Badmovies.org Forum

i've been thinking about buying a play station 2 for the longest time. but being that i live in the real world now and can't have my parents buy certain things for me it just seems to me like video games are such a waste of money (and time it seems). what's everyone else's opinion on this issue?
 *on a bad movie note that Evil Dead game looks so kickass! is that coming out for P2?

I am 39 years old and I have Playstation 2. I go into phases where I will get "hooked" and play it almost every day for a month or two, but then I might put it away and not use it at all for a month or two.

Playing video games is just another source of entertainment. I don't think that there is anything wrong with playing them, as long as you balance your life with other things. I don't think that it is healthy or productive to sit in front of the television playing video games 8 or 10 hours a day, 7 days a week.

So, my answer is "no." I do NOT think that video games are a waste of money. If you enjoy them, then play them!

I agree with Burgo - I happen to be 31 and I slept out to get my playstation 2 on Oct 22nd 3 years ago... The only waste of money is if you don't research your purchases in advance. Since games can cose upward of $60 nowadays, it's so much better to rent from Blockbuster to make sure you don't make a bad choice.

I go through the same type of phase, but it's usually when I haul out my Sega CD games, play them for about a week, then don't touch them for 5 months.

I would recommend buying a PS2.  I own one myself, but only buy the games when on sale (20.00-10.00).  You can get some great games for about this price like Red Faction and Grand Thef Auto 3.

As for the Evil Dead game, it has been out since April which is when I ordered it.  I bought it off of the internet for about 20 bucks including the shipping.  Go out, buy a PS2 and buy the game.

Have Fun!

One word of advice....

While the PS2 is decent...buy an X Box instead.
I compared all 3 systems on the market very carefully before I made my choice and I can tell you that the X-Box outclasses the competition in every aspect.

It has a faster processor...doesn't require memory cards  (it has a HUGE storage capacity for saving games)....and usually comes with two games......the price has also dropped to $179.99 in most places.

I will take the "Pepsi Challenge" any day when it comes to my X-Box.

If you really need more info and a tech specs comparison, Howstuffworks.com has a fantastic article that compares all of the major consoles.

Check it out here:
http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/video-game.htm

Oh and by the way, unless you are a super mega ultra hyper Evil Dead fan.....stay away from "Fistful of Boomstick".....it stinks!

Howstuffworks.com has a new article on an upcoming game machine called the Phantom.

I'm not so sure about how successful it'll be.
What do you think?

Go here to read about it:
http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/phantom.htm

>i've been thinking about buying a play station 2 for the longest time. but being
>that i live in the real world now and can't have my parents buy certain things for
>me it just seems to me like video games are such a waste of money (and time it
>seems). what's everyone else's opinion on this issue?

Years ago, I owned an Atari2600, starting from when it was just an obscuresystem with maybe ten Atari-made games available for it to when it died a slow death. At the time, it was the only game system I knew of that allowed you to play a wide variety of games. I got a few full-priced games as gifts, but a large portion of them were bought at closeout sales. Later, I got a C64 and was introduced to the world of pirating games. Suddenly, for the cost of a box of blank disks, I could have dozens of games. This trend continued with the Amiga.

With this system, I only have a couple copied games, but I have a ton of stuff that I've bought at a local closeout store for $5 each. Also, some used games from eBay for less than $10 each.

I can't imagine buying a dedicated video game system for $100+ and then games at $25-50 each.

My advice would be to upgrade your computer system and use that for playing games. Buy them used and on sale. In addition, you also have access to a wide range of emulators that will let you run almost all software written for game and computer systems up to the Genesis and SNES perfectly, plus some games for the original PSX, and N64. Not to mention hundreds or even thousands of arcade games. Many games come with online options, usually free that you can use over your existing internet connection without having to sign up for a special service.

>I compared all 3 systems on the market very carefully before I made my choice
>and I can tell you that the X-Box outclasses the competition in every aspect.

The X-Box is basically just a glorified computer system but without a keyboard or mouse. I can't help wondering what you do when the HD eventually crashes and the games refuse to work. HD's have a limited lifespan and a decade from now, either your X-Box won't work any more, or you'll have to open it up and install a new drive. You'll be screwed if it won't accept a drive formatted under a standard Windows system, or it has to be a particular size. Of course, in a decade, the motors in the CD/DVD drives will probably have worn out, and they'd be even more trouble to replace, if it's even possible.

