The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
‘Yeah, I’ll be getting a Playstation 2 when it’s released. The graphics and sound look OK and the DVD player sounds great too’.
What is wrong with the above sentence?
Well, apart from being a completely naive and stupid view to take, most of the information is a load of cobblers. Yet this is what most gamers (I know) seem to think.
First, if you read any decent review/news item/magazine article written by people who have actually played the thing, you’ll discover that, apart from a few titles, the graphics and sound look no more advanced than the Dreamcast’s. Another thing that everyone likes the sound of is the built in DVD player. It does sound fantastic but has anyone ever sat down and thought about how Sony would be able to place a good quality DVD player inside an already expensive console and be able to charge under £300 for it? Thought not. Unsurprisingly, Sony has chosen the cheaper option, opting to fit their console out with a cheap, sub standard DVD player and keeping the price around the £200 mark.
Another thing wrong with the statement is that it doesn’t mention how utterly average the games look (and play) at the moment. People say that more games will be developed in time for the PS2’s European launch but, if Sony are content to release their supposedly next-generation hardware with only a few mediocre games to support it, what evidence is there to say that Sony will bother developing decent games for when it’s launced over here.
The bottom line is, the only proper, decent feature that this console has is the fact that it bears the ‘Playstation’ name. I predict that there will be a mad rush to buy the thing at first and when people compare it to their old PS and realise that it isn’t all that different, they’ll be running back to the shop for a refund.
Once again, the leading manufacturer in the current market gets way too sure of itself and tries to sell a console on brand name alone. This is just what Nintendo did with the N64. They were so drunk on the success of the NES and SNES they thought no competitor could touch them. Then along came Sony and the Playstation and the rest, as they say, is history.
So when the PS2 comes out in a few months time, instead of following the herd and rushing out to buy one, look at how the console and judge for yourself whether this marginal improvement on the DC which you can currently pick up for £150 will be worth the collosal amount of money you will be spending. I think that if you do, you will find that there are much better alternatives like the Dolpin and X-Box just around the corner.
What is wrong with the above sentence?
Well, apart from being a completely naive and stupid view to take, most of the information is a load of cobblers. Yet this is what most gamers (I know) seem to think.
First, if you read any decent review/news item/magazine article written by people who have actually played the thing, you’ll discover that, apart from a few titles, the graphics and sound look no more advanced than the Dreamcast’s. Another thing that everyone likes the sound of is the built in DVD player. It does sound fantastic but has anyone ever sat down and thought about how Sony would be able to place a good quality DVD player inside an already expensive console and be able to charge under £300 for it? Thought not. Unsurprisingly, Sony has chosen the cheaper option, opting to fit their console out with a cheap, sub standard DVD player and keeping the price around the £200 mark.
Another thing wrong with the statement is that it doesn’t mention how utterly average the games look (and play) at the moment. People say that more games will be developed in time for the PS2’s European launch but, if Sony are content to release their supposedly next-generation hardware with only a few mediocre games to support it, what evidence is there to say that Sony will bother developing decent games for when it’s launced over here.
The bottom line is, the only proper, decent feature that this console has is the fact that it bears the ‘Playstation’ name. I predict that there will be a mad rush to buy the thing at first and when people compare it to their old PS and realise that it isn’t all that different, they’ll be running back to the shop for a refund.
Once again, the leading manufacturer in the current market gets way too sure of itself and tries to sell a console on brand name alone. This is just what Nintendo did with the N64. They were so drunk on the success of the NES and SNES they thought no competitor could touch them. Then along came Sony and the Playstation and the rest, as they say, is history.
So when the PS2 comes out in a few months time, instead of following the herd and rushing out to buy one, look at how the console and judge for yourself whether this marginal improvement on the DC which you can currently pick up for £150 will be worth the collosal amount of money you will be spending. I think that if you do, you will find that there are much better alternatives like the Dolpin and X-Box just around the corner.
I would definetly keep it. The only thing putting me off buying a PS2 is the price.
I prefered it when topics were like this. There were about twenty of us on the forums, and all of us were regulars. There would be one new person every week, and newbies were welcomed, because they were fun to have around.
(Yeah, changed a lot now, hasn't it.)
I prefered it when topics were like this. There were about twenty of us on the forums, and all of us were regulars. There would be one new person every week, and newbies were welcomed, because they were fun to have around.
(Yeah, changed a lot now, hasn't it.)
Why do that? Bad choice me thinks.
I'd love to wina PS2
You could sell it for 200 quid easily
You could sell it for 200 quid easily
In response to the title:
I'm not even going to slowly buy one!
I'm not even going to slowly buy one!
James007 wrote:
> ‘Yeah, I’ll be getting a Playstation 2 when it’s released. The
> graphics and sound look OK and the DVD player sounds great
> too’.
