By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Anyone think the Dreamcast is over-rated now?

Frogger on 24 March 2015
AlfredoTurkey said:

Sorry, but you're dead wrong here. You're looking at things in a vacuum. Mario 64 would indeed be trash if released today. The same goes for just about any game that's not a 2-d side scroller and/or not Pac-Man. 

Sonic Adventure blew minds back when it came out and was the cream of the crop. You can only judge games based on the time when they came out and when that game launched, there was nothing close. 


No, I'm not. SA2 released in 2001. An improved GCN version released in 2002. SA2 is regarded as the better SA game. Dreamcast version? 89. GCN version released only 8 months later? 73. SA DX, again an improved GCN port released shortly after the original? 57.

Mario 64 remake 8 full years later? 85.

I'm not looking at things in a vacuum. The games were never good. They were just reviewed terribly at launch.



Around the Network
MikeRox on 24 March 2015
spemanig said:
MikeRox said:

The 6-7/10 cap was more in jest. However I have frequently seen games score lower for not having online modes because they don't have as much content/longevity.

Mario 64 certainly wouldn't be given 10/10 if it was released today. The response would be there are already much better games on the market doing more.


I don't even think it should have gotten a 10/10 back then, but that's not my point. Even in retrospect, aside from the absolutely terible framerate and dated graphics, the game is a B to B+ game. There aren't "already much better games." 64 is still one of the top 3D platformers of all time. If you applied the same pardons to the Adventure games, they would score an F today, because the games themselves aren't good. And it's not an age thing. Infact, every time the games have resurfaced, their metacritic scores have gotten lower and lower; as low as 48. When Mario 64 resurfaced for the DS? 85.


When Mario 64 resurfaced on the DS it was released onto a market that was still driven by 16 bit era games. They also added an awful lot of extra content, it wasn't just the N64 game.

As for the Sonic scores dropping and dropping. They also introduced more and more bugs into the mix with each subsequent port.



RIP Dad 25/11/51 - 13/12/13. You will be missed but never forgotten.

badgenome on 24 March 2015

Yes. People who are wrong do.



Frogger on 24 March 2015
MikeRox said:

When Mario 64 resurfaced on the DS it was released onto a market that was still driven by 16 bit era games. They also added an awful lot of extra content, it wasn't just the N64 game.

As for the Sonic scores dropping and dropping. They also introduced more and more bugs into the mix with each subsequent port.


I don't know what ports you've been playing if you honestly believe that.



mornelithe on 24 March 2015

Hell no....fucking power stone wars ftw! If that was literally the only title on the DC, it'd still be under-rated.



Around the Network
MikeRox on 24 March 2015
spemanig said:
AlfredoTurkey said:

Sorry, but you're dead wrong here. You're looking at things in a vacuum. Mario 64 would indeed be trash if released today. The same goes for just about any game that's not a 2-d side scroller and/or not Pac-Man. 

Sonic Adventure blew minds back when it came out and was the cream of the crop. You can only judge games based on the time when they came out and when that game launched, there was nothing close. 


No, I'm not. SA2 released in 2001. An improved GCN version released in 2002. SA2 is regarded as the better SA game. Dreamcast version? 89. GCN version released only 8 months later? 73. SA DX, again an improved GCN port released shortly after the original? 57.


You're not proving your point here. Firstly, I'd ask where you got your meta scores from, as reviews were primarily magazine based back in 2001 (more so in 1998 when SA1 first launched) and metacritic certainly has nowhere near the breadth of reviews that were actually made for the games.

Secondly, the GC ports may have had extra content, but particularly in the case of SA:DX was a much inferior version of the game. Frame rate instead of being locked, was erratic, which led to bigger control issues. Also introduced a lot of additional bugs/glitches which weren't in the original.

Also, as you say, ported later, charged full MSRP for the games again though.

Sleeping Dogs had an improved port with all DLC to PS4/XB1, yet that scored less than the original did both on PS3 and 360 even though it had a lower MSRP than the original release.

The Wind Waker HD went from 96 on GC to 90 on Wii U despite being the better version of the game (because they took all the "bad" parts out).

It's perfectly natural from review scores to decline with time even when the re-release is clearly a noticable improvement. I don't know why you'd expect adding extra bugs, having inferior audio and an irratic frame rate as the SA port to GCN had not to lower the review score.



RIP Dad 25/11/51 - 13/12/13. You will be missed but never forgotten.

disolitude on 24 March 2015
BMaker11 said:
disolitude said:
BMaker11 said:

I said this a while ago:

We are nostalgic for the DC because it got canned. But was it the "best console ever", as some have said? No!

