Uh, GTA3 has been out on the PC for two years or so, and on the X-Box for almost a year.
Which PS2 second party games are you talking about? As far as I know, GT3 is still a PS2 exclusive. The same goes for Jak and Daxter, that Raccoon game, and Ratchet and Clank. There are a lot of 3rd Party games that end up on X-Box and PC, but the nature of a 2nd Party game is that the game will stay exclusive to that system, like a first party game.
Uh, GTA3 has been out on the PC for two years or so, and on the X-Box for almost a year.
GT - It's a racing game, there's been like 300 of those on either system. They don't need to port it, so this becomes pointless as any owner of any system can pick up about 30 racing games per week.Originally Posted by Gengachu
Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank, Sly Cooper - Platformers. If anythings been shown, it's that the XBox is not a place for platformers. After Blinx, if they didn't buy a PS2 for the platformers, they're not gonna buy a Platformer for the XBox...
The nature of a 2nd Party game is to appear on the system it's developed for but also to keep the options for a port open.
Except Gran Turismo has a certain quality that 95% of other racing games do not.
Anyway, I'll give my thoughts on the PS2:
I own one and I love it. While the majority of games suck, it is home to quite a few games that I wouldn't mind playing again(FFX, GT3, DMC, Jak II, Ratchet and Clank, Xenosaga, and the entire PS1 RPG Library). A lot of other fine games that I loved to death also. Although it is obvious the GCN/XB are more powerful, I've found that to someone like me(ie. most people - duders who lack hdtvs, widescreen stuff, surround sound, and that special stuff for xbox), the graphics that the PS2 has are absolutely fine and that there is little different from them to the XB. Obviously games like DOA3 look quite a bit better than GTA3, but I wouldn't say that it is unbearable or anything like that. The general public still believes that the PS2 is more powerful than the GCN. Heh. And a lesser number believe it is more powerful than the XB.
On the other hand, I also hate the damn thing for killing off the Dreamcast. I don't want to join the damn bandwagon and get an XB just so I can play Shenmue III. I loved my DC to death and still do. It is probably my favorite system today just because of its sheer usefulness and innovation, whether for the games or for the massive pirate scene(y)(y)(y)(y)
It definately had the advantage being released way before all other consoles, because obviously people spent their money on PS2 and don't really want a second console. Saying the DVD drive had nothing to do with it is utter bullshit and you all know it. $300 is a lot to spend on a console, and the whole "it can play DVDs, dad!" thing pushed it out of the window. Regardless if you can now get a DVD player for $25, back then it even convinced people like me to splurge out on it.
The hype and name-recognition made the thing so popular. It's only real competition at the time was Sega and with the whole hype bullshit it pretty much took over. While hyped to be "the most powerful console ever", the Dreamcast was able to produce better looking games at the time, and even now has certain graphical advantages over it. I forget what they are, I read it at dcemulation a long time ago, something about the PS2 having jaggies I guess.
I won't even go into the name recognition and backwards compatibility issues either, because that is just common sense.
I probably drifted off as to why the 'cast rocks, but those are my thoughts on the PS2 and why it did so well.
GT=Gran Turismo. And GTA3 isn't a second party game. It's published by Rockstar.Originally Posted by Raz
Ugh...second party means exclusive at a period in time. But not necessarily permanent. GTA3 WAS until the PC port hit.
There's a difference between 2nd Party Games and Exclusive games. GTA3 was an exclusive not 2nd Party.
Actually...2nd party means it's exclusive at one point. It's game by game I think, like Viewtiful Joe is 2nd party, but Final Fantasy 11 is 3rd party(since it's on PC, not PS2, and was never meant to be exclusive)Originally Posted by Gengachu
Just because a game was exclusive does not mean 2nd party. A 3rd party game can also be exclusive.
