Splinter Cell to PS2, GC?

[Brisco Bold]

As Andy said, the actually design of the C-stick would dramtically change the way Splinter Cell would be played. However, it (the GC controller) would be be a lot better to use than the Dual shock (pad lay-out and all).

[Andy]

I'm glad someone else knows where I'm coming from. The analog is vital PV, honestly.

[MVS]

The GC controller has:

2 analog sticks that do not have Push in Function, a dpad
5 buttons, 2 analog triggers and a start button.

Splinter Cell on XB uses 2 analog sticks with press in (L3 R3) function, a dpad, 2 analog triggers, 6 buttons (with different features), Start and Back, and the dpad

Even if they map 2 of the buttons to the UP and DOWN on the Dpad, they are one button short and have no L3 and R3 function.

For that matter, the PS2 can do the L3 R3, but can't do the Analog Triggers.

Sounds like some control changes to these ports.

[Melf]

Shin, you're right about a lot of the games on my list being PC ports. However, a lot of them are only coming to the Xbox, of the 3 consoles. I don't play games on my PC because it doesn't feel like a gaming environment to me (I work hours in there for my classes, grading papers, etc) and because my wife doesn't really like the idea (I have a whole room just for gaming, what more do I need!). So the Xbox is the only way I'll get to play these games.

I understand everyone has their own tastes. I just think the GC has very few 3rd party games worth mentioning. I don't see why I'd choose the GC over the PS2 or even the Xbox for 3rd party titles. The system is almost entirely Nintendo-driven, which is why I got one in the first place.


As for the volleyball games, I said I'd rather not play any at all but that the DOA game looks more interesting (from what I've seen).

[Lhadatt]

Originally posted by Andy
Look who's talking. Yoshi bashes Xbox with more sense than you do. At least I make my judgements off of experience, smart guy

1) I am not on staff. There is precident for this.
2) My main beef with the Xbox is Microsoft's tendency to dominate industry sectors they want by their particular "conquer and plunder" methodology.

First comes the lure of the sparkly crap -- more advanced features, shiny graphics, a comprehensive broadband play environment. Then they strongarm other parties into going along with their plans to force out or limit competiton. Next is reaping the most beneficial aspects of that market at the time (usually by adopting features or buying companies). Finally, they then leave the market stagnate and free of innovation because they are the only player and see no need to push the market forward any longer.

It's happened with web browsers, it's happened with productivity software, it's happened with desktop operating systems. You may call me paranoid if you like (I've been called worse), but I'd like to not see it happen with videogames.

[Andy]

Originally posted by Lhadatt
1) I am not on staff. There is precident for this.

Yoshi is on the staff as well, and so is Hero, Burgundy, Sleeveboy, MechDeus, Sqoon, and many other people with opinions. Being on staff doesn't suddenly make us angels and take away our feelings, we aren't on staff because we think one console is better than another. I write objectively, as do all of the aforementioned, that is why we are on staff. Not because of what we say on a message board.

And I may be mistaken, but I could've sworn you were on staff a while ago, were you not?

2) My main beef with the Xbox is Microsoft's tendency to dominate industry sectors they want by their particular "conquer and plunder" methodology.

And this has what bearing on the games? I mean that is what this is all about, isn't it, Lhadatt?

First comes the lure of the sparkly crap -- more advanced features, shiny graphics, a comprehensive broadband play environment. Then they strongarm other parties into going along with their plans to force out or limit competiton. Next is reaping the most beneficial aspects of that market at the time (usually by adopting features or buying companies). Finally, they then leave the market stagnate and free of innovation because they are the only player and see no need to push the market forward any longer.

It's happened with web browsers, it's happened with productivity software, it's happened with desktop operating systems. You may call me paranoid if you like (I've been called worse), but I'd like to not see it happen with videogames.

Are Windows, Internet Explorer, and Office not fine products? I don't know about you, but I'd sure as hell rather enjoy my GUI environment-focused Windows that supports an all-encompassing catalog of hardware and software than type commands or work with something that nobody supports. What any of this has to do with videogames in the first place is beyond me.