Yes, it had great games like Sonic Adventure, Power Stone, Shenmue, 2K Sports games exclusive, Jet Set Radio, etc. We're fond of those games and they are the shining examples of the DCs library. But we never stop and remember: that's all it had. DC was on the market for what, 2 years? When thought about rationally, does its library really compare to Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, GTA, MGS, SoTC, Dragon Quest, God of War, Jak and Daxter, DMC, Okami (I could go on forever) etc. for the PS2? What about Halo, Blinx, Jade Empire, Panzer Dragoon Orta, Forza, Morrowind, KOTOR, etc for the Xbox? And that's just games from the same generation as DC.

As I said when I first made this comment: let's keep our fond memories of the DC as just that. Memories. Because when you're objective about the console, it's not even in the top 5 of best consoles ever.

You forgot Code Veronic, Soul Calibur and Sonic Adventure 2 as it is superior to the original. The massive titles you listed all came out in a year and a half. How long did it take for PS2 to release all of the games you listed? like 7 years?

Also you're just generalizing here. Dreamcast had a shitload of gems no one talks about as Metacritic doesn't give them praise, but they were awesome games.

Ikaruga, Alien Front Online, Headhunter, Demolition Racer, Test Drive Lemans, Toy Comander, Swords of Berserk, Gigawing 2...all amazingly fun games where it mattered the most, gameplay

Fuck, it had few games released in the last 2 years that are better than some major PS4 and Xbox One games. Gunlord and Sturmwind.

Look at this awesomeness... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zy2k_iwJDY

You're telling me that you'd rather play The Order over that?

Actually, FFX (2001), KH (2002), GTA3 (2001), MGS2 (2001), SoTC (2005), DQVIII (2004), Jak and Daxter (2001), DMC1 (2001), Okami (2006). Most of them came out in the first 2 years, none of them took 7 years, and I could have easily picked other games (such at GT3 or Ratchet and Clank) that came out relatively early in the PS2s life.

And the Xbox had it's library in and out in 4 years, yet we still got the games I listed and more.

I never said DC wasn't a fun console, that the games sucked, etc. I'm just saying, it only lasted 2 years. There are great games in there, but because the console got discontinued, there's limitations to the amount of games it had. All those great games you named, I could go like for like with the PS2, PS1, OG Xbox, SNES, etc. and have more games on each console, to boot. Even the "gems no one talks about because of Metacritic". And they'd all be great games with great gameplay. Had the DC lasted longer, we'd be having a very different conversation.

Fair enough...while your stance is more resonable in the post above, I still think Dreamcast smokes all consoles if you apply the formula of:

(Awesome games releases * fun factor)/duration of time

I had PS2 at launch and it was absolutely garbage for almost 1 year after its release. First fun game worth playing was Twisted Metal Black which came out in July 2001... up until then the console was literally a DVD player. 

Also Dreamcast could do cool things, like play emulators, homebrew, surf the net, play Quake 3 online... There was always something fresh and cool to do with the Dreamcast...

Maybe I am just a dreamcast fanatic but the fact that half of the board to this day is still defending it is proof that the console was pretty sweet. 

For the record, my Dreamcast today has an SD card reader installed called GDEMU, and a 128 GB memory card in it with over 150 games preinstalled. It also lets me use Playstation 2 Wireless Force controllers for some cordless gaming. It also upscales to 720p HDMI with an adapter and looks really good.

Still play it at least once per month. 



d21lewis on 24 March 2015

At the time, the Dreamcast have me the feeling that I was experiencing the future. Even more so than the PS2. Add I said many times, I was a Sega hater and the only reason I got a Dreamcast was because I wasn't able to get my hands on a PS2 and I got tired of coming home empty handed (the same reason I got an Xbox 360 before I got a PS3...). The console was amazing to me and until Christmas 2001, I bet there wasn't a PlayStation owner alive who was having more fun than I was.

I admit that it was short lived but the console did great things. Analog triggers, built in modem, voice enabled gaming, second screen in the controller. Gotta respect the Dream.



AlfredoTurkey on 24 March 2015
spemanig said:
AlfredoTurkey said:

 

I'm not looking at things in a vacuum. The games were never good. They were just reviewed terribly at launch.

That's your opinion, not fact. The facts are this. Sonic Adventure was universially praised and given 9's back in the day. You would have been on an island alone with your opinion back then. Of course, being that you were only 8 or so when it launched, it wouldn't have been taken seriously anyway.

Maybe that's the problem here. I should have looked at your age before debating this because I have a rule about it. Never debate the past with someone who was a little kid when said past was happening. You weren't there. You don't know. You have no idea of how impactful that game was. All you have to go on is wikipedia and youtube. That's not good enough.



KungKras on 24 March 2015

Dreamcast was a better console than PS2 up until it was discontinued (comparing the console libraries at that time). It gave better value for money and had tons of fun games.

Now it's overglorified by the same people who abandoned it in favour of the Sonyfication of gaming. The Dreamcast is interesting as it really is, even without all the nerd hype.

EDIT: The dreamcast is one of the best consoles ever though. That people found a way to still play Phantasy Star online on it should be a testament to that.



I LOVE ICELAND!