Still on the fence about the cube...

I wasn't seriously considering a current-generation console at all until Mario and Zelda were on the horizon. I was always a playstation guy and was pretty content. Then last year, on a whim, I picked up a cheap dreamcast and a bunch of $10 games...which led to the purchase of a used N64. Overall, the N64 had a pretty weak library, but there were 10-15 SPECTACULAR first and second party games on that thing.

So the big selling point for me at this point is first party Nintendo games. But if I'm going to buy a new console, I don't want to buy the wrong one. I've been perusing the reviews, and it seems like when a game comes out on all systems, the Gamecube version is the weakest of the bunch. Specifically I'm talking about Spiderman, Sega NFL/NBA 2Kx, Need For Speed, and Robotech: Battlecry...but I'm sure that there are other examples.

Are the differences drastic, or so subtle that I wouldn't notice unless I played the other versions? I really want Mario/Zelda/Metroid/Starfox, but there are some really good exclusives on PS2 as well. If the PS2 is the superior console, I'll just wait since I still have N64 and DC games to finish.

Please don't turn this into a "console x sucks" kind of a thread. I'm looking for objective opinions here.

note: DVD capability is a non-issue and the X-box doesn't tempt me in the slightest...I'm just not a PC guy.

This problem is plaguing the Xbox as well. Most multi-console games are optimized for the PS2, and then sloppily ported to the other two consoles. There are exceptions: for instance the Xbox version of Spiderman is generally considered the best of the three. Ditto the GCN version of Turok.

It does seem that developers are finally starting to get a clue. Gamespot gave the same rating to all three versions of Timesplitters 2. Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance is being retooled to take advantage of the Xbox and Cube's power.

Personally, I don't play a lot of multi-console games (this is by coincidence than by design). Those that I have played I've enjoyed, however, and when reading some of the negative reviews it seems that sometimes these games get low marks because the reviewer had played the game on the PS2 and had a hard time adjusting to the new control scheme on the other consoles.

Most of the differences aren't very noticeable. The ones that are bad, are also worse on the X-box than the PS2. Need for Speed 2 is a good example. According to the EGM reviews, the PS2 version is far superior, as the GCN and X-BOX lack the sense of speed due to a slower frame rate and some slow down.

This is a result of the developer making the game for the PS2, (which is a no brainer given it's huge lead in sales), and the rushing out half assed ports to the other systems with the only concern being to make the launch date and get a few bucks of gamers that don't own a PS2.

For most games the difference is just graphics not as good as they should be on the GCN or X-box. The GCN also has a memory disadvantage on sports games due to it's tiny memory cards. I buy my sports games for my PS2 even though I prefer the GCNs controller simply because most sports games on the GC take a whole mem 59 or, in some cases, a whole mem 251 to save a season or franchise.

BTW, I played all 3 versions of NBA2K2, and found the GC version to be the best. The X-box version looked slightly better, but they slightly tweaked the AI for the GC version, and as a result the "players stop like running into a wall when trying to drive by a defender who wasn't in front of them" problem was less frequent in the GC version.

I haven't played NBA2K3, so I don't know how the GC version stacks up.

The only way to be safe is to buy 2 different consoles. I own a XBOX and a GC. The GC has a nice line up(1st party games)
....but the XBOX has more power....but is making moves to build a stronger lineup. Plus you have HALO and XBOX live!

I would think that the PS2 is the best one console setup. But I would never buy one. 1. Zero power 2. lame controller 3.it's old news

that's only my 2cents!

I think no matter which way you go you'll feel like you're missing out on some games. I own all three next gen consoles, but I have to pass on games because of time and money, so there really isn't a solution to catch all of the desired games for me.

Between the PS2 and the Cube, I don't think the multi-console games are that much worse on the Cube. In fact, load times are usually much quicker on the Cube and there is little graphical difference. The Xbox is usually the console that receives the extra upgrades. [edit: I may be wrong here. I don't actually own any multi-console games, so this was based on personal interpretations of other news and information. According to the other admittedly more knowledgeable folk here, the PS2 may have a slight edge.]

