Ultimate Spiderman: for which platform to get?

[Joel]

Ultimate Spiderman looks great. The problem is, which version should I get? Gamecube or PS2? There's no PC version, right?

[JackAxe]

I vote for Gamecube, since it has more power, faster load times and an overall edge graphically. But, the dual-shock controller for the PS2 is nice. :)

<]=)

[Rampax]

There is a pc version. I am planning to get that one since I dont have any console anymore. But if you want it for console, Id suggest ps2, but I havent played it yet so I cant say that it will be better than the gamecube's version.

[Joel]

Ok... I'll probably get the PC version then. I had the impression that there's no PC version.

[JackAxe]

Go with the <PC> (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000AM72DG/qid=1128149278/sr=8-7/ref=pd_bbs_7/103-7820000-9651021?v=glance&s=software&n=507846) , it's the cheapest.

The GC version costs less than the others, but is still quite a bit higher than the PC version.

<]=)

[Rampax]

BTW what are the system requirements for this game?

[Joel]

I've just ordered from gogamer.com ... $29.90.

System Requirements : Windows 2000/XP, Pentium 1Ghz, 256MB RAM, 32MB DirectX 9.0 video card, DVDROM, DirectX 9.0 compatible sound card, Keyboard, Mouse

The personal rule I follow is to double the requirements to fully appreciate the game.

[Rampax]

Well sometimes doubling the requirements is a very costly, and often useless, thing to do. (ie: BF2)

[Ezikial Anta]

BF is top of the line - gaming PC needed- this is more of a anyone can play it kind of thing. Besides, I think he means take the basic requirements not the recommended.

[Rampax]

Even so, BF2 requires 1.7ghz min so doubling it would be a 3.4ghz or equivalent. Considering that the top pentium 4 out there right now is a 3.8ghz, getting a 3.4 ghz is still something that is moderately costly. Also, the video card that you have to get has to be at least near the top of the line and that could also be very costly.

And besides, with much better looking games coming out, more and more system would be required. I wouldnt be suprised if by christmas, you will need a machine with at least a 2.0ghz processor, 1gb of ram, and a 256mb video card just to play it. How many people can double that when this configuration would be considered as one of the better machines out there right now (maybe except the processor). Not everyone has the money (or even be willing to) to get a FX, 2+ gb of ram, a geforce 7800, and raptor hard drives just for the sake of running their games at max settings.

[Ezikial Anta]

Well, we don't want to. But, Double is the safest way to - if you can afford it.

[JackAxe]

You don't need Raptor HD's for video games, that's silly. :D I move Gigs upon Gigs around on my internal 7200 SATA for the massive video jobs that I do. Even my external 7200 FW 400 can keep up for some things.

PC games have always been like this, but in general, about 6 months after the game is released like BF2, the hardware required to run it smoothly has been replaced by something better, and the overall cost for prefered parts has dropped considerably.

For the peeps that prefer the massive edge PCs offer over any console, upgrading for a game like BF2, if they're into it, is a no brainer. Games like BF2 are better played on a PC anyways.

Sadly, Microsoft seems to be taking this upgrade mentality into the console arena though. Blah. This is one area that should not require an upgrade just to play a new game.

<]=)