:lol Ohhh you guys... let's take it from the top, shall we?
Do me a favour and pay no attention to that post. That's the biggest load of crap I think i've ever seen on this message board. Why? Because it's completely biast.
First of all, its spelled "biased". If you're going to put down my post, do it properly. Secondly, "opinion" would have been a much better word, because it's my
opinion. As well, referring to it as "the biggest load of crap"(I would like the record to show the mud slinging started with Retro, not me, and from here on in I get to be as sarcastic as I want)... are we in grade 3 here? Because if we are, you are a poo-poo head.
Wrong. The Xbox is NOT the way to go for multi-player games. The Gamecube offers some fantastic multi-player games that aren't available on any other console.
Right and wrong do not apply to comments based on my opinion. My favorite color is blue, yours is green, does that mean blue is wrong? Of course not. If I think the Xbox has the best multiplayer, then that's my opinion, not a fact, so don't tell me its wrong. Sure the GC has some great multiplayer titles; Mario Golf, Mario Party(quite a few of these), Mario Tennis, Mario Kart, etc. Of course, if you're not into Mario, there's considerably less choices, and if you don't have 3 friends available 24/7, then a lot of the multiplayer features will go unused. And if you owned a 64, there's really not much need to play any of these games. I know I enjoyed MK64, and Mario Party 2 more than any of the later versions, but I don't want to come off as biased, so make sure you rent and try every game on the GC at least once before you judge it, because even if it doesn't look like fun that's no reason not to waste money on it.
The PS2, with it’s huge libary, will also provide great multi-player games, although you do have to splash out on more for a multi-tap. Each console has it's own good multi-player titles, but i've found way more on Gamecube and PS2 than on Xbox, and i've known many other sources that agree.
I'd like the names, addresses, genders, and average age of these sources, to prove that they exist. Ok, that's not necessary, but that statement is completely irrelevant. If you want a way to gauge how many people are playing GC multiplayer games and Xbox multiplayer games, take a look at the member lists for NextBC(although I think their name has changed, have to get back to you guys on that) and the Warp Pipe. These are both services that provide free online play for online/LAN enabled games. Average users on NextBC varies from 500-5000, depending on the time you're playing. Average users on the Warp Pipe... well, I couldn't tell you, every time I tried to play someone over it, no one else was on. Kind of pathetic, really. Now, is this a completely inaccurate way of gauging who's playing what multiplayer games on which console? Of course, but it's a lot more accurate and unbiased than "I know a lot of people who agree with me", and you don't just have to take my word for it. Check if for yourself.
(in regards to good single player games on the Xbox) [There are] Not even half as many as the PS2 and Gamecube have.
Having next to no online ability will do that to a console. I mean, while everyone else is having fun playing Mortal Kombat with people their skill level halfway around the world, you'll be enjoying the great "single-player" experience defeating bot after bot after bot. Must be very rewarding.
That’s not entirely true. For one thing, the Xbox comes with a built in hard drive, meaning you don't have to buy any memory cards whatsoever. I myself have spent a good $80 on memory cards alone. Convert that to American $, you're looking at at least $50 if you want to save a decent number of games, but if you want the freedom to save anything, anytime, you're looking at more like $80-100 on memory cards, American. Oh, and if you do want to play any GC games online, that's another $40 for a BBA. Oh, and if you want to play the only GC game built for online, you'll be paying a monthly fee. Oh, I almost forgot this one, I've already busted 2 of my GC controllers. On my first the joystick broke and my second the c-stick broke, so expect to pay another $40 on replacement controllers. Kind of adds up, doesn't it?
If you're only gonna get one console, you need to look at what you can get from the console. Mega has already stated that he loves the Sonic the Zelda games, which the Gamecube provides quite nicely. There's also a ton of games for under $20 that Mai has just listed. Most of which aren't going to dissapoint someone who's previously enjoyed Sega and Nintendo franchises. That $100 is hardly looking "wasted" now, is it? However, i'd like you to list what $200, twice the amount, is going to do for him. So truthfully, spending $100 on a console that will guarentee good titles is a lot better than $200 wasted on a console that can't do the same.