As usual, it comes down to games. I can't live without the Final Fantasy series, so I had to have a PS2. On the other hand, Mario/Metroid/Zelda/MARIO KART! were Cube games I had to have. In my opinion, even hardcore gamers will find plenty of satisfaction with any of the consoles. None of the consoles are worse than the others in my opinion. In fact they all rock for their different reasons.

I guess it depends on which exclusive series you would miss more, the nintendo ones or the PS2 ones.

stoolie

Hell I gave up on my beloved FF!

chess, since you listed mario/metroid/zelda/starfox why not just get the cube? You really won't find those types of games on either of the other two systems. I would say get a cube now and if you see a must have game later just pick up the other system. You could go used or refurbed or een pick up one of those bundles later on this holiday season.

It's hard for me to say you won't notice them as I play many of my games on multiple systems (I own all 3). I could give you some examples though:

1. Madden 2003/NFL 2K3 - with the GC you NEED a 251 block memory card. Either that or you will fill up one 59 block card. I am not sure about the exact number (I do not own these on GC, but have played them) of blocks needed, but franchise mode takes quite a bit.

Another thing with these 2 titles is they both have a blurring effect in use. Madden 2003 has it a bit more than NFL 2k3. The PS2 and X-Box versions of these games do not have this blurring effect going on. You would probably not know the difference if you have not played the games on the other systems though, but that is only a guess.

The GameCube controller is IMO the worst for these games. I will not go so far as other people have to say that the GameCube controller is for Mario only, but the PS2 (#1) and X-Box (#2) have better controller options.

2. NFS: HP2 - the bad ports to GC and X-Box are because EA Canada got the reigns to these 2 ports while Blackbox (the original developer) worked on the PS2 version. This game was only supposed to come out on PS2 and PC when first announced. The problem with this game is that the PS2 version just has so much more in it and actually has better graphics. It is obvious that Blackbox and EA Canada did not work in conjunction with each other on this project.

The PS2 version of this game is easily the best and there is actually slowdown in both the GC and X-Box versions. The GC and X-Box versions are pretty identical. I would not purchase this game on either system, only PS2.

3. Spider-Man - All versions are actually pretty good. I would argue that the PS2 version is the worst and the X-Box version is the best. Unless you are REALLY picky, you probably will not see much of a difference in graphics beteween the X-Box and GC versions, but you will in the PS2 version. The PS2 version has no texture to the windows in the city for example (they are black instead of reflecting the area around them), while the GC and X-Box version do.

The X-Box has two extra levels plus an extra boss fight. The controls on each system are pretty easy to get used to. I don't think you would be disappointed with the GC version of Spider-Man.

I will say that there is some slowdown on the GC version though. It runs quickly quite a bit, but there are some slowdowns.

Basically, the biggest strike against the GC (especially from a sports game perspective) is the memory issue. Both the PS2 and X-Box have a larger bank of memory on their cards or hard drives (in the case of the X-Box). Hopefully EA and Sega will rectify the blurring in this years football games and have none in Madden 2004 and NFL2k4, we shall see though.

I'm not going to push you to buy an X-Box (I own all 3 systems, all 3 are great systems), but it is not fair to call the X-Box "PC". I think the X-Box has gone a long way into getting console-type titles out instead of ones you are more used to seeing on PCs. There are some very good X-Box games out there that would not pander to the general PC game populace.

Are you even considering a Playstation 2? Many of the best games are $19.99 now. Of course these games are 9+ months old.

I too am concerned with this.

It's simple though. Games are "made" for the PS2, and then the XBOX and GC get ports off that. Usually (as with the 2K's) the GC gets the worst port and the lest time spent on it. Yes it's pretty f'ed up for us GC owners, but then again you get what you pay for.

I bought the GC since I couldn't live without Mario, Metroid Prime, Mario Kart and all the other Nintendo first party titles. Well, I recently found out that I can live without Mario, so maybe it's time for a different system for me. Nevertheless, you too should think it through, whether Nintendo's first party games are a must-own.

While GTA3: VC and Halo 2 look very promising on their respective systems, IMO there is very little else that you'll find on those systems that is "must-have".

I would be lying if I didn't say the GC ports of NFL 2K3 and NBA 2K3 could be a lot better graphically and overall.

