StarDestroyer.Net BBS

The SNES in particular was like a fucking rock, I swear. Almost 15 years old and it runs better than both my PS1 and PS2 ever did.

*have to check*
*take his old gameboy Mk1*
*put Supermarioland in it, put batteries, switch on*
*tiding!*
*shut the console*

I've made my N64 crash. In Goldeneye, If you put a bunch of remote mines on the shuttle on the level Aztec. and finish the level, the system will lock up and you will have to reset it.

If you use the expansion pak without taking the cover off of where it goes (or, in my case drilling holes through it) the system will overheat, and freeze up.

I'm reminded of Xplay's bit where they took a PS2, a Xbox and a Gamecube for thier "Iron-console smashfest" or something of the like.

The tests where, I beleive, dropping it from a second story into cement, dropping a bowling ball on it, and Morgan hitting it with a 20lb sledgehammer......

the PS2 failed after the first test, the Xbox failed out of the second test because well....the powerbutton popped out, you can't work the system if the power button pops out (default loss)

and the Gamecube, even after all three tests, managed to survive and STILL play.

That's a durable lil console there.

Someone online posted screen shots of Halo 2 on Xbox, and on Xbox 360 using a capture card to show the difference.
You can see it here:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/lemone ... 94676.html

Some of my old Nintendo 64 cartridges used to always crash when I used them, but never anytime I used anything else. The consoles themselves are very durable but some of the older cartridges aren’t as strong I guess....

I have two NESs that still work. Althought that bit about the Iron-Console Smashfest is awsome.

DarkSilver wrote:I'm reminded of Xplay's bit where they took a PS2, a Xbox and a Gamecube for thier "Iron-console smashfest" or something of the like.

The tests where, I beleive, dropping it from a second story into cement, dropping a bowling ball on it, and Morgan hitting it with a 20lb sledgehammer......

the PS2 failed after the first test, the Xbox failed out of the second test because well....the powerbutton popped out, you can't work the system if the power button pops out (default loss)

and the Gamecube, even after all three tests, managed to survive and STILL play.

That's a durable lil console there.

I think I still have that video on my hard drive...either that or my DVR.

I'm pretty sure I saw wires come out though. It wasn't just the power button. The entire faceplate with wires attached as I recall came off.

Ah here we go. Low quality, but...thank you Google Video Search.
X-Play "crash testing" all three consoles

Car Drag

Star-Blighter wrote:
Anyone remember back in the day when a nintendo could be used as a blunt instrument and still be playable afterwards?

Even more so today than ever; the GameCube has a convenient handle which you can use to swing it better than any previous system

Nintendo has dedicated itself to the fine art of making it's consoles both capable of playing games, and being toys on their own. The best kind of toys: Those you hit your siblings with.

to quote a certain Simian Transformer:
Die cast construction...it's a lost art.

R.O.A wrote:Someone online posted screen shots of Halo 2 on Xbox, and on Xbox 360 using a capture card to show the difference.
You can see it here:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/lemone ... 94676.html

Some of my old Nintendo 64 cartridges used to always crash when I used them, but never anytime I used anything else. The consoles themselves are very durable but some of the older cartridges aren’t as strong I guess....

Still looks shitty. I can't imagine how anyone could enjoy games such as Halo at only 640*480. Why anyone would purchase an Xbox 360 for use with anything lower than 1080i is also beyond me.

The NES I had as a kid is still in service 20 years later. My 12 year old brother has it set up in his bedroom. He has a PS2, but still plays original Zelda from time to time.

EDIT: Regarding the Halo 2 screenies... They look exactly the same. I am most unimpressed.

The thing is that moving parts are subject to wearing down and failing a lot more than the electronics inside. In fact, the reason why most of the old front-loading NES' tended to fail was because one of the moving parts inside wore down and was no longer providing adequate contact between the cartridge and the console; from what I've heard, a $1 generic part from Radio Shack, and an NES that once stubbornly refused to load any game would be just like new.

LordShaithis wrote:The NES I had as a kid is still in service 20 years later. My 12 year old brother has it set up in his bedroom. He has a PS2, but still plays original Zelda from time to time.

EDIT: Regarding the Halo 2 screenies... They look exactly the same. I am most unimpressed.

You should wear your glasses before you look There's a huge difference in image quality. The Xbox 360 has much less jaggies compared to the Xbox.

People are wetting themselves and standing in line for days to buy a system because of a barely discernable difference in image quality? Christ, I guess the old days of each new console generation being a leap above the last are over. NES vs SNES this is not.

LordShaithis wrote:People are wetting themselves and standing in line for days to buy a system because of a barely discernable difference in image quality? Christ, I guess the old days of each new console generation being a leap above the last are over. NES vs SNES this is not.

That's um... playing an older game without newer code. It just shows basic resolution improvements. It's like whining that your PS1 games look the same on the PS2. Irrelevant.