CHOMP~
Depends on what you mean by "backwards compatibility". GameCube has the GameBoy Player, which is kinda like "sideways compatibility". Also, considering XBox is the first system in what will possibly become a "line" of consoles/portables/etc., it's pretty damn hard for them to have backwards compatibility.Originally Posted by Amethyst Flygon
However, I don't think it's fair to compare consoles. It's like comparing an Alienware and an eMachines: They have different purposes. They can both compute, but one's designed for hardcore gamers, while another is strictly budget. I'd say the same about consoles: XBox and PS2 are both "hardcore"-player oriented consoles, though XBox (obviously) more than PS2. I'd say the PS2 is more of an RPG-player oriented console; it clearly has the some of the best RPG's (though, this is subjective, and there are exceptions). GameCube is kinda the "average"-player console (ie, serious ADD), for people who like to play a game, and then buy another one and play it.
I totally disagree about what you said about the Cube. It's based on legendary franchises that come out every few months. Nintendo calls out to the hardcore gamer who grew up with these characters.
Sony and X-Box go for the popular violence and whatnot of the day. That doesn't mean the games are bad, but they want to attract various types of gamers.
Assassin, I think you've got it backwards. GameCube is for hardcore gamers, while PS2 and X-Box are for mainstream gamers. Both of them are mainly trying to attract the "killing people is cool!" croud, while Game Cube is mainly trying to get the people who have been playing since the 8- and 16-bit days. That's not to say that PS2 and X-Box don't have any old-school games. I recently played Metal Slug 3 on X-Box and it's great and PS2 has some SHMUPS, but I think Sony and Microsoft have to rely too heavily on games like GTA and Madden(yes I know Madden is on Game Cube, but the PS2 version sells a lot more copies).
Did you think that madden sells better on PS2 because there are like 1 billion more PS2 owners than gamecube owners? Not because PS2 relies on it?
CHOMP~
I think PS2 owners are a lot more interested in Madden than Game Cube owners and considering that the PS2 version of the "new" Madden game with slightly better graphics, updated rosters, and a few new features no one gives a crap about will be a best seller, I'd say that Madden and other sports games are some of the things that Sony relies on.
Why are updated rosters, better graphics, and few changes that people do care about a bad reason for it to be a best seller?
CHOMP~
It's not good because they're basically releasing the same game every year. But then again most of the people who buy it, buy it because it's football. I guess I have a bias against sports games, and particularly EAs. I've already stated the main reasons I don't like EA Sports, but besides them I think the AI is incredibly cheap. It seems like if you're leading at halftime, the opposing team will make some incredible comeback getting tons of interceptions or steals or whatever they call taking the ball from the offense in that game. That just doesn't seem fair to me, and it makes the game not fun. Plus the games take ridiculous ammounts of memory card storage.
Mario Party anyone?Originally Posted by Gengachu
Originally Posted by Lady Vulpix
I dunno if I communicated effectively enough; I can really be a screw-up sometimes. By "hardcore gamers", I meant people that like to invest lots and lots of time into their games (ie, Halo, Everquest, various other online titles). Of course, the 'Cube has SSBM. I find that the majority of 'Cube games are "serious ADD": fun, but sometimes not long-lasting. One reason I think so is the fact that PS2 and XBox have online compatibility ('Cube does, but it's far better supported on both PS2 and XBox).
Are you sure you're playing an EA Sports game and not NFL Blitz? If the other team starts beating you second half is ethier because you're running the same type of plays and the computer has learned what you're going to do, or you start sucking. Madden doesn't have rubberband A.I.Originally Posted by Gengachu
CHOMP~
I hate Mario party, but it's made by Hudson, so it's o.k. to hate it. And no I wasn't playing NFL Blitz(I actually like this game and I used to play Blitz 2000's multiplayer mode a lot) and that happened on every version of Madden I tried. Madden 64...cheap A.I. Madden 99...cheap A.I. Madden 2000...cheap A.I. At this point I said screw it and I haven't bought another game in the series since.
So you haven't played one of the games in almost half a decade and you're bashing it?
CHOMP~
Fixed it for you.Originally Posted by HealdPK
Yeah. I probably should try a newer version to see if they fixed the problem and it might be fun to do a franchise mode on one of them, but the series screwed me over way too many times, so I just don't feel like giving it another go. Plus I haven't been too interested in football lately anyway.Originally Posted by PNT510