:
By the way, I'm not rolling my eyes, I'm looking up at my previous statement. Paying $200 up front will save him the hassle of buying and keeping track of memory cards. It will allow him to play any number of great online games for a single annual fee. He could even use it as a DVD player, or store some of his favorite songs on it, and replace some game soundtracks with songs he likes. If you want to talk about consoles that "can't do the same," you're on the wrong side of the argument. I understand that he liked previous Zelda and Sonic installments, I never disputed that the GC wouldn't give that too him, but there are plenty of good $20 games for Xbox that Mai could list, if she was so inclined. I just thought that maybe if he wanted something new, he should consider the Xbox.
No, you're not just getting your Marios and Zeldas. Again, a biast opinion. Not much else? I can name about 15 exclusive titles, great ones, for the Gamecube. Games that mainstreamers like yourself fail to enjoy because they aren't online or don't belong to the console with the higest graphics.
"mainstreamers like me?" What does this have to do with anything? Trust me, if I was a “mainstream gamer” I doubt I’d spend my time talking about videogames on message boards. Don’t kid yourself, you’re not any more knowledgeable or enlightened about videogames than me just because you’re console of choice is unpopular. And again with the "biast opinion" nonsense. You're statement of being able to name 15 "great" exclusive titles for the GC is just as "biast" as what I said about Marios and Zeldas. Except mine is based on observation. Don't take my word for it, MegaDrive himself said that one of his reasons for buying a GC was for Zelda. I bought my GC for Zelda. A lot of people here probably did as well. It's not a dig at Nintendo, its the plain truth. First Party titles is about all the GC has going for it (and to a certain extent, cost, but that's just because all the bells and whistles for it are sold separately, $800 Panasonic GC anyone?). In fact, I bet at least half of those 15 “great” titles for GC are made by Nintendo, probably more. That’s Nintendo’s strength, but that’s pretty much it. The Xbox has great graphics and online, and the PS2 has the greatest game library known to man. Again, if you don’t like your Marios and Zeldas(by that I mean games made by Nintendo) then you probably won’t have much use for a GC.
Mega, get a Gamecube or a PS2.
Odd, I also suggested he get a PS2. Its almost like we're on the same side... almost...
your not comparing things right though. THE ONLY reason (on a per game basis) that the Xbox has better graphics is because the developers PORT THE GAME FROM THE PS2 TO THE GAMECUBE. How retarded is that?
I specifically stated, and I quote myself here: "Any 3rd party game that is across multiple consoles always looks best on Xbox, whether that's due to technology or just developer's getting lazy when it comes to porting, the Xbox comes out on top."
In other words, REGARDLESS THE REASON, GC GAMES (IN GENERAL) SCORE LOWER THAN XBOX VERSIONS, OF THE SAME GAME, FOR GRAPHICS. Please read through my posts so that I don’t have to restate what I already said. You want to play a game with sub-par graphics, then by a Cube and rant about how lazy developers are. Or, you want to play a game with top-notch graphics, by an Xbox.
Another reason is because the Gamecube is NOT set bent on visuals... as Nintendo has stated themselves. It can be done... developers just choose not to. Thats what I have always stated.
Developers also choose to not develop for the Cube, period. Once again, you can cry about it, or you can understand that there's another console that fulfills these desires.
It is a bunch of hogwash. I have yet to see the Xbox look much better than the gamecube. I am comparing BOTH on S-video. Thats how I do all my comparisons. You better believe I play everything that comes through my shop.
First, define “much better”. Secondly, I have to disagree with you there. Me, and the editorial staff at IGN. Just take a look at the head-to-head-to-head articles. Every once in awhile a GC game will come out on top, but its not very often, in fact, its almost never.
Sorry guys, if Mega's gonna buy a GC it should be because he likes Marios and Zeldas (or should I say Sonics and Zeldas, would that make ya'll happy?) not because someone on a message board told him the graphics are just as good as the Xbox's and there are way more, better, cheaper, games on it.
I bought my GC for Zelda, and now, 4 years later, I’m finally going to get what I wanted. But in those 4 years that I waited I was fairly disappointed with the games that came out for the GC, and in all honesty, I really wish I’d have bought an Xbox instead. I just want Mega to think about his decision and not make the same mistake I did.
edits: quoting issues...
