Rob2600
02-15-2009, 12:58 PM
it's not really about the systems now is it? :D
Icarus, usually your comments are humorous and right on the money, but this time, you're wrong. It really is about the systems, at least for me.
If someone searches Google for "Xbox vs. GameCube" and finds this thread, I want that person to have the facts. If I hadn't posted in this thread, that person might think the Xbox really could push 125 million polygons/second in-game or that the Xbox really is 10 times more powerful than the GameCube, neither of which are true.
Instead of believing Microsoft's old marketing hype and spreading misinformation, I'm trying to be as factual and fair as possible. For the record, once again I'm stating that the Xbox was indeed more powerful than the GameCube...just not several times more powerful like Bojay claims.
The theoretical tech specs that Microsoft released in it's marketing materials in 2001 are meaningless. I'm going by actual in-game graphics. Sometimes I see that the graphics in Xbox games are a bit better than the graphics in GameCube games, but the difference isn't gigantic, like Bojay claims. Again, this is from what I've seen in screenshots and from the Xbox games I used to play with my old roommate.
I was also the Assistant Manager at an EB in NJ and would run GameCube and Xbox games on the store's TV. Neither I nor my coworkers ever noticed a huge difference in the graphics between the two consoles and we never had any customers, not even the fanatical ones, come in and claim that Xbox graphics were several times better than GameCube graphics. Instead, they resorted to arguments like, "The GameCube only has kiddie games," or "The GameCube is stupid because it's purple," but they never bashed the GC's graphics.
It's not just the graphics on games like Halo that the Gamecube couldn't handle, it's also the multi-player both over a LAN and on-line that it didn't have leftover horsepower to handle. Tracking multiple human controlled players in real time is super processor intensive and that's why you never saw anything beyond four player games on the Cube.
The GC couldn't handle online play? The Phantasy Star Online games run just fine using the GC's broadband adapter.
The lack of online GC games had nothing to do with CPU power or RAM. The Xbox had many more online games because it had a built-in network adapter and the GC didn't. It's as simple as that. How many people bought the GC broadband adapter? Five? It wouldn't make sense for developers to support GC online play when so few people bought the broadband adapter.
Besides, the Dreamcast featured online play in first-person shooters and sports games. If the DC can handle that, obviously the GC can, too.
Icarus, usually your comments are humorous and right on the money, but this time, you're wrong. It really is about the systems, at least for me.
If someone searches Google for "Xbox vs. GameCube" and finds this thread, I want that person to have the facts. If I hadn't posted in this thread, that person might think the Xbox really could push 125 million polygons/second in-game or that the Xbox really is 10 times more powerful than the GameCube, neither of which are true.
Instead of believing Microsoft's old marketing hype and spreading misinformation, I'm trying to be as factual and fair as possible. For the record, once again I'm stating that the Xbox was indeed more powerful than the GameCube...just not several times more powerful like Bojay claims.
The theoretical tech specs that Microsoft released in it's marketing materials in 2001 are meaningless. I'm going by actual in-game graphics. Sometimes I see that the graphics in Xbox games are a bit better than the graphics in GameCube games, but the difference isn't gigantic, like Bojay claims. Again, this is from what I've seen in screenshots and from the Xbox games I used to play with my old roommate.
I was also the Assistant Manager at an EB in NJ and would run GameCube and Xbox games on the store's TV. Neither I nor my coworkers ever noticed a huge difference in the graphics between the two consoles and we never had any customers, not even the fanatical ones, come in and claim that Xbox graphics were several times better than GameCube graphics. Instead, they resorted to arguments like, "The GameCube only has kiddie games," or "The GameCube is stupid because it's purple," but they never bashed the GC's graphics.
It's not just the graphics on games like Halo that the Gamecube couldn't handle, it's also the multi-player both over a LAN and on-line that it didn't have leftover horsepower to handle. Tracking multiple human controlled players in real time is super processor intensive and that's why you never saw anything beyond four player games on the Cube.
The GC couldn't handle online play? The Phantasy Star Online games run just fine using the GC's broadband adapter.
The lack of online GC games had nothing to do with CPU power or RAM. The Xbox had many more online games because it had a built-in network adapter and the GC didn't. It's as simple as that. How many people bought the GC broadband adapter? Five? It wouldn't make sense for developers to support GC online play when so few people bought the broadband adapter.
Besides, the Dreamcast featured online play in first-person shooters and sports games. If the DC can handle that, obviously the GC can, too.