GTA on Gamecube and Xbox (in 2004)
- Thread starter Tallgeese
- Start date
By then they will be full of PS3 propaganda to blow out their windholes.
Edit: And Gamecube and Xbox owners will be looking forward to the next generation as well. This is a long way off.
It's humorous that someone says HAHA! when they have to wait 20 months to get a product that is readily available on other platforms. Wait a second...that almost sounds like what happens to people who try to play games on their MAC....
Note the heavy sarcasm in what I wrote....
Note the heavy sarcasm in what I wrote....
if you bought a mac for games, then the sales guy at compusa got good commission from you 
. IGN also annouced GTA4 for ps3, are they internet rumors probably. sometimes IGN reminds me of the old school EGM back in the days. EGM used to give out fake information.
. IGN also annouced GTA4 for ps3, are they internet rumors probably. sometimes IGN reminds me of the old school EGM back in the days. EGM used to give out fake information.yeah, a 20 month wait til the "other fanboys" get their chance at the GTA franchise on the "other consoles". sheesh...gloating over PS2s loss of the GTA monopoly 20 months in advance REALLY screams of jealousy. i understand why, they were REALLY fun games.
maybe i should go play the Legend of Zelda or Metroid now (8-bit versions) since you can play them on your pc with an emu and i dont have to support Nintendo while doing it! (tongue pressed firmly in cheek)
Sony locking RSG's GTA franchise to their system for 3 years=VERY SMART
Sony Copyrighting the phrase Shock & Awe=VERY STUPID
you win some you lose some.
maybe i should go play the Legend of Zelda or Metroid now (8-bit versions) since you can play them on your pc with an emu and i dont have to support Nintendo while doing it! (tongue pressed firmly in cheek)
Sony locking RSG's GTA franchise to their system for 3 years=VERY SMART
Sony Copyrighting the phrase Shock & Awe=VERY STUPID
you win some you lose some.
rockyct
Diamond Member
- Jun 23, 2001
- 6,656
- 32
- 91
I don't see why people just buy it for the PC, or buy a PS2 if they have to have it. Most likely by E3, the PS2 will be only $150 and there are plenty of other games only for the PS2. Sonly was pretty smart about keeping the GTA line only for the PS2 and PC. By the end of next year, most of the people who really wanted to play GTA on a console would have already bought a PS2.
I think this is huge for one BIG reason:
Well, first off, MrEvils comment drawing comparsions between Xbox owners and Mac owners, although quite articulate, completely missed the point.
The unleasing of Rockstar's games onto other consoles will give xbox/gamecube owners the opportunity to play future releases of the GTA series(and Vice City, GTA3, etc for those die hards who will still want to play those games). But I don't think the story is about the xbox fan who now gets GTA: Vice City. He/She probably bought a xbox because they wanted the superior hardware in a gaming console. They have already made their statement. The great news is that all the GTA fans will now have a choice of console in the future, as opposed to being locked into a inferior gaming enviroment(which will soon not be with PS3).
Games matter. But, the more games that open up to all communities will help people obtain to perfect system for them when the next generation consoles(aka PCs) come around. I personally own both consoles, but would not have a PS2 if GTA was on Xbox. What Microsoft will do to take on the PS3 down the road will be interesting...but in the end, I predict, both will be comparable. The ideal situation for the consumer is that each system is basically equal and deciding factors will not be about games, but about online support, multimedia capabilities(DVR), etc. This will never be the case, but the closer the better. Only for Xbox/PS2/Gamecube games really pushing the envelope when it comes to game development as respective companies fight for market share (which is great for end-users too). Find the balance between these two "goods" will hopefully create a greater "good" that will benefit the consumer(ME!).
This is just my percspective. I am cosmopolitan however and would love to hear other people's takes on this news.
Well, first off, MrEvils comment drawing comparsions between Xbox owners and Mac owners, although quite articulate, completely missed the point.
The unleasing of Rockstar's games onto other consoles will give xbox/gamecube owners the opportunity to play future releases of the GTA series(and Vice City, GTA3, etc for those die hards who will still want to play those games). But I don't think the story is about the xbox fan who now gets GTA: Vice City. He/She probably bought a xbox because they wanted the superior hardware in a gaming console. They have already made their statement. The great news is that all the GTA fans will now have a choice of console in the future, as opposed to being locked into a inferior gaming enviroment(which will soon not be with PS3).