What is wrong with the above sentence?
Quite a lot. Only 165,000 were available at launch, so not all of us got them that quickly.
Well, apart from
> being a completely naive and stupid view to take, most of the
> information is a load of cobblers. Yet this is what most gamers (I
> know) seem to think.
We are right though.
First, if you read any decent review/news
> item/magazine article written by people who have actually played the
> thing, you’ll discover that, apart from a few titles, the graphics
> and sound look no more advanced than the Dreamcast’s.
It has had a head start, but is now getting surpassed. With GT3 on the way, nothing will stop it now. Besides the Dreamcast has gven up.
Another thing
> that everyone likes the sound of is the built in DVD player. It does
> sound fantastic but has anyone ever sat down and thought about how
> Sony would be able to place a good quality DVD player inside an
> already expensive console and be able to charge under £300 for
> it? Thought not. Unsurprisingly, Sony has chosen the cheaper option,
> opting to fit their console out with a cheap, sub standard DVD
> player and keeping the price around the £200 mark.#
I like the DVD playback. It is really good. The only problem I`ve had is the lip sync on one DVD, but that is easily sorted by pausing it.
Another
> thing wrong with the statement is that it doesn’t mention how
> utterly average the games look (and play) at the moment. People say
> that more games will be developed in time for the PS2’s European
> launch but, if Sony are content to release their supposedly
> next-generation hardware with only a few mediocre games to support
> it, what evidence is there to say that Sony will bother developing
> decent games for when it’s launced over here.
You obviously hadn`t heard of SSX. Also, there are many fine games in developement. FFX, MGS2 GT3 and the rest of the list I always put up in these arguments.
The bottom line is,
> the only proper, decent feature that this console has is the fact
> that it bears the ‘Playstation’ name. I predict that there will be a
> mad rush to buy the thing at first and when people compare it to
> their old PS and realise that it isn’t all that different, they’ll
> be running back to the shop for a refund.
Not that I know of. I certainly didn`t
Once again, the leading
> manufacturer in the current market gets way too sure of itself and
> tries to sell a console on brand name alone. This is just what
> Nintendo did with the N64. They were so drunk on the success of the
> NES and SNES they thought no competitor could touch them. Then along
> came Sony and the Playstation and the rest, as they say, is
> history.
You have written off the PS2 way too early, and now you are wrong.
So when the PS2 comes out in a few months time, instead
> of following the herd and rushing out to buy one, look at how the
> console and judge for yourself whether this marginal improvement on
> the DC which you can currently pick up for £150 will be worth
> the collosal amount of money you will be spending. I think that if
> you do, you will find that there are much better alternatives like
> the Dolpin and X-Box just around the corner.
A very long corner, that probably loops into the past in terms of quality :-)
> ‘Yeah, I’ll be getting a Playstation 2 when it’s released. The
> graphics and sound look OK and the DVD player sounds great
> too’.
What is wrong with the above sentence?
Quite a lot. Only 165,000 were available at launch, so not all of us got them that quickly.
Well, apart from
> being a completely naive and stupid view to take, most of the
> information is a load of cobblers. Yet this is what most gamers (I
> know) seem to think.
We are right though.
First, if you read any decent review/news
> item/magazine article written by people who have actually played the
> thing, you’ll discover that, apart from a few titles, the graphics
> and sound look no more advanced than the Dreamcast’s.
It has had a head start, but is now getting surpassed. With GT3 on the way, nothing will stop it now. Besides the Dreamcast has gven up.
Another thing
> that everyone likes the sound of is the built in DVD player. It does
> sound fantastic but has anyone ever sat down and thought about how
> Sony would be able to place a good quality DVD player inside an
> already expensive console and be able to charge under £300 for
> it? Thought not. Unsurprisingly, Sony has chosen the cheaper option,
> opting to fit their console out with a cheap, sub standard DVD
> player and keeping the price around the £200 mark.#
I like the DVD playback. It is really good. The only problem I`ve had is the lip sync on one DVD, but that is easily sorted by pausing it.
Another
> thing wrong with the statement is that it doesn’t mention how
> utterly average the games look (and play) at the moment. People say
> that more games will be developed in time for the PS2’s European
> launch but, if Sony are content to release their supposedly
> next-generation hardware with only a few mediocre games to support
> it, what evidence is there to say that Sony will bother developing
> decent games for when it’s launced over here.
You obviously hadn`t heard of SSX. Also, there are many fine games in developement. FFX, MGS2 GT3 and the rest of the list I always put up in these arguments.
The bottom line is,
> the only proper, decent feature that this console has is the fact
> that it bears the ‘Playstation’ name. I predict that there will be a
> mad rush to buy the thing at first and when people compare it to
> their old PS and realise that it isn’t all that different, they’ll
> be running back to the shop for a refund.
