game.com What is the inside joke on this??

[Anthony1]

I always hear people mention game.com, and then some snide remark usually follows, and it's like an inside joke that I don't know about. I must admit that I know virtually nothing about the game.com . So what is this joke about the game.com that everybody knows but me?

[chrisbid]

the game.com was plain awful. think of an original gameboy without the charming games

[Darth Sensei]

Yeah, it sux ass. Almost completely un-redeeming steaming pile of poo.

[cyberfluxor]

I get the inside jokes for the most part but isn't not that horrible for all. I played Wheel of Fortune and Lights Out on my friends for quite awhile when I was at his place back in high school hanging out and he'd have to do some chores. I will admit the library is small and nothing amazing to glaze at but it'll eat some of your spare time up.

[Anthony1]

So basically, it's just that it sucks really bad. There isn't anything else to it? Like they advertised a ton of games that were coming, and then all of a sudden went bankrupt or something?


It seems like this is the most hated system of all time, and I was wondering if there was something more to it, than it just sucking really bad. The 32X isn't the butt of every joke, yet it sucks really, really bad.

[s1lence]

The 32x is way better then the game.com, minus the size of the system. The game.com is just a really poor system. Granted if you want to collect it you can probably get the system and every game for under 100 bucks, so guess that could be another positive for the system.

[The S]

Simply put, the game.com was to its time what the N-Gage is now.

I still want one, though.

[playgeneration]

the problem with it is the screen, any scrolling or movement makes it blur so much that you have absolutley no idea whats going on. I can only assume developers like sega had no idea about this fatal flaw when they commited to making so many games for it. The only games that can be enjoyed are the primarily static screen ones like the solitaire you get built in

[tholly]

the inside joke is that it is a piece of shit, unlike the 32x, as you have mentioned.....

[Neil Koch]

I got one plus about 8 games for $20 on clearance from Target - and that's about what it's worth. The version of Monopoly is decent, but like was said before, any of the scrolling action games blur so much that they're unplayable.

I certainly don't have the same level of disdain for it as I do the 32X, which I was actually stupid enough to pay full retail for when it first came out...

[Poofta!]

its the size of a gamegear, with a monocrone screen with more ghosting than first generation LCDs. it had about a dozen or so games, all of which are terrible. you can compare this system to those 5 dollar electronic touch screen organizers you see through mail order.

it was called the .com cause you were supposedly able to check your email and play games via telephone line.

it was made by Tiger Electronics Ltd.

it had 'ports' of games like duke nukem 3d and resident evil (i think) unfortunately these games are about as playable as shoving a 2600 cart into an NES.

its just a piece of crap. all around. no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

[Pantechnicon]

It's not a complete waste, but it's nothing to build a web shrine for either. I recently got a hold of a boxed game.com with four games for $7. It was a fair price, given the overall quality of the system.

Pros: Pretty good sound. Has two functioning cart slots. Integrated PDA-style functions. Online connectivity (useless today, but noteworthy in its time).

Cons: Inordinately heavy. Horrendous screen. Controls feel sloppy. Stylus is awkward.

That's about all I've got to say about it.

[c0ldb33r]

Can you get online with it using the modem? That's a pretty neat function :)

[rbudrick]

I've always wanted a Game.com-TV converter just so I can see if the games still suck when they don't blur. Sonic might actually be fun.

Unless Brian Provinciano makes these for the mass market, the world will never know. LOL

-Rob

[fishsandwich]

Simply put, the game.com was to its time what the N-Gage is now.

You must not have an N-Gage.

It's still being supported. The latest batch of games are great... Pathway to Glory (two of them), Civilization, Urban GT 2, the free Worms game, and (hopefully) the upcoming Warhammer are perfect examples of awesome games. Did the Game.com even have ONE game that could be considered "good", much less "great?" To bad there won't be many more physical releases for the N-gage, I'm afraid.... Nokia seems to be headed for a download-only model.

N-Gage runs a variety of great emulators. The ones for the Game Gear and Game Boy Color, in particular, are outstanding... and most of those portable games are great for on-the-go gaming. The MAME is pretty good, too, as is the NES. I haven't tried the Genesis emulator yet.

