Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
On the issue of hardware, which was better: Xbox vs. PS2 vs. GameCube?
#1
What say you?Smile

Sponsored links

#2
Xbox>GameCube>PS2.
#3
Xbox dies first, then Gamecube, and finally PS2.

It is funny that the more powerful, the shorter lifetime.
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400 | nVidia GeForce GTX 750 | 4 GiB DDR3 @ 533 Mhz | MSI G41M-P28 | Cooler Master RS-390-PMSR-A3 | Xigmatek TYR SD962 | LG Flatron W1943SE | HP KB-0316 | MotoSpeed F60
#4
The better hardware is not so good as the enjoyment and fulfilling sense of accomplishment it can bring. I remember when we children were out making our own cars from ball bearing devices (not sure the name in English for those devices used in machines, cars in the specific case). And then there was fierce competition to have the best car we could make.

Few children gets to make their own toys nowadays, I deem it a major and maybe terrible loss. There are advantages from industrial products of course, just I can't avoid the feeling there was a loss.

This applies to that thread title as a glove, what good is the most powerful hardware if it fails in what it should really shine?
Imagination is where we are truly real
#5
(03-09-2013, 07:27 PM)nosisab Ken Keleh Wrote: The better hardware is not so good as the enjoyment and fulfilling sense of accomplishment it can bring. I remember when we children were out making our own cars from ball bearing devices (not sure the name in English for those devices used in machines, cars in the specific case). And then there was fierce competition to have the best car we could make.

Few children gets to make their own toys nowadays, I deem it a major and maybe terrible loss. There are advantages from industrial products of course, just I can't avoid the feeling there was a loss.

This applies to that thread title as a glove, what good is the most powerful hardware if it fails in what it should really shine?

What are you going on about? The TC asked specifically about hardware. All three platforms had great games.
#6
(03-09-2013, 11:29 PM)metalmallow Wrote: What are you going on about? The TC asked specifically about hardware. All three platforms had great games.

How do you measure the better hardware?
Imagination is where we are truly real
#7
(03-09-2013, 04:36 AM)metalmallow Wrote: Xbox>GameCube>PS2.

This.
Xbox was an entirely different ballpark (Geforce 3!) and GC was a good bit more modern than PS2.
#8
(03-10-2013, 02:47 AM)nosisab Ken Keleh Wrote: How do you measure the better hardware?

Rama confirming is pretty much proof enough. Tongue
But seriously, look at any cross-platform games. Resident Evil 4 and Soul Calibur 2 looked loads better on GameCube than on PS2. Here's a detailed article: http://www.anandtech.com/show/858/13
#9
While PS2 may have had the weakest hardware, it definitely had the best software. Don't forget, only the PS2 could play DVD movies. Gamecube games were limited by mini discs, which held less data.

I think some PS2 games had worse graphics due to bad port jobs, especially in RE4's case (PC port was hideous!). Haunting Ground, Silent Hill 3, Fatal Frame 3, and Final Fantasy 12 are some of the best examples of what the PS2 could do graphically.

In any case, it's not really important anymore, cause we have the PS4, modern gaming PCs and emulators now. Also, Steam > Xbox Live.
#10
why gamecube is before than ps2? i thought ps2 is at second rank




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)