>Howstuffworks.com has a new article on an upcoming game machine called the >Phantom.
>
>I'm not so sure about how successful it'll be.
>What do you think?

I'd be VERY surprised if this thing ever gets off the ground. It has flop written all over it. They want people to pay $400 for a stripped down computer system, then $10 a month for access to their game network, and THEN pay $3-50 each for games that will be downloaded to the system? Yeah, sure...

Sure, you can download a game, but what about the manual? Online documentation that you can't print out sucks. What happens if a game becomes corrupted on the HD and doesn't work any more? Will they let you download a new copy for free? What happens when the company goes belly-up and you can no longer get support? What do you then if you have problems with your encrypted HD?

If this thing actually gets launched, who wants to place bets on how long it is before the first program to decrypt the game files shows up on the net? Or before the games start getting ripped and patched to work on normal computer systems?

It's a hoax!

Check out the website for the phantom.  It's certainly a hoax.  Looks like someone had a few too many hours on their hands and were bored.  

A system cannot offer a full range of cross platform games.  It's impossible and implausible.

But lets say that it actually would offer cross platform games.  These would be downloaded by your broadband connection.  This is yet another big sign that the Phantom is a hoax.  Look at newer Xbox and PS2 games.  Some of these are at upwards of 3 gigs!  Nobody is going to sit and wait for a 3 gig download  to come through just to play a game.

HOAX!

JohnL wrote:

"HD's have a limited lifespan and a decade from now, either your X-Box won't work any more, or you'll have to open it up and install a new drive."

A decade from now, X-Box will be so obsolete that it won't matter if the hard drive doesn't work. The same for computers.

These days, if you buy electronics under the impression that they are going to be useful for more than 3-5 years, you are just fooling yourself. Technology is moving too fast. As soon as Playstation 3 comes out, I doubt that I will use my Playstation 2 ever again.

Video-games a waste of time? I don't think so. Compared with TV, at least you are to use your brain while playing a video-game. Another matter is if you have tendency to become an addict to these kind of stuff. Otherwise, it is perfectly valid to play video-games for all your life.

although i'm not using it as often anymore, i have a ps2 and it was very much a waste of my time, though it was a good waste of time :P  why else would you buy it?  you've got some good games out there, and games like metal gear solid 2 and the final fantasy series get me hooked right into it [great storylines and just enjoyable]  
one good use is when friends come over and we just bum around and play multiplayer games all the time.  its all good fun!!

so if you're after that sort of experience, the xbox is better: it can house 4 controllers
but i will never say go out and buy and xbox, i'm too much of a hardcore ps2 fan!
though it seems to be a better system...

don't let microsoft find another way to take your money i say!! they'll screw you in the end for sure! :P

just think about what you're buying it for, check out what games are available, and whatever you do, don't get a gamecube... they s**t me beyond belief!

and enjoy!

Video games do have that ability to tap into the obsessive compulsive in every gamer. I played Metal Gear Solid 2 and LOVED the storyline - it was like having a Tom Clancy novel come to life!

However, I soon found out that one could collect the dog tags from each soldier. Yes, I did eventually collect them all, but the payoff was quite good - downloadable wallpaper (got it up right now), game sounds and icons.

This took upward of 3 weeks of constant gaming. Pretty much every game has hidden stuff in it to keep people interested now. Sad that the story isn't enough anymore to entertain people.

But at least they don't abruptly end like the cruddy E.T. game for the 2600!!!!!!

Video games a waste of time? Only if you let it happen.

>A decade from now, X-Box will be so obsolete that it won't matter if the hard drive
>doesn't work. The same for computers.

Some people actually enjoy having access to their old games. I still own my Atari 2600, 5200, 7800, Intellivision, C64 and Amiga. They're not set up because I don't have room enough, but those games can still be fun.

>These days, if you buy electronics under the impression that they are going to
>be useful for more than 3-5 years, you are just fooling yourself. Technology is

I don't look at electronic devices as being disposable. If I buy something, I expect to be able to use it until I decide to get rid of it, whether that's 5 years, or 10 years.

>moving too fast. As soon as Playstation 3 comes out, I doubt that I will use my
>Playstation 2 ever again.

