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

Forums - Gaming - GameCube or Dreamcast?

MaxwellGT2000 on 08 April 2008

I say Dreamcube 360

 That Yoshi game looks hot XD

But seriously Gamecube cause it had some of the best games last gen.



MaxwellGT2000 - "Does the amount of times you beat it count towards how hardcore you are?"

Wii Friend Code - 5882 9717 7391 0918 (PM me if you add me), PSN - MaxwellGT2000, XBL - BlkKniteCecil, MaxwellGT2000

Around the Network
Onyxmeth on 08 April 2008
jman8 said:
Jlaff said:
Onyxmeth said:

Dreamcast by miles. Many, many miles. The Gamecube was a flawed concept of a console with no discernible reason for why it existed other than to follow the PS2 into the next generation. The Dreamcast was innovative beyond belief and helped shape the online landscape of today's consoles, and still has a better online experience than the Wii somehow, let alone the 4 games that were online capable on the Cube.

Dreamcast was also built around arcade boards tech which made porting arcade games to the Dreamcast a very simple process. For those of us who grew up in the arcades, this was a huge win.


I second this.


I'll third this. The Dreamcast really brought "new" to the gaming world. For a site that has so many Wii fanatics praying at the temple of "innovation," I'm somewhat surprised people are so overwhelmingly in favor of the Cube. What's something new that Nintendo brought to the table last generation?

Don't get me wrong. I love my Gamecube because it had some great games. However, they were all really just refined and well-executed N64 updates that took years on end to actually be released. In just 2 years, Sega pumped out some of the best and most interesting games. DC takes the win.

They don't pray at the temple of innovation because of motion controls, they do it because it's Nintendo that innovated. If it were Microsoft or Sony that thought this up, trust me, so many people on this site would not be upping this innovation nearly as much. Not to discount the innovation of motion controls, because I feel they're very important for progress, but many people here do not follow innovation, they just follow Nintendo.

Dreamcast offered more originality, innovation and fun in 2 1/2 years than the Gamcube did in it's 4 year cycle and anyone that wants to refute this can put up an argument. The Cube was Nintendo's most unnecessary console ever.

 



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.



Crabmaster2000 on 08 April 2008
Onyxmeth said:
Crabmaster2000 said:
Onyxmeth said:

For those arguing that the Gamecube was better because it recieved a majority of the Dreamcast's best games after the DC had left the market, ask yourself this; is the Wii a better console than the NES, SNES, N64, Turbo Grafix-16, Sega Master System, Sega Genesis and Neo Geo because the Virtual Console contains a good majority of the quality library each system posessed after each console had left the market? The scenario is the same. Had the Sega Dreamcast not gone off the market, GC would have never recieved those games and had the entire VC console competitors not have gone off the market, the VC wouldn't have recieved those games.

You should be taking each library as it's own at the time it was released, minus those strange instances where libraries intersect, because for all accounts it's really not a fair argument.


This arguement doesnt make a lot of sense. We are looking back at the entire life span of both systems so why wouldnt the entire systems libraby be taken into account. Thats like excluding RE:4 from the PS2 or Lost Planet from the PS3s game librabies because they were released first on another system. Why exclude great games regardless of how they got there? I consider Ikaruga to be one of the best Gamecube titles even though it started as a Dreamcast exclusive. And yes i believe that all of the virtual console titles should be included in the Wiis library of avialable games too. Should we exclude Xbox 360 arcade games from its appeal? I agree that the Dreamcast had a vastly superior library at launch and if it didnt die prematurely it could have easily surpassed the Gamecube but the fact is that it didnt.

That's fine. I don't condemn you for thinking that way. My point was to not disqualify the Dreamcast for having it's library horded out AFTER it's end if you weren't going to do the same for systems like the SNES, Genesis, etc. in direct comparison to the Wii. I'm sure most of the people that put up the arguement would never consider the Wii over the SNES just because games were posthumously released on the Virtual Console, but since you do then you have a valid reason to compare in that way. Simple as that. My argument makes perfect sense as it's showing a possible contradiction in others' arguements. Obviously not yours so leave it at that.

 


I can at least say that without the Dreamcast games shifting over to the Gamecube it would have significantly hurt the Gamecubes appeal. I mean just Skies of Arcadia, Resident Evil and Ikaruga would have been a huge blow to the cube. Thats without mentioning the other 20 or so great titles that also jumped boat. Also if a lot of the great sequels from Dreamcast games stayed with the Dreamcast it would have made the Gamecube almost pointless unless you needed your Mario/Zelda/etc Fix (which was somewhat diluted compared to previous generations).

As for your later post regarding Dreamcast innovation as compared to Nintendos I can whole-heartedly agree. SEGA put forth an amazing system that was worthty of a new generation beyond what the PS1 and N64 had acheived and recieved very little praise for it. The Xbox, Cube and PS2 all recieved much more attention for much less.

By the way thanks for not trying to tear me a new one for not completely agreeing with you, and also being able to see and understand my points of view. Thats very rare on many internet forums.