mgbfan

They're sure few and far between ... good ones, at least. I picked up Barbarian hoping that it'd be a fun 4-player romp, but after trying the single-player mode, I'm more than a bit dubious.

So what's good? I want games where 4 people are playing simultaniously (not in turns, a la Hot Shots). I want fairly simple games, where people can pick up a controller and play competantly right away (no 10-minute lessons in how to play). Genre doesn't matter.

Opinions?

BrinStar

#1. Time Splitters. 4player fun with up to 16(?) bots. Golden Eye on Crack.

#2. Tekken 3, fun if everyone can play well.

#3. Dead or Alive 2, Fun even if everyone doesn't play well. One 4 player board tho, suck.

#4. Madden, up to 16 players on one PS2. (I think, we only got up to 8 before my living room was full and ran out of beer)




Thats about all I've played.

Trigger

I thought you could only hook up 2 controllers to the PS2... one if you intend to use the DVD remote kit. Are these 4 person games for people who have 2 PS2s and 2 copies of the game? Or is there some sort of adapter you can buy extra?

Josh H

There's an adapter of the Playstation 1 and 2 called the Multitap that lets you hook up four controllers.

Just another way Sony sucks money out of consumers by requiring them to buy an accessory rather than building 4 controller ports on the system.

Trigger

Sorry, couldn't resist.

mgbfan

I've heard good things about Timesplitters. Think I'll add it to my want list. It's not as slow-moving as 007 or Unreal Tournament, is it?

dvdsteve2000

BrinStar

Nope, no where near as slow as 007. Didn't play Unreal on console.


Its alot more... disorganised.
But for drunken video game night the only thing that can top it is NFL Blitz on Dreamcvast.



Time Splitters has a MOUTIAN of stuff to "unlock" in the game. More so than 007 even.

I've gotten about 85% of the stuff and only about 10% of the "cheats" unlocked so far and Time Splitters was the first game I got for PS2 (back when it first came out).

Cardiff Giant11

actually, this was probably true more so for the PSX but I've heard that the inclusion of 4 controller ports would mess with the backwards compatibility of the PS2. Not sure if it's true or not. Either way, I think my cube will be the multiplayer machine. I've got 4 controllers for both (although on my PS2 two of them are original dual shocks) but I and most of my friends seem to find the cube controller a tad more comfortable. As far as good 4 player games, NHL 2002, NCAA Football 2002-03, and Agent Under Fire are all pretty good(although the cube version of AUF is superior in almost every respect).
Edit-Quake 3 Arena for the PS2 is pretty good as well. It's not perfect but it's much closer to its PC counterpart than Unreal Tournament is to UT PC. Having said that, I still preferred UT as it's just a more fun game

duy37

well for 4+ player games i would say..

Timesplitters, pretty much what everybody said before

Bomberman Kart - Japanese. Don't know when the USA version will be available but this game is great 4 player racing as well as classic bomberman. There's also different modes of playing, one I really like is where everybody is floating on a small circular island and we try to drive each other off the island, theres powerups and bots as well.

The Weakest Link - PAL converted to NTSC. Played with 7 players and its so fun voting against your friends. This is the UK version so some questions are related to the UK and money is in pounds. Don't know when the USA version will come out. The thing I don't like...You can't skip the part where the host is asking stupid questions on why that person voted against that other person.

This game is not out yet but its called Street Hoopz, similar to NBA Street. I'M really hoping for 4+ player support. Hopefully it's good.

Souljahh

another vote for timesplitters. this fps is underrated imho. it's fast, the control is crisp and responsive, and it's only about 15-20 bucks now.

Aghama

And Microsoft does. And Sega did. It's a valid point to bitch about.

Trigger

Sure it is... I totally agree and it's why I don't own a PS2 and am instead waiting until the price drops through the floor or the PS3 comes out... but I think it's fair to tease him a little after he used words like "moronic" and "lame" in response to things I've said. At least I was good natured about it. Sheesh...

Trigger

Actually - I don't know that it's a valid point to bitch about as in saying that Sony only did it so they could suck extra money out of people with the multitap... it was a design oversight or design flaw more likely than a malicious attempt to screw people out of money. The PS3 is going to have the PSone and PS2 capabilities on one chip and will be backwards compatible and I'd be shocked if it didn't have 4 controller ports. Besides, why would they try to squeeze money out of people over the controller ports when they're going to be able to squeeze tons of money already with their online play.

Aghama

I would agree that it probably wasn't so much a way to suck money out of the consumer as it was a cost-cutting measure. But the N64 and Dreamcast both had 4 ports, the N64 being a favorite of multi-gamers, so Sony wasn't ignorant of the fact that 4 player gaming was fairly prevalent.

Trigger

Well, perhaps what dfbennett heard is true and it was a limitation they had to accept at the time in order to be able to include backwards compatability for PS1. Who knows... I could ask my friend in Korea who works for SCEA and see if he knows.

Aghama

My understanding was that they achieved backwards compatability by practically sticking an entire PSX inside. But that could be BS too.

Josh H

The N64 and Dreamcast had 4 ports, and 4 player gaming was a big hit.

There is no reason sony shouldn't have put 4 on the PS2. Compatibilty is lame excuse IMO. They could have made it work.

They saw they could cut the costs a little, and also sell an accessory by only putting 2 on it.

Trigger

I think that's basically true, but I'm told by an insider that the PS3 will have the PS1 and PS2 on the same chip. He was pretty excited about it, so I figure it's big news? Anyway...

Trigger

Uhh... well I can't speak for the world, but I would think that if you put 4 controller ports on your system, then people are more likely to buy 4 controllers rather than if you put 2 controller ports on your system hoping they will buy 4 controllers and a multitap. I have 7 controllers (all different) for my Xbox - if it only had 2 ports, I'd probably only have 3 or 4 controllers. If they were doing it for the reason you're thinking they did it - it would've been a huge marketing blunder on their part. They could've made more money selling controllers if they had just put 2 extra dead ports just for looks.

Aghama

What I was getting at was that if the PSX and PS2 parts are pretty much seperate, the compatibility problem w/ 4 controllers doesn't hold much water.

Trigger

If you were an engineer, what you are saying would actually mean something to me... I'll ask my friend and see what he says.

Aghama

You don't need a Master's in EE to figure that if there are essentially two systems sitting in a box, they can be wired to different peripherals. The PSX doesn't even need to know about the other two controllers.

Trigger

Sorry this thread got spun off topic, but last thing I'll say here is if what you're saying is true, then the PS2 would have to have 6 controller ports - 2 for the PS1 component (which as you say is seperate) and 4 for the PS2 component. It's just something you can't actually know for sure unless you designed it or heard it from someone who did - we can speculate all day long though and your logic path is certainly a possiblilty, but not the only one.

RJainMJ

I know its PS1, but Crash Team Racing sounds exactly what you're looking for. Tons of fun multiplayer and easy to play. Unfortunately, I think that would require a PS1 multitap?