I know people like that. As soon as something new comes out, they dump whatever they were perfectly happy with up until that point and never look back. One guy I knew used to switch flight simulator programs about every 2 weeks.

In a time when Halo and Half-Life II are considered state of the art for first person shooters, I recently had a lot of fun playing the original Dark Forces. Fairly soon, I'll probably install Jedi Knight and play that. I also enjoyed loading up a C64 emulator and playing Karateka on it.

>Pretty much every game has hidden stuff in it to keep people interested now.

Which penalizes players who aren't good enough to unlock the secrets. I've been playing Rogue Squadron and to unlock the three secret levels without cheating, you have to get bronze, silver and gold medals on all the levels. So far I've only managed to get one gold medal, three silver and bronze on all the rest except for 2-3 where you get blown out of the sky every 30 seconds. Oh yes, on quite a few of the levels, I couldn't even finish them without using the unlimited lives cheat. One in particular has groups of 2-5 laser turrets in clumps, all of which take like 6-7 shots to destroy while they only need maybe 3-4 shots to kill you. To top it off, at the end of the level, I *ALWAYS* get blown up at least 3-4 times by something I can't even see. One minute it's clear sailing to the target and the next I'm getting pounded by shots out of nowhere.

I finally got so frustrated of trying to meet the ridiculous requirements for the various medals that I just used a cheat code to unlock the secret levels.

Im 22 and will still be playing video games when im 80.I just love them, its just nice to lose your self in a good game for a few hours a day,helps take some of the stress off of life.

I try not to buy video games when they are hip, or just released - because this is when they are at their most expensivest - and frankly no game is worth me shelling out £40 odd quid for.

I wait for the game to come down in price - then when it does, I wait until it comes to a rock bottom price - then, when it does that I wait until its so cheap I can afford three of them - then I buy it.

But by then the machine is out of date and so is my taste.

Glad to hear I'm not the only one who still has an old 2600 at home. I keep meaning to set it up. I've also still got my old TRS-80 CoCo 2, but I never had more than one game cartridge for it. Most of the games I played on that were typed out of books in BASIC.

I'd say today's dedicated game systems are definitely a waste of money, and not just because I'm sick of seeing rental games displacing good movies in video stores, or that the free time I once spent on games seems to have evaporated.  I agree with the poster who said that there is no point in buying a game system when you have a computer.

I already need my to keep my computer up to date for working and surfing the net. There are plenty of affordable games available for it, and it's a lot more versatile all around. If I'm going to spend the money, I'll put it into my computer.

Besides, the video game industry is going in too many directions, in a neverending cycle of cash grabbing. By the time a system proves itself to be worth buying, a bunch of new ones come on the market, with questionable improvements, and it starts all over again.

I just stay away from it.



Post Edited (10-09-03 11:14)

JohnL, it's scary how much you just sounded like myself.  I still have my original Atari with close to 200 games.  My wife and I still play it quite a bit and I'll be damned if it doesn't bring back some great memories.

As for Dark Forces, I'm glad that I'm not the only one that still plays that.  I've had that game for years and still get periods where I'll play it for weeks at a time.  It's superior to some of the new FPS, in my opinion.

Skaboi, just got it! along with Splinter Cell, one great game. thanks!!

Most of the games I played on that were typed out of books in BASIC.

"Compute!" :)

"plus some games for the original PSX, and N64"

Unless you have a very old computer, ALL games will play perfectly.  The N64 sucks without an N64 controller though, and considering the system is like $20 now, why not just buy it?

"The X-Box is basically just a glorified computer system but without a keyboard or mouse. I can't help wondering what you do when the HD eventually crashes and the games refuse to work. HD's have a limited lifespan and a decade from now, either your X-Box won't work any more, or you'll have to open it up and install a new drive. You'll be screwed if it won't accept a drive formatted under a standard Windows system, or it has to be a particular size. Of course, in a decade, the motors in the CD/DVD drives will probably have worn out, and they'd be even more trouble to replace, if it's even possible."