[Shin Johnpv]

MS did not invent the GUI

it was actually invented at Xerox and then Apple ripped them off and then MS ripped off Apple

and Windows only got good with 2K, theres still a better OS than Windows out there and its called Irix it supports both GUI and command shells unfortanetly its only on SGI workstations but if SGI ever ported it to the X86 platform i would be a very very very very very very happy user

its the most stable OS ever created

Internet Explorer is OK

browsers like Opera and MOzilla are much faster than it

Office i have no comment on cause i never use it


I grant you that the one great thing about the windows enviornment is how many different hardware set ups it supports and thats probably its greatest aspect it allows for a great diversity in hardware


Unfortanetly Lhadatt isnt far off on MS's buisness practices and if you think its not going to hurt gaming your kidding yourself

I saw similar things happen when MS decided it wanted to be a market leader in 3d Animation

it bought up one of the large companies producing a very popular and powerful software Softimage (much like theyve been buyin gup gaming companies) they ported Softimage to the windows NT platform well ok they really didnt they wrote an Irix emulator that ran ontop of windows and made it run like ass, and hwile they were doing this software updates became too few and far between, sales of SOftimage dropped off, the big release of the next generation of Softimage kept getting delayed and put into limbo and when MS released it just couldnt take control of the industry (after spending millions upon millions of dollars on it) they sold off Softimage broke up some o fits technology and was done with it

Softimage was left a shell of its former self and it has taken avid quite a few years now to get it almost back to where it was ofcourse the market has moved on alot and softimage is not seeing the sales it used to even though XSI (the next generation softimage) is a pretty damn fine program

people then said the same thing

even if MS lost billions they had the money to stick with it and never give up on Softimage

dont kid yourself if they keep losing at something theyll drop it


Realise if MS ever decides to pull out of gaming because its not getting the control it wants the same thing will happen to the companies its bought like Rare and Bungie, their franchises will be sold off and them cut lose and theyll be left as shells of their former self

[gamevet]

Originally posted by Schlep
Good god, haha. I know that there are people out there without 5.1 playing the game on the Xbox, I was just pointing out that being able to hear the direction of guards/cameras/etc is extremely helpful in playing the game. I don't think 5.1 is that expensive or technophile anymore. I've seen speaker/receiver sets for $150...well worth the cost.

I have time linked Pro Logic and it can determine sounds to one of 6 speakers.I really don't notice that much of a difference in sound quality and I sure would'nt pay $150 for inferior equipment to have the added feature of 5.1. My 200 watt Sony STR-D990 will do the job better than some cheap $150 5.1.


So it is my feeling, that the Gamecube version using Pro-Logic II, will work just fine for this game.

[Yoshi]

Originally posted by Andy
Oh, and if strictly talking third party games, I don't know how anyone could possibly think Cube's line up is as good as Xbox's

I have to agree with Andy here. Throwing first and second party stuff out the window basically leaves the GameCube with Capcom's stuff. The third party stuff that is not exclusive to Xbox is also on PS2, but it is not on GC or the most part (Indiana Jones, Wolfenstein, etc.)

[Andy]

MS doesn't invent much, but what they rip off they usually do it as good or better (I know they do crappy jobs on many things though, like the integrated defrag, etc). But still, the gaming industry is a much, much different beast than the software industry, and judging from what practically every developer that has done projects for MS has said, MS is being extremely respectful and supportive with all of their developers. Just look at what Bizarre (Project Gotham, Metropolis Street Racer) said about MS:

GameSpot: What was it like developing Project Gotham Racing?

Brian Woodhouse: Developing Project Gotham Racing was a real challenge after Metropolis Street Racer. Microsoft's approach to developing games was totally new to us after our previous experiences. It was similar in some senses, and very different in others, to what we expected. Overall, the major difference between expectation and reality was that the Microsoft guys were really affable and "human," which was very different from the "corporate monster " we expected to encounter.