With the xbox we're supposed to be seeing more games ported from the PC since the hardware is so similar... so far the only one I can think of is Morrowind (which is nothing to sneeze at). I think once developers start seeing what the xbox can do and decide they need that power to fully realize their aspirations it'll take off. Not that I'm an avid xbox fan, or a PS2 or GC fan for that matter. I own all three plus a GBA and a buncha other mess from second and third and fourth and fifth generation systems.

I do think, though, that ports being worse on the xbox than the PS2 is more of an exception than a rule. I can think of several that are better to own on the xbox than the Ps2 (Tony Hawk, Spiderman, Turok, Spy Hunter, Madden to name a few) and the only one I can think of the other way around is Need For Speed.

The GameCube REALLY surprised me. This was the last system I thought I'd own (and I guess it sorta was since I bought it last, but anyway). I was all pumped to get the xbox, especially when Buffy came out and am very happy to have that along with my PS2 (which I wouldn't give up with stuff like GTA: VC and Kingdom Hearts). I kept saying, I'm not buying a GameCube till they prove themselves because I still felt a bit burnt by the N64 thing. Sure it was around a while, but it never had an expansive library of titles and some things just sucked on it no matter what.

Then Animal Crossing rears its ugly head and I buy a GameCube... then a week later I get a GameBoy because of the durn thing. At any rate, the last 3 weeks I've been playing almost nothing but my GameCube. I guess it's true that graphics and raw power don't a console make. They all three have their good points and bad points... I guess I'm a bad person to ask which to get since I couldn't decide myself and broke down and got em all.

~Scheherazade

Animal Crossing is what is going to kill Nintendo. Because once everybody buys it they won't have time to play any more games on their cube!

Heh, you're probably right Groucho... I don't have the desire to buy any other games for my GameCube yet. I am satisfied with just Animal Crossing for my $300. Hehe.

For those wondering about that outrageous amount, that include the game, my gameboy and link cable, the gamecube... and the $45 in fees on my check that I bounced when buying this stuff!

~Scheherazade

Since this is sort of on topic I have to say that most games that come out on all three consoles at once never strike me as all that good. I prefer a game to be developed for one system and have everything optimized for that system. I'm not a big fan of ports. Of course there is always exceptions such as MGS which is being optimized for the Xbox, but it's not a simultaneous release. Besides sports games what must have games have come out for all systems at once?

thanks for your thoughts fellas...

what i'm hearing is that most games are pretty close in quality across systems unless they're blatant PS2 ports...Need for Speed being a good example. Spiderman is fine, sports games are hit and miss...

aside from the first party titles (and probably the true reason for this thread) robotech: battlecry has my interest peaked. it may not be a perfect shooter, but that game is just a dream come true for me, and has me motivated more than anything else to buy a system NOW as opposed to waiting for them to get really cheap. i actually think it was primarily designed for x-box, but i'm not sure.

anyway, if I get a cube, i'll get ever so slightly inferior ports, will miss out on some PS favorites like Gran Turismo, FF and MGS...along with some new stuff like GTA2 and that racoon platformer...plus i'll be missing the best controller by quite a stretch (PS2) and a lot of current $20 games.

but if I got a PS2 i'd be missing out on Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Starfox, Wave Race, Rogue Squadron and Animal Crossing...would pay an extra $50 for the system...and would still get a port of the game i'm most interested in (robotech).

i know i'll own both eventually...unless PS3 is backward compatible...but i think i want the gamecube now. plus there's a cool platinum version coming out for x-mas.

Pretty good responses so far from everybody, so I just want to comment on this line, also.

I didn't think anybody was still equating Xbox with PC. It's an anti-Xbox argument that's not even seen at the Gaming-Age forum anymore. And those of you who know Gaming-Age know just what that means.

Personally, I wish we were able to equate the two. The first year is the weakest for any console; think of how many great PC games could have been brought over to easily create the best first-year lineup ever. There are millions of non-PC gamers for whom every PC port would have been a new experience. Instead, there's just Morrowind surrounded by such console-only games as Running Wild, Kabuki Warriors, Shrek, and New Legends.

It's a shame, really.

DON'T DO IT!!! I only have old consoles right now, and I don't want to be the only one.

But I always look at reviews, and I have seen the trend you speak of, but interestingly the trend seems to be toward the x-box being slightly ahead of the others in one category or the other.