HDDs have a limited lifespan, but it is way longer then you seem to think.  It isn't as if people are using their xbox 24/7, and once the new systems come out, the people who don't trade up will play it even less.  We have 15 year old PCs that have been semi regularly used and still work perfectly.  You can also format a standard PC HDD (which is what the xbox uses) to use in an xbox if you want more space or to be able to play emulators on it.  for emulation, region free DVD playback, divx playback, MP3 playback, and other general entertainment stuff, the Xbox is an incredible bargain at $140 - you just have to have the know how to get them working (don't even need a modchip anymore).

However, IMO at least, the Xbox library is lacking still.  The exclusives I would probably get at this point: Halo, Knights of the Old Republic, and...  Well, I guess that is it.  It has a lot of good 3rd party games, but so do the PS2 and GC.  

"These days, if you buy electronics under the impression that they are going to be useful for more than 3-5 years, you are just fooling yourself. Technology is moving too fast. As soon as Playstation 3 comes out, I doubt that I will use my Playstation 2 ever again."

That's just sad.  I still, to vastly varying degrees, play my Genesis, SNES, NES, N64, and other systems.  The NES is my all time favorite system, and now I have NES games on my GBA with a flash card - greatness.

"just think about what you're buying it for, check out what games are available, and whatever you do, don't get a gamecube... they s**t me beyond belief!"

What's wrong with the GC?  A lot of people are strongly prejudiced against the GC, and I don't get it.  The good to excellent GC exclusives (obviously IMO): Metroid Prime, Star Fox Adventures, Super Mario Sunshine, Zelda: TWW, Viewtiful Joe, Resident Evil 0 and 1, Super Smash Bros Melee, F-Zero GX, Animal Crossing, Pikmin, Rogue Leader, Super Monkey Ball 1 and 2, and Eternal Darkness.  I consider the GC exclusives to be better games then the PS2s, though the PS2 has a considerably larger array of them.

"Which penalizes players who aren't good enough to unlock the secrets. I've been playing Rogue Squadron and to unlock the three secret levels without cheating, you have to get bronze, silver and gold medals on all the levels. So far I've only managed to get one gold medal, three silver and bronze on all the rest except for 2-3 where you get blown out of the sky every 30 seconds. Oh yes, on quite a few of the levels, I couldn't even finish them without using the unlimited lives cheat. One in particular has groups of 2-5 laser turrets in clumps, all of which take like 6-7 shots to destroy while they only need maybe 3-4 shots to kill you. To top it off, at the end of the level, I *ALWAYS* get blown up at least 3-4 times by something I can't even see. One minute it's clear sailing to the target and the next I'm getting pounded by shots out of nowhere."

I can agree with you here - the unlockable stuff gets ludicrously hard in some games, considering how much extra value the unlockables add.  I hate it when there is some super awesome multiplayer extra (I don't mind if it is some relatively minor extra, like a trailer or different costumes) you want to unlock but you can't because it's soooo hard.

"I agree with the poster who said that there is no point in buying a game system when you have a computer. "

The many exclusive titles speak for themselves.  Good traditional RPGs and 3rd person platformers/actioners are practically non-existent on PC.  I have recently come close to giving up on the PC as a gaming machine for newer games after all of the problems I've had with mine, but I seem to be an exception (and I own my share of PC games - at least 70 non-pirates, thousands if you want to count ROMs, which I don't).

"I already need my to keep my computer up to date for working and surfing the net.
Besides, the video game industry is going in too many directions, in a neverending cycle of cash grabbing. By the time a system proves itself to be worth buying, a bunch of new ones come on the market, with questionable improvements, and it starts all over again."

Uh, what does your job involve doing with the computer?  Unless you're like a 3D modeller or something like that, I'm not sure I see why you need to keep your PC so up to date - definetly not for surfing the net.  A Pentium 3 500 mhz with 128 megs of RAM will perform for most users practically as well as a P4 3.6 ghz with 2 gigs of RAM.  It annoys me when they try to convince people otherwise in stores.

Jim Hepler wrote:

> Uh, what does your job involve doing with the computer?  Unless
> you're like a 3D modeller or something like that, I'm not sure
> I see why you need to keep your PC so up to date - definetly
> not for surfing the net.  A Pentium 3 500 mhz with 128 megs of
> RAM will perform for most users practically as well as a P4 3.6
> ghz with 2 gigs of RAM.  It annoys me when they try to convince
> people otherwise in stores.