Games matter. But, the more games that open up to all communities will help people obtain to perfect system for them when the next generation consoles(aka PCs) come around. I personally own both consoles, but would not have a PS2 if GTA was on Xbox. What Microsoft will do to take on the PS3 down the road will be interesting...but in the end, I predict, both will be comparable. The ideal situation for the consumer is that each system is basically equal and deciding factors will not be about games, but about online support, multimedia capabilities(DVR), etc. This will never be the case, but the closer the better. Only for Xbox/PS2/Gamecube games really pushing the envelope when it comes to game development as respective companies fight for market share (which is great for end-users too). Find the balance between these two "goods" will hopefully create a greater "good" that will benefit the consumer(ME!).
This is just my percspective. I am cosmopolitan however and would love to hear other people's takes on this news.
I remember when Capcom had Street Fighter only on the Super Nintendo. People who had the Genesis like I did held off on buying the SNES till the game was available on the Genesis as Street Fighter CE. Thing was, by the time it was released, no one cared. Street Fighter CE wasn't as great as they promised...
Same thing here. GTA or GTA Vice City is super cool on the PS2, so do yourself a favor by getting a PS2 and the games. Save yourself a lot of let down or disappointment.
Same thing here. GTA or GTA Vice City is super cool on the PS2, so do yourself a favor by getting a PS2 and the games. Save yourself a lot of let down or disappointment.
That is interesting and I didn't have a console back then. Don't you think the next versions of the GTA series will hold their own though? I don't think xbox ports of GTA:Vice City is what is so big about this news...Obviously people who want to play vice city aren't going to wait til 2004 to do it. But the next GTA game will probably be a sick game on both next generation consoles
You can trademark a phrase, not copywright it. Additionaly, Sony dropped their acquisition of Shock and Awe, and it looks like Midway is picking it up.
Anywho, It sucks if you dont have a PS2 that you have to wait till 2004 for GTAIII and GTAVC to come to a console near you. Then again, if you are a PS2 player, then you have something to combat all the Xbox player's Halo hob knobbing.
I cant wait for future installments of the series, whether it be on the PS2, Xbox, or GC [haha, the last one is sorta a joke ...]
Brent - while I did not divulge further on my comment, I can. While the Xbox may have a beefier hardware platform, note that if you want to play any EA Sports Game online with a console, it is not going to happen on the Xbox. Not now, probably not until MS drops the way they are doing things with Xbox live. Talk about an inferior environement.
Nintendo has their own audience and are trying to manipulate that from the child-like audience to a include a more mature audience.
The Xbox ports may look a tad bitter crisper, but they also had an extra year to get better graphics, so it should be expected. Now, I can justifibly say that the PS2 has a better selection of games...then again, Sony was lining up developers years in advance when they mopped the floor with the PSX.
By the time that the GTA franchise is opened up to all those other platforms, the next big thing will be here and no one will go buy an Xbox or Gamecube just because GTA is on it. Thus, my comparison to the Mac, while in jest, is close to the point. I have many friends who own the GC or Xbox and complain about the lack of quality games and wonder when things like GTA will be ported.....to me, that sounds a lot like the couple of Mac gamers I know wondering when Quake X/Doom X will be ported to it.
Games matter more than what you wrote and hardware a little less than. Ask yourself why the Dreamcast failed? It had some good games, but not enough to justify the masses buying it...and the Saturn blunder....people do not forget. Not due to bad hardware. Ask IBM about their blunder with the MCI bus architecture. Great concept, poor execution.
I don't think I missed the point at all. I agree that games should be across all platforms, if they can sell. Ever wonder why Madden 2003 sold about 10x more copies on the PS2 as the Xbox? Graphics are a bit better on the Xbox....MS just missed the boat with Xbox live.
Nintendo has their own audience and are trying to manipulate that from the child-like audience to a include a more mature audience.
The Xbox ports may look a tad bitter crisper, but they also had an extra year to get better graphics, so it should be expected. Now, I can justifibly say that the PS2 has a better selection of games...then again, Sony was lining up developers years in advance when they mopped the floor with the PSX.