The N-Gage certainly had a botched launch and the side-talkin' thing made it into a joke, but to compare the N-Gage to the Game.com is plain stupid.

I'm done with my N-Gage rant now.

Visit www.geocities.com/the32xmemorial/index2.html to see why the 32x isn't as bad as people think.

As far as the Game.com goes... it sucks. A few of the slower-moving games are mildly entertaining (Lights Out, Wheel of Fortune, Jeopardy) but all of the "big" games are flat-out dreadful... Sonic, Mortal Kombat, Batman, Fighter's Megamix, Indy 500, et all are utter crap. Anything that requires movement is a festival of blurriness... a celebration of nausea.

I have a Game.com and about 3/4 of the games released for it. I haven't played that thing in almost two years.

[tom]

I like my game.com, it's not worse than, lets say the Supervision. I like the look of the game.com (original), it is a very nice, streamlined looking handheld.

game.com had neat features: 2 cartridge slots, PDA style touch-screen with pen, diary functions with calculator and phonebook, built in game, auto high score save into handheld, internet connection.

Blurring is bad, so avoid all scrolling games.
Good games are Lights Out, the two WOF games, Monopoly, Scrabble, Casino, Henry, Jeopardy, Quiz Wiz and Arcade Classics.

I got the 14k modem for the game.com, and actually 'surfed the net' with it. Text based only, understand.

[tholly]

Can you get online with it using the modem? That's a pretty neat function :)

ultra slow connection and a shittastic b&w blurry screen....that isnt a function, thats a waste of development time that could have been spent making the games / system better (not like that actually could have happened, there is not much you can do to improve shit....cuz, shit will always stink)

[anagrama]

I can only assume developers like sega had no idea about this fatal flaw when they commited to making so many games for it.

Back then, Sega jumped on any handheld that wasn't made by Nintendo ;)
I think it's much more likely that their licenses were farmed out to friendly 3rd Parties though, rather than them actually spending any time & effort actually developing for the thing...

[Poofta!]

Simply put, the game.com was to its time what the N-Gage is now.

You must not have an N-Gage.

It's still being supported. The latest batch of games are great... Pathway to Glory (two of them), Civilization, Urban GT 2, the free Worms game, and (hopefully) the upcoming Warhammer are perfect examples of awesome games. Did the Game.com even have ONE game that could be considered "good", much less "great?" To bad there won't be many more physical releases for the N-gage, I'm afraid.... Nokia seems to be headed for a download-only model.

N-Gage runs a variety of great emulators. The ones for the Game Gear and Game Boy Color, in particular, are outstanding... and most of those portable games are great for on-the-go gaming. The MAME is pretty good, too, as is the NES. I haven't tried the Genesis emulator yet.

The N-Gage certainly had a botched launch and the side-talkin' thing made it into a joke, but to compare the N-Gage to the Game.com is plain stupid.

I'm done with my N-Gage rant now.

Visit www.geocities.com/the32xmemorial/index2.html to see why the 32x isn't as bad as people think.

As far as the Game.com goes... it sucks. A few of the slower-moving games are mildly entertaining (Lights Out, Wheel of Fortune, Jeopardy) but all of the "big" games are flat-out dreadful... Sonic, Mortal Kombat, Batman, Fighter's Megamix, Indy 500, et all are utter crap. Anything that requires movement is a festival of blurriness... a celebration of nausea.

I have a Game.com and about 3/4 of the games released for it. I haven't played that thing in almost two years.



ngage sucks. stop hailing it. its bad ok? BAD. like... getting STDs bad.

[googlefest1]

how much was it when it first hit the market

i actually like it - but there aren't any game related things i dont like -- i even like many of the games people make fun of.

If it was cheap - then i would think it was a nice item

i was actualy impressed with what they got out of that screen - yea its blury - and if you want to compare it to the gba it sucks.