Uh, where did that come from? My computer bears more resemblance to your description of an adequate machine than you know, and that is irrelevant. My point was that I already have a computer I paid good money for, that plays all the games I want. Please refrain from jumping to conclusions about people when you don't have the facts.

>By the time a system proves itself to be worth buying, a bunch of new ones come
>on the market, with questionable improvements, and it starts all over again.

Not to mention that some of the best games come out near the end of system's life cycle since by then the programmers know how to get the most out of it.

>As for Dark Forces, I'm glad that I'm not the only one that still plays that. I've had

For me, it wast he first time. I never had an IBM clone back when Doom and all the other first person shooters started becoming popular. I've never even played Wolfenstein 3D.

>that game for years and still get periods where I'll play it for weeks at a time. It's
>superior to some of the new FPS, in my opinion.

I beat it on the easy level and would probably have replayed it on the harder levels, except that it didn't multitask. Every time I'd play it, my downloads would stop. The only thing I didn't like about it was that that you couldn't map looking up/down to the mouse. I ended up using the joystick for turning and looking up/down and the keyboard for moving. About the only things that gave me trouble were the full dark troopers. Once the first shot hit me, I would basically be stuck in place while they pounded me to death. If I get a second system, I want to download some of the level mods for it.

>"plus some games for the original PSX, and N64"
>
>Unless you have a very old computer, ALL games will play perfectly.

I do have an older system, but I hope to upgrade at some point. For future reference, what emulators are the best for each system? I wasn't aware that there were 100% emulators for either. For the PSX, I mainly want to be able to play Silent Hill since it's not available for any other system. For the N64, I'm actually downloading some of the games as I type this. One user is posting the entire set of N64 ROMs to alt.binaries.emulators.nintendo-64 and I've been downloading the ones that look good and got good reviews. There's too many for me to download them all. I figured I'd save them for the future.

>However, IMO at least, the Xbox library is lacking still. The exclusives I would >probably get at this point: Halo, Knights of the Old Republic,

Actually, Halo just came out for computers and Kinghts of the Old Republic is on the way.

>The many exclusive titles speak for themselves. Good traditional RPGs and 3rd
>person platformers/actioners are practically non-existent on PC.

At the moment, the only console exclusives that I'd want one for are Robotech and Godzilla Destroy All Monsters Melee. I want Silent Hill, but supposedly that's playable under an emulator. I also kind of liked one called Robot Alchemic Drive, although when I was playing it there in the store, it got really annoying the way some character would pop up and want to talk to me every time I started to do something.

You SAID you had to keep your computer up to date.  If your machine is close to what I said, then it is not even remotely up to date.  I don't think there is a problem with having a machine at that level, but if you consider it up-to-date, your standards are very different from the rest of the PC world.

"Not to mention that some of the best games come out near the end of system's life cycle since by then the programmers know how to get the most out of it. "

I'd agree with you there, but until recently the console generation wasn't terrible.  The Atari 2600 lasted almost a decade.  The NES/Famicom lasted 12 years.  The Master System (which is practically unknown, Sega's system before the Genesis) lasted a miraculous 7ish years.  The Genesis lasted at least 10 years.  The SNES lasted about 10 years.  The PSX is still going (though just barely) after about 8 years.  The Neo Geo AES/MVS is still going after 12 years.  With the way things sound now, the PS2 (I should note I'm going off the Japanese release dates) will have lasted 6, maybe 7, years before dying, and the GameCube/Xbox will have lasted perhaps 5 or 6.  

" I wasn't aware that there were 100% emulators for either."

To be fair, there aren't ANY 100% perfect emulators.  The Atari 2600 emulators aren't 100%.  

"For the PSX, I mainly want to be able to play Silent Hill since it's not available for any other system."

Get ePSXe, at http://www.epsxe.com/.

I haven't used it much, but everyone says it is the best.  I much prefer playing it on the real hardware.

I don't know too much about N64 emulation - any games I want for that, I'd get the cartridge.  

Try http://www.zophar.net/n64.html

"Actually, Halo just came out for computers and Kinghts of the Old Republic is on the way. "

Heh, I'm aware of that, as I work in a video game store, we got a few reservations on it.  For whatever reason, it is still considered exclusive if it is also on PC.  I guess "Console exclusive" would be more accurate.  Because of Nintendo's dislike of PCs, all their GC games are ONLY GC, not even PC at all.  Which is fine, as their games are best suited for the more relaxed environment of consoles anyways.  It is kind of like how they say Ikaruga is GameCube exclusive, but I actually have the Japanese version for my Dreamcast.  Regardless, Halo 2 will only be on Xbox, no PC version at all.