Then why are all the fanboys on that journal crowing about how much more awesome it looks?

Because they're impressed that 360 has that much higher resolution and clarity even with standard A/V cables compared to the X-Box with its highest video connection possible. Even without fancy frills and extra code, it's working on a much higher base of image quality, which will really show up on HD TVs in the following years.

That difference is because the 360 adds AA 4x to Halo 1 and 2 and most of the older games that actually run, right?


And I have to agree, this new generation is not the same kind of leap. N64 to current gen was a MASSIVE leap. Comparing Call of Duty 2 to current XBox games?

http://cubemedia.ign.com/cube/image/art ... 016628.jpg

vs

http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/ima ... 424456.jpg


Yes, the 360 is DEFINITELY better. But the differences are in the details. It's not the instantaneously-visible, Wow, that's definitely a new generation look, everything about it is beyond anything on my current console; it's the "Wow, my old XBox could never produce some of those effects".


Look at N64 -> GameCube. I believe the only game that was up-ported was Zelda 64, but that was just so it could be a Classic title, not a big-name launch game.

Now, we have games like King Kong getting a facelift and being republished as next-gen. Has this ever happened in the past? I can't recall PS2 having PS1 games with facelifts, but maybe I wasn't aware of them. Have there ever been dual launches in the past (games that come out for both PS1 and PS2, N64 and GameCube, SNES and N64, SNES and NES, etc)?

Praxis wrote:That difference is because the 360 adds AA 4x to Halo 1 and 2 and most of the older games that actually run, right?

It adds what?

Praxis wrote:Now, we have games like King Kong getting a facelift and being republished as next-gen. Has this ever happened in the past? I can't recall PS2 having PS1 games with facelifts, but maybe I wasn't aware of them. Have there ever been dual launches in the past (games that come out for both PS1 and PS2, N64 and GameCube, SNES and N64, SNES and NES, etc)?

The EA Sports games, I believe. Madden NFL 2002, to be specific, was released on PS1, N64, PS2, GC, and Xbox.

Galvatron wrote:

Praxis wrote:That difference is because the 360 adds AA 4x to Halo 1 and 2 and most of the older games that actually run, right?

It adds what?

Four times anti-aliasing, I think.

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:

Galvatron wrote:

Praxis wrote:That difference is because the 360 adds AA 4x to Halo 1 and 2 and most of the older games that actually run, right?

It adds what?

Four times anti-aliasing, I think.

In cheesy RPG terms, this would be a [Enhanced Video Resolution of +4 Resistance to Jagged Edges]

Mr. Sinister wrote:

SirNitram wrote:Holding out for X-Play. Anyone brave enough to mock the Dynasty Warriors series is pretty honest.

From what I remember, X-Play gave Kameo 4/5, Madden 3/5, Call of Duty 2 5/5, and Condemed 4/5. There should be more detailes at g4tv.com.

CoD2 is no surprise: they gave it a 5/5 last time!

I'm waiting for a review of Big Red One.

But as to the difference in the screenshots. As someone with 20/20 with my glasses on, you do have to look for the differences. This is simple fact, but unsurprising. It's an emulation, not an upgrade. That it adds anti-aliasing is nice, but no one's buying the consoles based on that.

I'll be watching more on the graphical quality of 360 based games. The risk we've known from the Microsoft declaration of being first by such a large degree has been the chance they'll be This Gen + .5, not Next Gen. But it's a little early to ring the doom bells on that.

Used to be that each generation allowed the creation of games that would have been unthinkable previously. You could never have done Legend of Zelda on an Atarti 2600. You could never have done Starfox on NES. Or Goldeneye on SNES. Each generation of consoles was a huge leap ahead.

Now? "Look real close at the edges, they're slightly less jagged! I'm gonna go stand in line for three days and pay $500 dollars to be the first!"

Praxis wrote:Has this ever happened in the past? I can't recall PS2 having PS1 games with facelifts, but maybe I wasn't aware of them. Have there ever been dual launches in the past (games that come out for both PS1 and PS2, N64 and GameCube, SNES and N64, SNES and NES, etc)?

I recall Paperboy 2 getting both an NES and SNES release, and the only difference there was more colors and some MIDI-like versions of the blip-blop soundtrack. Halo 2 running on the 360 with higher resolution and AA is not comparable to that; it may not be impressive even for not having any new code but I don't know why it's being treated as the benchmark.

On the other hand, I think the non-major differences between the CoD2 games is probably a combination of too-little-too-early and the complexity of advanced graphics versus what players need for graphics. We may eventually hit a point where the complexity of the current level of polygons and effects is sufficient even to the 'graphics graphics graphics' crowd.

And the former issue is what killed the Dreamcast; the PS2 wasn't even that more advanced and a lot of its first releases were just DC ports, and people still held off on the DC just to wait for the promises of the PS2 to come about. The 360 may suffer soemthing similar if Nintendo and Sony can draw people's attention the same way.