Nintendo Fans Vs. Third-Party Developers & Entitlement

[MikeRox]

se7en7thre3 said:

MikeRox said:

 

Rockstar/Remedy stated they couldn't get the game running up to snuff on GCN and so that version of the game got axed.

In the case of GTA, you've also got the capacity limitations of the discs. Can you really break a game like GTA into multiple discs easily? Plus it has the added development costs. By that point in the systems life, it wasn't really worthwhile doing. While the Xbox was basically a PC in a box with it's Pentium 3 Processor and Ge Force GPU making that port much more straight forward.

Im farily confident there was nothing PS2 had on GC except disc size.  IIRC GCN had more/faster ram, better cpu and gpu.  Heck some argued it was more efficient than OG xbox (resi 4 was arguably best looking game of that gen).  You're right about the disc limitations for certain games, but for a game like say, Vice City, a big chunk of that is audio files which could be further compressed or degraded in quality, and even have some tracks/stations removed if nec.  

But surely that would have led to the very same "not as good as other versions so I'm not buying" situation there was for many 3rd party titles anyway? Hell, GCN ports of the Dreamcast stuff wasn't even as good as the Dreamcast version.

My limited research on GCN hardware suggests yes, it had more overall RAM, but it wasn't as flexible as the PS2s as it was more set for specific tasks.

Btw, little bonus, here is the Dreamcast version of Max Payne, because yes, it started life due on Dreamcast. However changes in technology etc meant that newer platforms were more appropriate. Pretty much what happened to Project CARS.

View on YouTube

Video is from 1999, before even the PS2 launched!