.


This happens with all consoles, the first games look much worse than later. With the GC, there are a few games that look good, but most either look bad or like cartoons (not nesseserily bad, but relatively easy to do) With the PS2, there were a few games that looked great when it first came out  too.



> True, but look at Quake, Quake II, and Quake III, the premise is the same, the missions are pretty much the same, yet the sequels are also wildly popular!



Yes, they're  popular and fun games, but they lack originality. While being the same as other games doesn't make something bad, it just makes it worse. If you sepend $50 on a new game that plays the same as another game and doesn't add something big (a new, fun gimmic) you have, don't you feel ripped off.  A games never as fun if you've played a game just like it before.



> How about Half-Life? When it came out it looked like just any other FPS clone, yet its game play was dramatically different (it ROCKED)



As I said, it has a gimmic, a good story. Had Half-Life not had a story and had just been a mindless shoot-em-up FPS would it have rocked as much? I don't think so. 



> Think about it, even though Square is ~20% owned by Sony, it is willing to divert resources (even though through a "third party") to develop for GC and GBA, it does show that Square seens tremendous potential in the GameCube.



Sony doesn't mind that Square is developing for the GBA because that system is not a competitor. As for the GC, the square affiliate says that it is developing square games for the GBA. While they say that they will have GBA-GC connectivity that means one unconfirmed game. I think that the real reason behind this is not that they believe that the GC is a hugely profitable market, but that they are trying to find new profit sources. Nintendo's Fund Q is paying for the porting so Square is not putting that much money on the line by making Nintendo games. Additionally, they are not going to divert resources because they are not making games for Nintendo. Another 3rd party company, with square's permission, is porting the games.



> the PS2 is amazing, the GC is amazing, and the XBox is... Well, XBox



Don't get me wrong, the GC is a great system, I just prefer the PS2, and this debate was fun


----------



## rinse (Apr 20, 2002)

> _Originally posted by divibisan _
> *
> ... all of the buttons are analog (as opposed to only the sholder buttons).
> 
> ...Additionally, Sony owns 19% of square and is unlikely to let them make GC games, regardless, FF will always be on the PS2 so that's no reason to buy a GC *



All buttons are analog? I doubt it very much... the sqaure, circle, diamond, x buttons are analog? i want to see documentation on that.

Also, check around on nearly any game site, you will see that indeed there are two exclusive Final Fantasy Titles coming to Nintendo this year. One for GBA and one for GCN. The two will link together for additional playmodes.

Nintendo is really going after the 'adult' gamers with this platform as well. Eternal Darkness, Cameo, Metroid, RE, and sseveral other titles prove this. Supposedly Rockstar Games has two to three titles coming to the platform. Read up. 2002 is going to be a great year for the gamecube.


----------



## divibisan (Apr 20, 2002)

> All buttons are analog? I doubt it very much... the sqaure, circle, diamond, x buttons are analog? i want to see documentation on that.



It's true go here 



> Supposedly Rockstar Games has two to three titles coming to the platform.



Where? I haven't seen anything about that anywhere?



> Read up. 2002 is going to be a great year for the gamecube.



Yeah, but a even better year for the PS2


----------



## rinse (Apr 20, 2002)

I stand corrected on the analog buttons...

For in for on the square / final fantasy games and rockstar titles, take a look at cube.ign.com ...there are 2-3 new items regarding each of them, some in interviews with developers from both companies.

here is another one: http://allcube.com/news/stories/382002182757.asp

and a letter about a upcoming rockstar title:
http://cube.ign.com/mail/2002-04-11.html

a funny list about it:
http://cube.ign.com/mail/2002-04-11.html

some rumbling from Rockstar about E3 this year: http://cube.ign.com/mail/2002-03-29.html

so nothing 100%, but things look favorable.


----------



## divibisan (Apr 20, 2002)

I haven't gotten much new information on the Nintendo FF games. I read an older article wehere they said that the FF games were not going to be RPGs, but "a new type of game". Did you hear anything about that or what type of game they will be?


----------



## rinse (Apr 20, 2002)

> _Originally posted by divibisan _
> *I haven't gotten much new information on the Nintendo FF games. I read an older article wehere they said that the FF games were not going to be RPGs, but "a new type of game". Did you hear anything about that or what type of game they will be? *



i know they will not be like the PS titles, exactly... which is fine for me, because while they are beautiful and rich in story... the linearity of the game play seems too limiting to me. i am hoping for a more strategy / explorative scenario based RPG. similar to the roots of the series. i loved those games.


----------



## divibisan (Apr 20, 2002)

There have been some rumors that they will make a remake of FF Tactics for Psx for the GBA. That would be nice, but I have no idea what they will do w/ the GC. Of course, it will almost certainly come out for the PS2 also so I can find out them. It would be nice to have a strategy RPG.


----------



## Fahrvergnuugen (Apr 20, 2002)

The gamecube actually has better graphics imo. If you go to www.gamespot.com and read up on the three consoles, you will see that what M$ claims the xbox is capable of, is not how it actually performs. Their specs for polygons per second are like 10x what anyone has actually seen from it.

The GC also has / will have all of the legacy games that we all love [plus all of segas legacy games] Mario, Mario Kart, Zelda, Sonic, etc etc etc.

I think it's pretty cut and dry. The PS2 is already a year and a half old and they still want 300 bucks for it. The xbox runs windows [and they want 300 bucks for it]. And Nintendo is still king for 100 dollars less.


----------



## Fahrvergnuugen (Apr 20, 2002)

oh. One thing I forgot to mention. People complain because the GC doesn't have a DVD player. Well guess what? The GC is 100 dollars cheaper and you can get a brand new dvd player for about that much that will play dvds better than any console will. I have personally used the DVD player in the PS2 and I think its a piece of crap [it just doesnt work as good as a standalone dvd player]. And in order to even use the DVD player in the xbox you have to "unlock it" with a 30 dollar remote.

It's a game console. It's meant to play games.
When you buy a good stereo, all it has in it is a tuner and pre amps. Lower quality ones come with a bunch of built in "features" and you end up with a device that does a lot of things, but doesn't do any of them really well.


----------



## divibisan (Apr 20, 2002)

> The gamecube actually has better graphics imo. If you go to www.gamespot.com and read up on the three consoles,



It's your opinion, but personally, I think the PS2's are better



> The GC also has / will have all of the legacy games that we all love [plus all of segas legacy games] Mario, Mario Kart, Zelda, Sonic, etc etc etc.



The PS2 also has a lot of exclusive games, many more than the GC. It has many really good games in all of those genres.
Also, there isn't anything special about mario or zelda. People act as if the fact that these characters are in a game will make it good. That's not true. There's nothing special about these characters, and you an get the same types of games on every console and many of these are better.



> he GC is 100 dollars cheaper and you can get a brand new dvd player for about that much that will play dvds better than any console will.



The PS2's DVD playback is not the best, but it's pretty good. Also, the $100 is fora DVD player and an original Playstation.


----------