Not that I know of. I certainly didn`t
Once again, the leading
> manufacturer in the current market gets way too sure of itself and
> tries to sell a console on brand name alone. This is just what
> Nintendo did with the N64. They were so drunk on the success of the
> NES and SNES they thought no competitor could touch them. Then along
> came Sony and the Playstation and the rest, as they say, is
> history.
You have written off the PS2 way too early, and now you are wrong.
So when the PS2 comes out in a few months time, instead
> of following the herd and rushing out to buy one, look at how the
> console and judge for yourself whether this marginal improvement on
> the DC which you can currently pick up for £150 will be worth
> the collosal amount of money you will be spending. I think that if
> you do, you will find that there are much better alternatives like
> the Dolpin and X-Box just around the corner.
A very long corner, that probably loops into the past in terms of quality :-)
‘Yeah, I’ll be getting a Playstation 2 when it’s released. The graphics and sound look OK and the DVD player sounds great too’.
What is wrong with the above sentence?
Well, apart from being a completely naive and stupid view to take, most of the information is a load of cobblers. Yet this is what most gamers (I know) seem to think.
First, if you read any decent review/news item/magazine article written by people who have actually played the thing, you’ll discover that, apart from a few titles, the graphics and sound look no more advanced than the Dreamcast’s. Another thing that everyone likes the sound of is the built in DVD player. It does sound fantastic but has anyone ever sat down and thought about how Sony would be able to place a good quality DVD player inside an already expensive console and be able to charge under £300 for it? Thought not. Unsurprisingly, Sony has chosen the cheaper option, opting to fit their console out with a cheap, sub standard DVD player and keeping the price around the £200 mark.
Another thing wrong with the statement is that it doesn’t mention how utterly average the games look (and play) at the moment. People say that more games will be developed in time for the PS2’s European launch but, if Sony are content to release their supposedly next-generation hardware with only a few mediocre games to support it, what evidence is there to say that Sony will bother developing decent games for when it’s launced over here.
The bottom line is, the only proper, decent feature that this console has is the fact that it bears the ‘Playstation’ name. I predict that there will be a mad rush to buy the thing at first and when people compare it to their old PS and realise that it isn’t all that different, they’ll be running back to the shop for a refund.
Once again, the leading manufacturer in the current market gets way too sure of itself and tries to sell a console on brand name alone. This is just what Nintendo did with the N64. They were so drunk on the success of the NES and SNES they thought no competitor could touch them. Then along came Sony and the Playstation and the rest, as they say, is history.
So when the PS2 comes out in a few months time, instead of following the herd and rushing out to buy one, look at how the console and judge for yourself whether this marginal improvement on the DC which you can currently pick up for £150 will be worth the collosal amount of money you will be spending. I think that if you do, you will find that there are much better alternatives like the Dolpin and X-Box just around the corner.
What is wrong with the above sentence?
Well, apart from being a completely naive and stupid view to take, most of the information is a load of cobblers. Yet this is what most gamers (I know) seem to think.
First, if you read any decent review/news item/magazine article written by people who have actually played the thing, you’ll discover that, apart from a few titles, the graphics and sound look no more advanced than the Dreamcast’s. Another thing that everyone likes the sound of is the built in DVD player. It does sound fantastic but has anyone ever sat down and thought about how Sony would be able to place a good quality DVD player inside an already expensive console and be able to charge under £300 for it? Thought not. Unsurprisingly, Sony has chosen the cheaper option, opting to fit their console out with a cheap, sub standard DVD player and keeping the price around the £200 mark.
Another thing wrong with the statement is that it doesn’t mention how utterly average the games look (and play) at the moment. People say that more games will be developed in time for the PS2’s European launch but, if Sony are content to release their supposedly next-generation hardware with only a few mediocre games to support it, what evidence is there to say that Sony will bother developing decent games for when it’s launced over here.
The bottom line is, the only proper, decent feature that this console has is the fact that it bears the ‘Playstation’ name. I predict that there will be a mad rush to buy the thing at first and when people compare it to their old PS and realise that it isn’t all that different, they’ll be running back to the shop for a refund.
Once again, the leading manufacturer in the current market gets way too sure of itself and tries to sell a console on brand name alone. This is just what Nintendo did with the N64. They were so drunk on the success of the NES and SNES they thought no competitor could touch them. Then along came Sony and the Playstation and the rest, as they say, is history.
So when the PS2 comes out in a few months time, instead of following the herd and rushing out to buy one, look at how the console and judge for yourself whether this marginal improvement on the DC which you can currently pick up for £150 will be worth the collosal amount of money you will be spending. I think that if you do, you will find that there are much better alternatives like the Dolpin and X-Box just around the corner.