By the time that the GTA franchise is opened up to all those other platforms, the next big thing will be here and no one will go buy an Xbox or Gamecube just because GTA is on it. Thus, my comparison to the Mac, while in jest, is close to the point. I have many friends who own the GC or Xbox and complain about the lack of quality games and wonder when things like GTA will be ported.....to me, that sounds a lot like the couple of Mac gamers I know wondering when Quake X/Doom X will be ported to it.
Games matter more than what you wrote and hardware a little less than. Ask yourself why the Dreamcast failed? It had some good games, but not enough to justify the masses buying it...and the Saturn blunder....people do not forget. Not due to bad hardware. Ask IBM about their blunder with the MCI bus architecture. Great concept, poor execution.
I don't think I missed the point at all. I agree that games should be across all platforms, if they can sell. Ever wonder why Madden 2003 sold about 10x more copies on the PS2 as the Xbox? Graphics are a bit better on the Xbox....MS just missed the boat with Xbox live.
Yeah, apparently once Rockstar publishes another GTA game, that finishes out the exclusive contract with PS2 (I'm guessing the contract was for the next 3 GTA games to be released exclusivly for PS2 consoles with PC to follow since they've done GTA3, vice city and now one more planned).
Notice how GTA3 took like 6 months or more to get to PC after it hit PS2? It was because of that contract agreement. Personally I think they'd be stupid to sign another exclusive contract, since they got huge sales with GTA3 for PC, and I doubt they will sign another. They can pick up a fair amount of money by releasing GTA3 and vice city for the other consoles even if it will be another year+ before they can.
I think most people would say that is a false statement. Microsoft made a good move with Xbox Live as compared to Sony and Nintendo. MS has set the standard for online game console play. EA and Eidos I believe are preventing online capabilities from being included on the XBox ports of their games. It's kind of stupid as it boils down to EA not wanting MS to make money off of their game and wanting more control, ie, the ability to make money off of online play. It's stupid and EA will bend. Sega's 2K series has caught up if not surpassed EA Sports games in many people's mind. I have been a 2K fan since the Dreamcast. I think the reason Madden did better than 2K3 was not because it was better (as I think they well equal), but because people have always played Madden and people are simple sheep who stick to what they know or what is popular (like the PS2). Right now Xbox does not have the user install base that PS2 does. So EA can play this game. Come Xbox 2 it will be a whole different game. Online will be a big part of the future and MS has got it right (hopefully it will only get better). Nintendo plain and simple has missed the boat with online play, (though I think the kids they attract won't be playing online anyway). Sony's approach is hit and miss. While a good number of players play PS2 games online, they all play the 2-3 games that are available. MS is on point with Xbox Live, they maintain full control over the service, thus setting a standard groundwaork for developers to use. They have also mandated that each Xbox Live game use the headset. That in itself was brilliant as ability to talk to other players adds a whole new dimension to the games. Also single username for everygame makes it easy to find your friends and such. I've gotten 3 friends to get an Xbox just because of Xbox Live.
Since I liked the Dreamcast system because of the games it has, I'll place my input here.
I think one of the reasons the DC failed is that there aren't enough folks (developers/companies) lined up for it. That and the fact that EA refuse to develop any games on it crippled the system (maybe because EA was givin' Sony a BJ at that time). Another thing that kinda killed it is not enough licensing to bring the GOOD games out here. Games such as Guilty Gear X and Cool Cool Toons could've made the system sold more. And had Capcom brought out Capcom vs SNK 2 to the DC instead of porting it to both PS2 and GC, then the DC would've lasted just a bit longer. Alas, the only game I know of that made a big impact on DC itself is Ikaruga. And that's being ported over to GameCube. Still, if it weren't for some of the ignorant folks at the US office, they could've invested just a little bit more in keeping the DC alive for a little while longer. And I'm sure folks like me would've bought some of these games had it been brought out here.
As for the Saturn hardware, it works great hardware-wise... but the failing part of that is coding for the hardware. While Sega would have been the company who'd know the hardware best since it's their system, even they have trouble trying to take full advantage of the hardware itself. However, there were few key titles on the Saturn that made it sell: NiGHTS, Virtual On, and Capcom's VS games. But it wasn't enough to keep the Saturn alive when competing against the PSX, which had so much more titles to choose from and had the Final Fantasy franchise on the system for 3 releases.
Further comments or discussions are welcomed, even though my input was a couple of weeks late.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter