Definitive GC exclusive list?

NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube, Wii
metaleggman
128-bit
Posts: 894
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 7:21 pm

Post by metaleggman »

Mozgus wrote:The question remains silly and redundant.
yep. :P

I really don't know why you would want to buy them in the first place, tbh. Unless you don't own them for the PSX and find them cheaply (since Gamestop and Ebgames had RE3 at like 45 bucks, It's really not worth it, considering the DC version is technically the best), your better off emulating them on the computer (via emulator), playing them on the computer, or getting a DC or PS1 and playing them that way.
Image
User avatar
LordOfTheCynics
Newbie
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:37 pm
Location: Orlando, FL
Contact:

Post by LordOfTheCynics »

Mozgus wrote:
LordOfTheCynics wrote:
Mozgus wrote:
LordOfTheCynics wrote:Weren't there ports of RE2 and 3, too? I don't know if those made it to the PS2.

Is this a joke? Those games were ported to PS2 when PS2 launched. Backwards compatibility, dude...
No, I meant that they were full-on ports, not exactly a remake, but kinda like MGS: Twin Snakes, without major changes.

But the gamecube ports of RE2 and RE3 were NOT like MGSTT, which was a remake, not a port. Maybe you just phrased that wrong.

Backwards compatibility doesn't really count as a port, as it's emulation, hardware in this case, since the PS1 CPU is the I/O Controller for the PS2. Most people consider a port to be something that's made as a stand alone program for a new platform. Considering the game is a PS1 game and is basically being played on a modified PS1, it's really not a port.

Right. A port would most likely be inferior to what PS2 got. And Capcom knew it. The games ran flawlessly on PS2, so there was no reason to "port" them to PS2.

The question remains silly and redundant.
I'm not saying they were remakes like MGS TS, I'm saying that the graphics and whatnot were updated a bit.
Butterstick!!
User avatar
Mozgus
Next-Gen
Posts: 6624
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 10:31 pm
Contact:

Post by Mozgus »

LordOfTheCynics wrote:I'm not saying they were remakes like MGS TS, I'm saying that the graphics and whatnot were updated a bit.

How so? The resolution for the 3d models was doubled, but past that, there wasn't much difference. Unless you count RE3 on GC using the PC versions transitional high rez background segments. I've detailed this in another post with screenshots, but the PC version has certain focused portions of the backgrounds redone in 640x480. I estimate about 1/3rd of the backgrounds were given this treatment.

But really, it's a very minor update. It's still just a flat port. And RE2 didn't receive the background treatment.
Jubal
64-bit
Posts: 356
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:42 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, UT

Post by Jubal »

ok so here is a repost of the list so far... I didn't include the RE ports, as there are superior versions elsewhere

[list moved to first post in this topic]

-Jubal-
Last edited by Jubal on Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:57 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Mozgus
Next-Gen
Posts: 6624
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 10:31 pm
Contact:

Post by Mozgus »

Lost Kingdoms 1 and 2. I actually beat both, and I hardly ever beat RPGs. Great exclusive Cube games. A lot of a charm in the simplistic design. I can't quite explain it.
User avatar
Zork
32-bit
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 6:05 pm
Location: Huntington, WV

Post by Zork »

Wait a minute. Why is Sonic Adventure DX and Sonic Adventure 2 Battle on there? They're both Dreamcast ports with little additions.
Jubal
64-bit
Posts: 356
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:42 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, UT

Post by Jubal »

Zork wrote:Wait a minute. Why is Sonic Adventure DX and Sonic Adventure 2 Battle on there? They're both Dreamcast ports with little additions.


LordOfTheCynics post called them remakes, are they just ports?

LordOfTheCynics wrote:I'd like to add a few, some good, some definitely worth mentioning:
...
Skies of Arcadia Legends (these last two are Dreamcast remakes, and actually quite fun)
Sonic Adventure DX and SA 2 (more DC remakes)
...


-Jubal-
User avatar
Mozgus
Next-Gen
Posts: 6624
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 10:31 pm
Contact:

Post by Mozgus »

Jubal wrote:
Zork wrote:Wait a minute. Why is Sonic Adventure DX and Sonic Adventure 2 Battle on there? They're both Dreamcast ports with little additions.


LordOfTheCynics post called them remakes, are they just ports?

LordOfTheCynics wrote:I'd like to add a few, some good, some definitely worth mentioning:
...
Skies of Arcadia Legends (these last two are Dreamcast remakes, and actually quite fun)
Sonic Adventure DX and SA 2 (more DC remakes)
...


-Jubal-

Sonic Adventure 2 Battle is basically the Dreamcast version with more multiplayer modes. Otherwise it is the same game. A solid product honestly, as far as that series can go.

Sonic Adventure DX was just Sonic Adventure 1 with improved 3D models and textures on the characters and some other areas. But the frame rate was kind of inconsistent and really irritated me when I tried to play the fast-paced levels, so I preferred the Dreamcast original, and which is a pretty bad game to begin with.
metaleggman
128-bit
Posts: 894
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 7:21 pm

Post by metaleggman »

Ya, while not too complex of a remake, sonic battle 2 is justified. The original Sonic adventure doesn't really deserve to get on there though. It's not something you really need to play, or even try for that matter.

Then again, I may be a bit biased towards SA2:B as it was one of the first games I bought on my first console, GCN, along with the wind waker (free), NFL 2k6 (thank god it was free, since it sucked ass), and the collectors edition of robotech. That and the wind waker took up a lot of my time, since I loved em :)
Image
Jubal
64-bit
Posts: 356
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:42 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, UT

Post by Jubal »

for Sonic Adventure 2 Battle, are the added multiplayer modes good? do they add to the overall experience compared to the original?

I will leave SA 2 Battle up and take SA DX down.

-Jubal-
Post Reply