Does anyone out there agree with this ?

[JiggyG1]

This is my first thread posted on this website. I would like to know what others think about Chaos Theory for the Gamecube. I have purchased the previous two titles, and was hoping for improved graphics and overall gaming with the 3rd installment. To my surprise, the graphics looked absolutely horrible. After seeing this same game on the Xbox.....IT DOESN'T EVEN COME CLOSE. It seems as if Ubisoft rushed this one out the door without their software guys putting any finishing touches on this game. Considering that this is the third game out I was really hoping that it would somehow resemble Mircosoft's masterpiece. I realize that Nintendo's console isn't as powerful but come on guys.....you could have done better than this !!! Look at other games like Resident Evil 4 or the Metroid Prime series....how did they botch this one up ? Especially when the entire series sold so well, you'd think that with all the money they made they should have at least given us Gamecube owners better looking visuals. Does anyone agree with this ? Or am I just blind ? It almost seems like the Gamecube version is running the game on a $150 3D card and the Xbox version has a $900 card installed. I don't understand how IGN.COM gave it a "9" for graphics !!! I seem to agree more with gamespot's review. Also, talk about false advertising.....check out screenshots for Chaos Theory at gamespy.com website. These are shots from Xbox's console !!!! I don't know what else to say people.....I WAS VERY DISSAPPOINTED WITH THIS VERSION. I just can't believe that Nintendo is downplaying graphics so much with their new console coming out called "Revolution". The President says that we have to look beyond the visuals....YA RIGHT. I'll tell you something....when the Xbox 360 hits stores this winter, I'll be waiting to play Chaos Theory on my new system. By the way, I just own the Nintendo console, not the other two....but if Nintendo doesn't pack their new system with decent hardware, I'll be sure to put my money into Bill Gates' pocket instead this time around.

[umainebearman]

95% of the time ports suck. Stick with what the game was designed for. Splinter Cell was meant for Xbox hardware. Halo was fun on the PC had some good changes but I found it to easy so it lost something in the porting to the pc.

Ubisoft didn't rush it the GC is limited in just about everything it tries to do. 3rd game or 1st graphics can only be tweaked as much as the hardware will allow and the GC doesn't allow much. I haven't seen very many GC games and said wow that looks good (Eternal Darkness), and have never said wow that looks great.

As far as the reviews....heh. I find IGN highly influenced by the company sending them the game. I never trust them. But if they find a game that is widely getting high or low marks they'll go along with it. Hell there GC review was probably copied word for word from there Xbox review.

[Astrakan]

Originally Posted by umainebearman

As far as the reviews....heh. I find IGN highly influenced by the company sending them the game. I never trust them.

While I don't have an opinion on the trustworthiness of IGN reviews, I definitely think that your best bet is to get more than one opinion. I can't recommend GameRankings.com enough for this. They keep track of the review scores given to games by multiple sources, and then tally that up into an average. They also link directly to some reviews, so its easy to get from the gamerankings.com site to any of the reviews you're interesting in actually reading.

If you look at the Chaos Theory for Gamecube profile you'll see that the average rating is 81%, while IGN gave it an 85%. Granted, that's not a big difference, but you'll also see that Gamespy gave it a 70% and Gamespot gave it a 67%. This is enough to start suspecting something, and perhaps would've triggered a rental instead of a purchase.

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/924557.asp

Anyway, I hope this helps with future game purchase decisions.

KM

[Ruined]

generally the ubisoft gamecube ports are inferior to the xbox version. prince of persia was another example - it was missing many of the lighting effects of the xbox and ps2 version (ironically IGN again interpreted this as a good thing because it looked "brighter" - in reality it was just missing a lot of the shadowing/lighting)

[furthest1]

Gamecube ports seem to be pretty inferior overall in general. They make some good games, but the reality is, GC doesn't stand up to other systems and when they try to take their games, it ends badly and makse the GC look like trash.

I've found that reading the personal reviews by members or reading the message boards on Gamespot to be pretty helpful. I don't trust IGN anymore.

[elwood731]

The truth of the matter is that the GameCube is more powerful than the PS2, so the GC version should almost always look better unless it needs more space for textures and they try to compress it to one disc. The XBOX is the most powerful of the current consoles, but not by the huge margin many would lead you to bealive. Look at first party Nintendo titles and they for the most part look better than PS2 titles and as good as most XBOX titles. So what's the problem with third party?

The GC, at least in the states, is on the low end of the priority list for ports. Therefore, they often devote less team members and budget. They may develop the title on the XBOX (Splinter Cell, for example), and then port to the PS2 because it's simply too big of a market share to ignore. When it comes time for the GC port there isn't much incentive to put much effort into. They mostly throw it a bone because 1) there is still a fairly sizable base there, though most own at least one other system, and 2) they like to keep in the good graces of Nintendo because of the GBA/DS.

Now, that being said, I've played many ports on the GC that were perfectly fine and looked as good as the XBOX version. You just have to be careful about it. Generally, I would read several reviews from major sites--one of them not being IGN.

[Bananaslug79]

Agreed Elwood.

To add to this and others opinions of third party developers not making a Gamecube title priority, I try not to buy a game that comes on all three of the systems for my Cube only because the makers' really are just porting the title. Yeah, I know that's what "port" means, but the gaming industry these days has gotten so bogged down with the newest Grand Theft Auto or whatever that uses the Playstation controller layout that the same game on the other systems just doesn't play as well. Nowhere is this more obvious than on the Cube, where the only game makers who seem to take into account that system itself is Nintendo and a handful of others. The developers who are all about the bottom line and who chug out a game on all three systems to try and sell more copies doesn't care that it looks and plays tight on all three systems. Again, the console that suffers the most because of this is the Cube.

It's unfortunate, and I'm sorry you got a poor game, Jiggy. I certainly wouldn't lose interest in Nintendo just for one lousy port, though. You said yourself the Cube has several games you think shine on the console, and I would agree. Try to keep those on the forefront instead of the mediocre ports that developers are just trying to sell instead of making for all their customers to enjoy.

[Sid]

I dunno. I love my cube, and it usually looks better than the ps2 in what games I've seen. I've noticed that many many game reviewers dont even play the Cube versions of games. It was very apparent on the last 2 Midway arcade releases