>To be fair, there aren't ANY 100% perfect emulators. The Atari 2600 emulators
>aren't 100%.

Ok, but most of the old systems are emulated well enough that it's only a few games that don't work. With the PSX and N64 I've heard the rate of working games is more like maybe 50% if that.

>I don't know too much about N64 emulation - any games I want for that, I'd get the
>cartridge.

Hey, you were the one who said ALL those games could be played perfectly on an up to date system...

I've looked at the various N64 emulators and none of them sound all that great at this point. None of them works as well as the ones for the older systems where you can just select a game and have it work. You have to tweak settings, run it in special modes etc. and even then some games don't work.

Maybe I got a bad ROM download, but a few days ago I downloaded a copy of The Super Mario 64 ROM and copies of 4-5 different emulators including the original UltraHLE. A couple of them crashed when I selected it, one appeared to be running it except that there was no video or audio (but the instruction counter was running like crazy) and one locked up my entire system.

>Because of Nintendo's dislike of PCs, all their GC games are ONLY GC, not
>even PC at all.

Even games written by other companies? I've been hoping that Rogue Leader would come out for computers.

>Regardless, Halo 2 will only be on Xbox, no PC version at all.

That sucks. It used to be that you could buy a game for whatever system you had. Now half the games you want come out for the systems you don't have.

And what if my standards are different? They're based on what does a satisfactory job. I think on that we agree. And just because I don't have the latest machine doesn't mean that I haven't needed to put a little money into it so that it will continue to do what I want it to do. I consider that money to be better spent than If I'd put it toward a machine that only plays games. That was my point.

But what really bugs me is that you first jump all over me becaue you think I'm buying into all of the marketing hype and wasting money on a grandiose computer I don't need. Then, when you find out you were mistaken, it's clearly my fault, because, again, you assume I don't know what an up-to-date computer is. I'm really trying not to make the same mistake, and jump to the conclusion that you are a computer snob.

What I can say, is that you made an awful lot out of three perhaps poorly-chosen words that had nothing to do with the discussion at hand. It's much better to look at what someone is actually trying to say, than to pick their argument apart, word by word, while missing the point. And since you don't seem to be as interested in stating your own opinion on the topic as you are in commenting on everyone else's opinion, you might as well do it carefully.

Whew! I haven't lost it like that since JR started knocking Canada :)



Post Edited (10-10-03 10:23)

I've been  trying N64 emulation myself these last weeks, and I've found out that Project64 with Jabo's plugins gives a great compatibility rate -around 75%- . Most older games - Mario 64, both Zeldas or Goldeneye- run perfect, while there's still need of more work with newer games. 1964 is another good one, with an even better compatibility rate, but it crashes in my system. Don't try UltraHLE or its hacks unless you have a low-end computer (PII 350 or below), because it only works with some 3D cards and compatibility is quite poor.

About the roms, get the GoodN64 renaming tool and use it on your files - Just unzip them in the same folder and type "GoodN64 Rename"- Chances are that most files renamed as (U) - US version- and (!) -Verified good dump- will work.

I'm an ravenous emulation fan, I try at least once every system I've heard of, sometimes to remember the old systems I owned (Amstrad CPC, GameBoy), other times to play systems I always wanted to own but couldn't (MSX, Amiga, Genesis, SNES, N64, Sega Saturn).

I'd like to see some emulation for the old ColecoVision.

I used to have one when I was about 9 or 10 until I got mad at a game, ripped the huge power adaptor out of the wall & threw it.  The adaptor was damaged internally beyond repair.
After that, my mother would never buy me another game system.  
Stupid me!

Any good websites out there for Coleco emulation?

>About the roms, get the GoodN64 renaming tool and use it on your files - Just
>unzip them in the same folder and type "GoodN64 Rename"- Chances are that
>most files renamed as (U) - US version- and (!) -Verified good dump- will work.

The flood in alt.binaries.emulators.nintendo-64 is all verified ROMS, and I've been grabbing just the US versions of certain games. Right now, I'm downloading the two Zelda games.