I dont exactly know when it was released but if it was during the gameboy gamegear time and it was much cheaper then i think it is amazing for that time period. if it came out during the gba time then i would think what the hell were they thinking.

the other thing i find impressive about it is that it is a tiger product. I had such disdain for that company back in the day - and so many people purchased and played thier ripp off crap games. Then one day i saw the game.com and my jaw droped when i found out it was a tiger product.

edit::: what the heck am i thinking - this thing had fighting vipers and RE2 so it had to be released at least at the time of the ps1 and saturn. So still what did you have then GB and GBC - i still think i was a good product (IF it was much cheaper)

[fishsandwich]

ngage sucks. stop hailing it. its bad ok? BAD. like... getting STDs bad.

:monkey:

[tom]

N-Gage doesn't suck, poofta. How many N-Gage games have you played to come to this conclusion?

[Slimedog]

I can only assume developers like sega had no idea about this fatal flaw when they commited to making so many games for it.

Back then, Sega jumped on any handheld that wasn't made by Nintendo ;)
I think it's much more likely that their licenses were farmed out to friendly 3rd Parties though, rather than them actually spending any time & effort actually developing for the thing...

Actually, Tiger themselves paid for the liscenses and developed the games for the Game.com. Just like their hand helds. The same arangement with the NGPC resulted in the awsome Sonic game on that system, but thats because SNK is a responsible developer with talented programmers while the Tiger folks couldn't program a Coke machine. Thank god they never released Castlevania or Metal Gear Solid like they were planning.

[Rev. Link]

You beat me to it, Slimedog. I was gonna point out that Symphony of the Night was supposed to be "ported" to the Game.com. Can you picture that? *cringe*

[SaturnFan]

It's worst than Gizmondo, thats how bad it is. Though RE2 wasn't that bad for the time.

[cyberfluxor]

N-Gage doesn't suck, poofta. How many N-Gage games have you played to come to this conclusion?

That's a good question. I don't criticise anything until I've played it and played it for a good amount of time to judge it. Same goes with systems. I'd get an N-Gage but I just want a cell phone and handheld, not a cell phone that plays games. Although it's efficient, nothing I'm interested in at this time.

I like the 32X system. It's no huge fantastic godly system but it has its perks and good games on it. It was a nice addition to a Genesis to allow people to play newer games on an older system, kinda like the Sega CD (Which I'm still waiting to stumble across a cheap one).

[fishsandwich]

N-Gage doesn't suck, poofta. How many N-Gage games have you played to come to this conclusion?

No kidding. No one (that I know) disputes that the N-Gage launch was a well-publicized failure and that the original N-Gage design had some SERIOUS flaws (side-talking and battery removal for switching games being the biggest design errors.) The N-Gage QD fixed that. Unfortunately, the damage was done and many people think the N-Gage is a piece of shit.

What most people DON'T know is that Nokia has stood by the N-Gage since its inception, through the sucesses that are the DS and PSP... and have released some fine games for it in the past year and a half that are only available from ONE online source (not in stores.)

I think that people who actually OWN an N-Gage, have PLAYED the recent games, and have possibly taken advantage of the cool emulators really like their N-Gages. It's the folks who haven't played it (or at least not played it recently) who always talk shit. Figures.

I'm done for now.

[Snapple]

i really wanted the Game.com to succeed.

If you know nothing about how the system sucks, and you look at the library, there are some well-selected titles. If the games were GOOD, it could've been the beginning of something great.

Before the Game.com came out, I actually wanted one, because I noticed they were "porting" Fighters Megamix to the system, which in my opinion, is one of the greatest Saturn games of all time. Then you look at Sonic Jam, Duke Nukem 3D, and Resident Evil 2, and you think, "Wow, I can't believe those games are coming to handheld."

But from everything I've heard, the system blew, and everything blurs to such an insane degree that games are nigh impossible to play, except for simple games like Lights Out.

I might get a Game.com one day, if only because it's so insanely cheap, both the system and the games.

[neuropolitique]

I like my game.com, it's not worse than, lets say the Supervision.

Hey now, let's be reasonable. The Supervision has a much better screen and a far larger library.

The Game.com was relegated to bathroom duty for a long time in my house. It's good for a quick game of solitaire, or joust. and that's about it.

[tom]

Well, it's normal isn't it. You cannot say a system sucks, unless you played the games and/or checked out the machine.

