I have quicktime installed on my computer, and the only reason is because some of the games I play with need it. There is also a [b][i]lot[/b][/i] of bullshit games install (especially Sierra games) that I would like to see disapear from my computer, but I can't if I wish to continue to play.

Even so, I would probably need to format&reinstall if I wished to get rid of these pests...

its funny and confuzing when you say "just like I don't have any 'Real' products."

About the emulator thingy: I was talking rhetorically to bring the following question into your mind;

***why there are no cel shaded PC games?***

...I smell conspiracy...


btw I have QT and the trailer still doesn't work

The trailer can be found via the link Tuss posted on the first page: http://www.lucasarts.com/products/freelancepolice/.

Why puke? Some people here seem to dislike quicktime, I don't blame'em, if it weren't for my younger brother I wouldn't have it installed either, just like I don't have any 'Real' products.

About the emulator thingy: I was talking (hypothetically) about a 3D cel-shaded PC version of Sam & Max, PC being the only platform I know it is being developed for.

And finally:
Yes, I've now seen the trailer... For all the quicktime-haters: it looks exactly like the screenshots that started this discussion except there's a lame joke at the end where Sam says: "Holy bouncing buddha, Max. We're in 3D!", and Max replies: "Eh, it's been done."

Eh, it's been done.

don't forget an emulator as there are no cel shaded pc games and all the ones mentioned in this thread are for consoles (name one if I am mistaken).

what? where? when? why quicktime? and why puke?

Yeah I have all of the above and I just spent $170 on a memory card and two games

If you don't already have a PSX, stereo, or DVD player, it's a really great present, actually.

Just that your birthday wasn't yesterday What kind of an insulting present is that anyway?

Speaking on Consoles, my wonderful friends lastnight gave me a playstation 2 for my 18th pressent, I have no meaning to this post just thought it was a really swell pressent :S

Now I'd need the puke smiley

Nope, it's quicktime.

;)
Seen the Trailer?

1. NO controller has fit in my hands as perfectly as the DC did. The thumbsticks also didn't get as dirty or screwy as easily as they did on the N64 or Playstation (2).

2. I very much doubt that you've played every other game made for the DC. There are a TON of good games for the DC; I just mentioned the hilights.

3. Sure, they lost money, but they made a great console. The reason they lost money is that people like you didn't give it a chance. I also believe that, if they would have released it at the same time as the PS2 with a couple more (meaningless) features like the PS2 had (DVD capabilities, etc.), it would have done A LOT better.

4. Yep, it's definitely still a god.
Thanks. You just pointed out another thing that made the DC revolutionary: it was the first 128-bit system. But comparing it to the other 128-bit systems is ludicrous. Obviously, future consoles of the same type will be more successful than the first, because they can see what mistakes the first made; and then they can fix or dodge them.

Edited by Da_Goat at 19:16 on June, 15th 2003

You're right about the Dreamcast being a 128-bit console (a Playstation is 32-bit though), but comparing it to a Playstation 2/X-Box/GameCube is just not doing it justice, seeing as those consoles were released at the very least a whole year later... But comparing it to an N64 would be about as unfair (if not worse), I'll admit that.

Anyway, what you said: ...is right, and if you want to base your decision on that, go ahead, call it crap, never having had a console, I couldn't care less.

No I think you will find N64 and playstation 1 are 64 bit consoles. Playstation 2, DREAMCAST and co are 128 bit consoles therefore DC was the first of the 128 bit consoles and when compared to the other 128 bit consoles it's crap, like I have said all along

Pada: I wasn't saying it was crap because of costs, I was making the point that in order to even stay in the market Sega had to take a huge loss per console, only Sony make a profit on console sales

Playstation 2, Game Cube and X-Box are all one generation later than the Dreamcast, you should be comparing it to a Nintendo 64 if I'm not mistaken... In terms of graphics, it was certainly the best looking console at the time, wouldn't know anything about gameplay though.

SO now we're deciding upon the crappiness of consoles by their sales-records? How sad is that... The only consoles I had were the NES and the SNES, which I both thought to be excelent system seeing as they did exactly what I expected from them: they entretaineed me...

On the newer generations of consoles, I have but one major point of critique: their (and their games') prize. They are just too expensive too my liking else I'ld have bought myself a Playstation 2 some time ago...

And sure, most concole-games are utter crap (merely showing off the 'superior' tech they claim to have with fancy graphics and loud (so-called surround sound which use is rather limited if you have but 1 speaker), but then again, so are most pc-games for exactly the same reasons... It's the few games a console (or any other gaming-platform for that matter) that are actually good which determines if the console is worth the exuberant prize or not...

Even if the controlers we're crap and pretty much every other game made for it was crap, and sega had to take a loss of a few hundred dollars per console just to sell any?
Is the DC still considered a god now?

Any console that has Soul Calibur, Jet Grind Radio, Grandia II, or Shenmue (all four of these games were landmarks) is automatically deemed a God.

Edited by Da_Goat at 20:32 on June, 14th 2003

All consoles of any generation are trash. There.