I will wait until at least Christmas and maybe until Kingdom Hearts is a $19.95 game. Then I might have to jump in and get them all.

Oddly, I prefer the x-box from what I have read, but the games that it is known for (mainly HALO) is my least favorite type.

You shall be waiting at least 9 months and probably several years before that happens. Is FFX at $19.99 yet? Nope, that came out 9 months ago.

I can wait. I've gone this long. Honestly, there are so many great classic games out that I never had time to play that I will be busy forever.

Kingdom hearts may make its way into a bundle or something, too.

kvr,

good to see that you're still around. don't worry, i'm all about last generation stuff. the DC/N64 combo i picked up last year has definately served me well...particularly the N64. Mario 64 and Zelda 64 are probably my two favorite games EVER. I still think that the PS1 had a better overall library, but there were some terrific games on the N64.

i've even caught myself playing Mario all-stars for SNES a lot lately. those were really great games...and much more challenging than a lot of the stuff out there now.

but to me, the cube looks like a classic gamer's console. a throwback to when games weren't just "cool", but also FUN.

oh, i didn't mean to sound like i was disregarding the X-box because there's something wrong with it...it's a powerful system with a growing library. it's just that it's signature games aren't the type that typically appeal to me. it also seems a bit complicated for a console with the size and weight and harddrive and all. i think the x-box controller might be the size of a gamecube!

Get a PlayStation 2.

For as much as anyone and seemingly everyone likes to take shots at this system, it plain and simple gets many of the best games.
You don't play graphics, you play games and while nobody would decieve themselves into thinking the PS2 games are the best looking of this generation, who cares. I own all three of these systems and only play occassional console specific stuff like Halo, Mario, etc.. on my Xbox and GC, for a huge precentage of my gaming the PS2 is the way to go.
Given that you seem partial to Nintendo games, the GC is a fine console with some quality titles, but as a sole machine, just not enough to justify. Plus the lower cost in the aftermarket for used stuff make the PS2 more economical at this point.
graphics are again, not the end all and be all of a console and the PS2 has games, lots of them, many of them suck, but many of them are TOP NOTCH and can be found no place else, and it is not a half bad DVD player to boot. It would be the last of my three I would surrender (and you'd have to pry my Dreamcast from my cold dead hand).

Mario All-Stars gets a lot of play from me too. Agree about the library on the PSX. The N64 is pretty limited, but what it does have is fantastic. I still play pilotwings a lot.

Good to see you too.

Multiconsole games suck on GC. Most multiconsole games are designed primarily for PS2, and ported up to Xbox and GC.

Problem: PS2 has 4 shoulder buttons. GC has 2. Which means that a game designed to be played on a PS2 controller has to make some kind of adjustment to run on the GC controller.

For SSX this meant less tricks. In Madden, it means that you can't control the direction of your juke or stiff arm.

The upside is that most of the best console titles are exclusive to one system, but the best games that are multiconsole almost always play best on PS2.

I would tell you to get two consoles.

I really have believed and stated for a long time that the best two console combo is the PS2 and GC.

with the PS2 you get a large and growing library of games many of them great and with the GC you get great first party games from Nintendo.

With some bundles sure to hit this Xmas I would get both if you can afford it. remember to sell or trade in your PS1 to drop the price of the Ps2 purchase by a few bucks

2 consoles? hell, i already have 4 active ones...DC, N64, PS, SNES.

really, that seems like a pretty reasonable recommendation...and i'll certainly get a PS2 at some point...but not now. i'll either get a cube or nothing.

try to get my frame of mind here...i missed out on mario and zelda 64 entirely until about 8 months ago and was simply BLOWN AWAY. hearing that another mario and another zelda are en route has me motivated.

nothing that's come out on the PS2 has peaked my interest quite as much. GT3 doesn't seem much better than GT2 (or 1 for that matter), same with MGS2, i haven't played a FF since 7...GTA 3 looked pretty cool though, i must admit.

anyway, i'll be looking for holiday deals.

Mario Sunshine is already out. Or where you refering to the report that there's another Mario and a second Zelda coming?

At any rate, Mario Sunshine's great. I personally like it more than Mario 64. The new zelda looks interesting as well, though I'm not a fan of cel shading.