Fromt he other topic...

the n64 only had 64 bits and ps1 had 128(i think)

Wrong, 32-bit.

Really? That's interesting. Didn't the SNES have 32 bits? So how did the PS1 keep up with the N64??

Eh, how many "bits" a console's CPU is doesn't really have too big an effect on it's power. For the record, the SNES was 16-bit.

Think about PCs. They've been 32-bit from the 386 running at something like 30Mhz all the way up to the Athlon XP at 2800+. An XBOX is basically just a PC. I remember idiots going on about how the PS2 would beat the XBOX so hard graphics wise because the XBOX is only 32-bit. :roll: an XBOX xan easily outperform a PS2.

But that whole concept is flawed anyways, taking into account that the XBOX's CPU runs at something like 700Mhz, whereas a PS2 runs at 200 or something around there.

The N64 ran at 97Mhz, about 3 times the speed of a PSone which goes along at 33Mhz. It also had twice the "bits" woo. Yet the PSone could easily put up a decent fight against it.
-.-
YES BLUEXX LOL

I think I'm just blabbing on here and revealing some of my nerdy traits, so whatever, I'll shut up.

N64 flawed because it used cartridges and not cds, which instantly put them at a disadvantage. Which is why all good graphically games are piss easy to complete.

Ocarina of time :roll:

Kairo, I'm a bit confused. Why are the good grapahically games easy to complete??

Yea, it seems like they would be harder to make because of the cartridges.

N64 flawed because it used cartridges and not cds, which instantly put them at a disadvantage. Which is why all good graphically games are piss easy to complete.

Ocarina of time :roll:

Ocarina of Time took years and years to complete regardless of material the game was transferred in. I remember the year it came out...Nintendo was going to release it sometime mid summer but Shigeru Miyamoto (the Legend, god and founder of the Legend of Zelda) held it back because he wanted to add more puzzles and make the game more challenging for the players. As far as being piss easy to complete, that is bs. Ocarina of Time used a similiar type engine as Mario 64, but was modified extensively to its own engine which built the basis for most of the LoZ games you see now. Majora's Mask, the Wind Waker and such were all based off of that one engine. The time that the engine took to complete, plus the storyline, plus the graphics and cinemas, plus the monsters and bosses, plus the towns and finally the functionality and debugging...it took years. If they were so easy to complete, I would like to see you, Kairo, make a similiar game and have it to us by the end of the year.

Ocrina Of Time kicked serious ass!! I don't know how the PSone still beat the N64 after that game!

The bigger problem with Nintendo was basing their games and targeting specific audiences. Sony and their PS series have been more aimed towards an older audience (and imo) have thrived off of that aspect.

Nintendo on the other hand has always been primarily an "E for Everyone" type of company. Coming up with games like Pokemon Snap...Mario Kart, Super Smash Bros, Diddy Kong Racing...and the older audiences rather see people die, being raped and have mass confusion in their games. Which is something Nintendo really hasn't provided (minus Resident Evil).

Then when Microsoft came into the picture with their X-Box, it became a race of who can build the better (more high-tech) gaming console and not the better game.

And is it just me, or is the X-box huge? The thing is like the size of a computer. Sony has been keeping their system size pretty much stable, and Nintendo...well theirs are getting smaller.  

This is true but the Gamecube had brilliant games on and people in ther late 20s (which i knew obviously) liked: for example Sonic 2 Battle or Metroid prime 2

The GameCube unfortunately didn't fare so well against the PS2. They had a couple of games that were aimed towards the older audiences like you just mentioned (Metroid Prime was an AWESOME game...Samus is so hot). But the thing that pissed me off mostly about GC was their LoZ...the Wind Waker. I mean wtf is up with that? It was almost as bad as Paper Mario (which I loved the storyline btw). It's just a shame that Square left Nintendo for Sony back in the days of SNES. Now Nintendo would be lucky if it gets a FF game for their system at least once. I know GC had Crystal Chronicles (which sucked)...but ugh...whatever.

FFCC was ok (if you had friends) and the engine was a good experiment, its just that Square didnt use there past engines on the GC! That made me angry but i heard Sega is sticking with Nintendo and Microsoft soon which cheered me up  :^^: