OutRun: Finally, It's Worth Buying a PSP!

so spong favour the DS then.

is ther a review of this game anywere?

do i get anything for having over 200 posts???

It looks good, but its yet another racing game. They already take up about half the PSPs library.

It'll be worth buying a PSP when a game comes out for it not available on or beaten by a similar game on its big brother. I can't see it happening for a long time.

Either that, or they can make it £100 and throw in an SD adaptor for the Memory Stick port.

That statement is invalid, if:

1) You don't own a PS2

2) You do, but are happy playing updates/revisions of existing franchises ON THE MOVE.

To be fair, their are TWO other (gaming) reasons to buy a PSP; Wipeout Pure and GTA:LCS.

Try Gripshift, it's reasonably different from other games. Sure you drive a car, but it's not just a racer!

SPOnG review of Gripshift should give you some pointers at to what it's all about.

You could also try Lumines, which is real, honest-to-god, digital crack!

I agree with Fluff, Outrun is nice and a good game but this game has already been on Xbox. PSP is becoming a handheld for ports and little else.

Pursuit Force was different so Sony need something like that. Another angle they could use to their advantage is to release PS2 games on the PSP that never left japan. Stuff like SF 3rd Strike.

I seriously cannot wait for this game!



I agree to an extent, there are a lot of ports on PSP, however,the reason I think it's coming out on PS2, PSP and PC is probably becasuse it didn't sell very well on Xbox, so if Sega cover the various formats sales would increase.

And they've confirmed an Xbox version too. But why not GC? Surely the income in GC revenue would be greater than the extra cost of porting it to yet another platform?

Yeah, what are Sega playing at!

I read an interview (in Edge, I think), saying that they'd waited until the XBox to make the sequel to Outrun because until then, technology wasn't good enough to make it look beautiful enough!

So basically, they're willing to make quick, inferior versions of their most valuable franchises just to make a bit of cash! Just like Mario sports games!

However, I am a believer in multiplatform games... but where's the Gamecube version! Sometimes, e.g. 32X, Mega-CD, etc. Sega can be a bit silly and it pisses me off a bit!

Agreed with your whole post there, but wanted to emphasise this bit - without sounding too much like a fanboy, we're not talking about just any old existing franchise. We're talking Outrun.

BTW, for those who aren't aware, Outrun 2: Coast 2 Coast isn't a port as such but more of an update of Outrun 2. There are more courses (most from the Japanese SP Tours), more cars and music and the girl in many of the menus has been replaced by the legendary FLAG MAN. So it's not a port per se, it's a new game, sort of.

I had the privelidge of going to SEGA Europe a few weeks before Christmas and playtesting Outrun 2: Coast 2 Coast on XBOX. (Ooops, did I say XBOX? ;P) Funnily enough, the changes are more than in the menus (which look a lot more Ferrari-themed), courses and Flag Man (but then wouldn't you buy the game just for that?), the version I played even displayed somewhat of a small finetune of the controls. It was pretty much a perfect tweaking of the original Outrun 2.

Having said that, I agree if you got the original and aren't into SEGA or Outrun that much then there's no real point in getting it.


Wouldn't really go that far. As I said before, this isn't a port of Outrun 2, but rather an update with better controls (if it was possible) and more features. I wouldn't exactly call the version of Coast 2 Coast I played inferior! Bear in mind Outrun 2 was released AUGUST 2004. You're talking a whole year and a half JUST for this update version with a few added bells and whistles (and to my knowledge, Sumo Digital haven't really had much else on in the way of projects). So really, it's not much of a rush job of a brand new game in the series is it?

And... your quoting of the fact that they WAITED years for the XBOX just to make a new Outrun then use that as an instance of them making rushed and hurried games is a bit of a laughable statement I'm afraid. You do know the original Outrun was made way back in 1986, right?


Non-existent, because there's a big chance it won't sell? I'm a big believer of multiplatform too, but you gotta make some decisions that will reflect the audience you're going for. In this case, I guess SEGA feel that there aren't enough 'hardkore' SEGA fans with a Gamecube to warrant making a version for it. It's all well and good to say every third party should make a version of their game for every single console known to man, but you need a huge wodge of cash to attempt it - and you're risking a huge wodge of cash if you make the wrong platform choices. The only publisher with enough clout to do that is EA really.

I was annoyed as hell when Shenmue II wasn't being made for Gamecube, but now I look back it probably wouldn't have sold at all. Perhaps even less than it did on XBOX. It may annoy a few people, but can you really blame companies for making these hard decisions? Take a look at the Gamecube charts, the only games that are really being bought ARE the cheap Mario spinoffs and Pokemon (and don't say it's because there's nothing else to buy for it, that's bullshit and you know it). You compare Outrun to the stuff currently doing well on Gamecube, and you realise that there's no chance it'd sell. And when you consider Gamecube game sales are disastrously poor anyway... (case in point, Shadow the Hedgehog hit #2 GCN charts and #7 PS2 charts. The PlayStation 2 version sold much more than the Gamecube version).

Mind you, it's not just Gamecube that misses out. Sonic Gems Collection wasn't made for the XBOX, after poor sales of Sonic Mega Collection + for the console. It's not all out against Nintendo or multiplatform, it's whether you have the cash to sustain a vast loss from poor sales.

The first quote - You obviously don't understand what I meant. I didn't mean that "worse graphics" = inferior. I'm talking about games in terms of art. If they have to compromise their art to get it to run on a different machine, then some of the artistic value is lost, therefore it is an inferior piece of art - it doesn't convey what the artist wanted it to convey as accurately.

The other quote - this obviously is more complicated than you think - firstly, if you think about it, it will sell more if it is available on that console than if it isn't - I thought this was the entire concept of multiplatform games. Also, however, if every game was multiplatform, then it would make no difference, because the audience would be the same for every platform in terms of who plays what games. So I don't see any good reason to release on every platform but one. It's not as though Gamecubes are a complete failure - they do have a user base.

Do you really think that if it's only aimed at hardcore Sega fans, then that means they should make it for the PSP and PS2!!! What about the Sonic franchise then? It's all on the Gamecube. Sega don't work like that anyway: Virtua Fighter 4 on PS2, Shenmue on II XBox, Phantasy Star online on GC, etc... If all hardcore Sega fans owned PS2s, I think it would be a lot different. Did Shenmue II really sell that great on the XBox anyway?

Do people buy s**t games because that's all that's available? Yes and no. In general, the public have poor taste in computer games. But I must say that on the Gamecube, there really aren't that many good new games out!

Fair enough, I must have misunderstood that bit.


Not quite. When you have a game to publish, you've not only got to spend money on manufacturing the game, you have to worry about licensing (be that by way of approval from console manufacturers - so the quality of the game is good enough to be sold on the system itself - or game rating classification. Might sound strange, but even submitting a game for [mandatory] classification by even PEGI costs money per game, per format), shipping it all to stores and advertising. Advertising in the form of TV, print, special cardboard stands and other store promotional material. Not to mention potential freebies to heighten attention for the game. If you add even one more platform to your planned list of consoles, your costs will spiral upward and upward. In this case, SEGA would need to spend money on manufacturing the game for Gamecube, they'd need to acquire licensing/classification, ship to stores and even advertising as well, assuming many publications will be an avenue once. A company like SEGA I would assume has only a limited budget for each game.

As a result, it's not simply a case of "if they sell even one copy on Gamecube amongst the other platforms they'll be making a profit". There's all sorts of spending to make up for, sometimes as much as the budget for promotion itself. I don't know about how SEGA or other companies strike up their profits and sales figures records, but if it's anything along the lines of analysing sales on each console seperately against expenditure rather than looking at the whole sales for all formats, then some consoles are going to look weaker in terms of sales than others.

I guess a better way to illustrate my point is to compare making a game for multiple formats with a worldwide publisher releasing a game for multiple territories. Namco might find that worldwide, Katamari Damacy probably sold respectably well. However if they looked at individual regions seperately, that may suggest to them whether they should release a new game in that territory. In Japan, I imagine Katamari sold quite well. To sell to the US would make sense for them, as the largest number of importers are there, and the population is larger so there is little risk. Namco might look to Europe though and deduce that, because Europe doesn't take kindly to quirky innovative games at the moment (particularly in the mainstream), they won't bother releasing Katamari for the region.

In a similar vein, one could argue that Namco could just release the game in Europe, because any games they sell here will just add to profits worldwide, won't it? Unfortunately, it doesn't work like that, because to release the game in Europe, there are perhaps £millions of expenditure required. If the game sells minimal amounts, the company makes a loss in that territory.

And it's exactly the same with consoles (only on a less drastic level obviously). If a specific type of game like Outrun has been seen to bomb on Gamecube, then what's the point in releasing it? Audiences also bear a factor - today's European mainstream audience is into racing games, movie tie-ins and war simulation. The Gamecube's audience is primarily children and those of a family nature. Much how a game like Katamari wouldn't sell in Europe based on the current audience of Europe, Outrun is unlikely to sell to the audience of Gamecube owners. This point pretty much answers your next point as well:



That's why you won't see GTA on Gamecube, you see. You and I might not agree with it, but that's the way it is. It's what they call business I'm afraid.


LOL, nice one. :) Thanks for pulling me up on that. I didn't mean by the 'hardkore' point that that's all SEGA are aiming for, I was just trying to put a 'person' in my statement.

As you rightly point out, it's all about the audience. Sonic is on the Gamecube. That's because Sonic sells best on Gamecube. Why? Because Sonic is a character that appeals to children and early teens. The core audience of the Gamecube. Virtua Fighter 4 is on PlayStation 2, because the people who would be most interested in VF4 would be hardcore fighting gamers. How many people do you know who play fighting games all their days that DON'T own a PS2? (that's a rhetorical question BTW ;P). So yes, I think it's correct to assume that Outrun 2 wouldn't sell particularly well on Gamecube. Given that Beach Spikers didn't sell much of a unit, Skies of Arcadia suffered a similar fate and not much other than Sonic, Super Monkey Ball (for a while) and Phantasy Star Online has hit the charts on the platform in a moderate fashion. =/


There aren't really that many new games out for GCN, full stop. When you consider a lot of people are buying old classics for the Gamecube now, you have to wonder just who's buying these games - Resident Evil 4 is still in the charts (18), but Mario Smash Football, a game released in Sep/Oct (and is terrible) is at #2 while Fire Emblem is at #10. With a bunch of old/not-so old mainstream pap inbetween. So to be fair, the only difference between the GCN charts and the others is that some titles happen to be older and that half of them don't sell an eighth of a PS2 port. The people buying the games are still klutz's. I love my Gamecube, but I've stopped buying the games because Nintendo is the only company with the gall to charge £40 per game on the only console that's nearly dead. A shame because I really want Fire Emblem too. It's not that I can't afford it, it's a matter of principle really. Meh, I guess I'll just eBay it.

Yeah, I understand. That is how the industry think - what they make is based on what people buy. It's safe for them but, on the other hand, it's getting boring for us.

I still think that if people like us who own Gamecubes would have bought Shenmue II and Outrun 2, there must be a fair amount of other people. I don't think it's as if a game released on the Gamecube will sell one or two copies, even the worst ones! Releasing a game on any console almost guarantees you will sell quite a few. Of course, I can't determine whether or not Sega would have made money, but if they can do it for two platforms, why not three (etc)?

Although, most people own a PS2, not many own a PSP. And I thought Resident Evil 4 sold better on the Gamecube than PS2, even though fewer people own a Gamecube. To me, this says that a game like this has potential, because (a) it's famously amazing and (b) there isn't any competition.

The other thing is, Sonic and Mario are not just for kids, this is propaganda. They look like cartoon characters, because they are fat and have big eyes...but some people haven't realised yet, after several decades of computer games, that computer games are not movies*. Disappointingly, this seems to include a lot of people that make the games. People sometimes confuse fun with childish, e.g. Mario Sunshine looks totally camp, but some of the missions are bloody impossible!

Still, ultimately, I am the one who cares, and because of it, I've already got a GC, PS2 and XBox...

*Except "The Movies" ;) Which, ironically, happens to be amazing and innovative!

To be honest, on the journeys I do a PSP would be dangerous. Why? Because if you miss your stop, you can be a mile away before you get chance to get off... concentration needs to be breakable, and as such games like Animal Crossing and Nintendogs are perfect. That's why I want a new DS. If I did get a PSP, I'd only be able to play it at home, destroying the point and doing exactly what I hate to see people do with a handheld.