It's like people saying 'my computer/console is better than yours', and they don't know the first thing about the opposite system.
The C-64/Atari XL debate comes to mind, who ever owned both systems to really disrespect one of them (I owned both in the 80s, so that was always my case: How do you know, unless you used the other machine?)

[Juganawt]

N-Gage doesn't suck, it's the only handheld that you can play Ghost Recon, Civilisation, and Sega Rally on.

It's a good system, just not a popular one. It sucks as a phone though.

As for the Game.com, it's not too bad, it's the only handheld you can play Resident Evil 2 on as well as Duke Nukem 3D... it's just really big and clunky. It was also the first handheld to have a touch screen and stylus... although it was poorly implemented.

[fishsandwich]

I remember being really excited about the Game.com when I saw that Duke Nukem was coming out for it. I mean, the Game.com was cheap and here was a FPS that I LOVED... coming to a handheld. This was during the reign of the Gameboy (and possibly Game Gear) and I was so impressed, especially when screenshots made it look like a REAL FPS. Handhelds couldn't do FPS shooters at the time.

Anyone who has played Duke for Game.com knows that it isn't like the PC or console versions in any way, shape, or form. It's a totally different (and mostly unpleasant) experience.

I may have to break out the Game.com soon and see if I can't find SOMETHING to like about it. My opnions of it are entirely negative. It's been a long time since I've played it so maybe I'll be able to approach it objectively.

[Slimedog]

I hate to contribute to the growing NGage threadjack, but nobody who has ever played a last generation NGage game will say the system sucked.

Game.com had some potential too. If they had played to the strength of the system and made more slow, non-scrolling games, it might have not been such a flop. Also, with a little prior thought, the interesting but pointless Hi-Score save feature could have been implimented in a way to allow for game full save data instead. This would have allowed for longer, more elaborate game design, although I doubt the software programmers would have been up for that task.

So who makes a "portable" system that checks email but requires a huge modem and phone cords to do so? My theory is a bunch of execs who hate games got in a room and decided on the features for the new system. Those took presidence over things like, "make sure the screen can handle scrolling" and "keep the frames per second over 5".

[Daria]

It's a good system, just not a popular one. It sucks as a phone though.


Actually I find that the QD is an excellent phone. I certainly talk on it a lot more then I ever play the games I own for it.

[Slimedog]

It's a good system, just not a popular one. It sucks as a phone though.


Actually I find that the QD is an excellent phone. I certainly talk on it a lot more then I ever play the games I own for it.

I second that. Letstalk actually paid me $50 to take a QD after contract about 6 months ago. Of the alternative "free phones" I couldn't find any that had all of these features:

- color screen
- card slot
- bluetooth enabled
- supports symbian programs

Even if I didn't play games, this phone would be an excellent value.

Alternatively, the Game.com makes a really crappy phone. I can't hear the other party well at all unless they are within about 15 feet.

[jboypacman]

i had a girlfriend buy me a game.com one year for christmas
while it was not as bad as everyone says it is its not a great system either.i would keep it at her house and play it when i would come over to see her.she played it more than i did so when we broke up i just let her keep it.i wasnt too upset about parting with the system because i had a gameboy and a gamegear at the time.i imagine it would be easy system to collect for if you want to not many games and it should be very cheap.

[RetroYoungen]

How bad was the game.com? Let me put it this way: I was happy when the batteries corrhoded in mine, because it gave me a reason to throw it away.

THAT bad.

Lights Out wasn't bad for it, but it's such a simple game without a lot of power needed for graphics that it can run on nearly anything. Same with Solitaire. But Duke Nukum? HELL no, I couldn't even figure out how to turn him! ADD to that all the blurring, and it's practically unplayable.

And I was excited about this system too, for what reason I don't know.

It was bad. Still is bad. Just... bad. Crap.

[swlovinist]

I have a complete US collection, and it will stay on my wall...nuff said.

[§ Gideon §]

it had 'ports' of games like duke nukem 3d and resident evil (i think) unfortunately these games are about as playable as shoving a 2600 cart into an NES.
Ahaha. I like this man's thinking.