>Any good websites out there for Coleco emulation?

Yes, although it'd be hard to find one that has both the emulators and the ROMS due to all the cracking down on emulation that's been happening. Here are some links;

 Virtual Colecovision  (http://www.classicgaming.com/vcoleco/)
 Mad Jock's Emulation page  (http://madjock.emulationworld.com/)
 ColEm downloads  (ftp://ftp.komkon.org/pub/EMUL8/Coleco/ColEm/)
 Coleco Adam Emulator  (http://www.komkon.org/~dekogel/adamem.html)

 Coleco ROMs  (http://www.theoldcomputer.com/Libarary's/Emulation/Coleco/Roms/coleco_games_summary.htm)
 Coleco ROMs  (http://www.videogames.org/html/)
 Coleco ROMs  (http://www.classicgaming.com/vault/colecoroms.shtml)

 Coleco Adam links  (http://www.adamcon.org/~dmwick/adam/)

A few notes; The first ROM site doesn't seem to work with GetRight, and may not work with other download accelerators. Works fine with IE. The ROMs on the second site are in the Colecovision section, under the Archive link. The third site has them stored on FilePlanet, which you have to join in order to access them.

The Adam emulator will also play the Coleco ROMs, as well as Adam specific games, like the expanded version of Buck Rogers which you can find as disk images.

"And what if my standards are different? They're based on what does a satisfactory job. I think on that we agree. And just because I don't have the latest machine doesn't mean that I haven't needed to put a little money into it so that it will continue to do what I want it to do. I consider that money to be better spent than If I'd put it toward a machine that only plays games. That was my point."

Yeah, I can see what you're saying.  I misunderstood what you were saying in regards to upgrading PCs.  

"Then, when you find out you were mistaken, it's clearly my fault, because, again, you assume I don't know what an up-to-date computer is"

When you say you have to keep your computer updated to play games, my knowledge of the ascension of PC game requirements (one thing that has alienated me from the genre) leads me to believe...  You are updating your computer  to play games.  In other words, regularly getting new video cards and every 3-4 years a full new PC.  It costs far more to be able to play the newest PC games then the newest console games - well, to play them smoothly.  Of course, if you're just playing through older PC games (which I still do - I recently beat Fallout and Fallout 2 for the first time) it's a very different story.  

"I'm really trying not to make the same mistake, and jump to the conclusion that you are a computer snob."

I'm really not, but sometimes I sound like one.  My computer is just on the brink of becoming aged - at 1.7 ghz, with 768 RAM, and a total 120 gigs on the HDD.  Before this one,, I was entirely happy with my Athlon 900 mhz, til it broke.  Then I switched to the older PII 450 mhz, which I was relatively happy with..  Then it broke (both less then a month apart).  That was what led me to buying a new PC all of sudden, and gave me a bit of a bad outlook on PCs at times - especially as a gaming platform, which I still consider consoles better for.

"Ok, but most of the old systems are emulated well enough that it's only a few games that don't work. With the PSX and N64 I've heard the rate of working games is more like maybe 50% if that."

I shouldn't of said the N64 was working so great, as I really don't have first hand experience - second hand really (I tried them when they first came out, but they're terrible on a keyboard or joystick).  ePSXe is supposed to work with over 99% of games though (I've tried about 15 games in it and all worked perfectly).  Final Fantasy 9 requires a 1 ghz processor for some reason - way over any other games requirements.

About the colecovision..  I've seen a ROM pack of every game released for the system floating around.  I didn't snag it, but it was less then 10 meg if memory serves.

I do have the complete colecovision set.  It's about 3 megs.  I'll try to find a place to host it.

>I do have the complete colecovision set. It's about 3 megs. I'll try to find a place
>to host it.

Back when older ROMs used to be much easier to find, I think I downloaded almost the entire set. I compared it to a list once and I think it was only missing 4-5 really obscure titles, like educational games and such. I also grabbed several of the Adam disk images.

I haven't bothered to run either emulator for myself yet, but I tried them out over a friend's house several years ago, and I wasn't overly impressed with the games. I mean, the Colecovision had this image as being an incredible game system that made me think it was on a level with something like the C64, but the games didn't look all that much better than magazine type-in games. Even the enhanced Adam games weren't all that impressive.