The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Why does everyone think that only one super-console is going to survive? Doesn't anyone remember how the SNES and the Sega MegaDrive managed to co-exist quite happily? I think everyone is assuming that just because the original PlayStation dominated the space under our TVs for so long, the same's going to happen with the PS2. The only reason Sony became the market leader with the PlayStation is because Sega and Nintendo both made serious mistakes with their consoles' launches - that together with Sony's marketing muscle.
Sega have obviously learnt from their mistakes. The Dreamcast was launched over a year earlier than the PS2, compared to the Saturn's pitiful one week lead (which was a sign of weakness more than anything else). There were quite a few good launch games, and many great ones followed shortly. And there are loads in development too. Sega have made their system easy to program for and easy to port PC games to. This is very important - it's where the Saturn went wrong.
The PS2, on the other hand, has repeated the mistakes Sega made with the Saturn. Sure, the console's powerful, but it's damn difficult to program for and it has some serious hardware faults (a couple of which will be corrected for the western release, thank goodness). The PS2's video RAM is half that of the DC's, although its total RAM is actually 2 MB bigger than the DC's - it's a pity Sony didn't allocate the RAM where it was needed. This basically means you can expect PS2 games to have higher polygon counts most of the time, but with less detail mapped onto the polygons themselves - a big compromise. Oh yeah, and the fact that programmers have to use middleware to program for the PS2 (for the moment, anyhow), brings the PS2's sky-high polygon count down to the DC's level.
This sounds very one-sided, and I admit I am a DC owner myself, so I am biased. But I'm only presenting the facts. I think both the PS2 and the DC have their own strengths and weaknesses, and hopefully they will both be equally successful. I originally thought Sony was going to wipe the floor with the competition, but now I'm not so sure. The launch games aren't exactly awe-inspiring: Tekken Tag, Ridge Racer V, Grant Turismo 2000. Tekken Tag isn't as good as DOA2 (which is on the DC **AND** PS2); Ridge Racer V has received bad reviews in Japan; Gran Turismo 2000 has potential, but let's face it: it's just another rehash. From what I've heard about DOA2, the DC version has less game modes (but these WILL be in for the western release) and the cut-scenes run at half the frame-rate of the PS2 version. But.... the PS2 version runs at half the horizontal resolution: it simply interlaces the image to make it appear at the same resolution as the DC. The PS2 also lacks full-scene anti-aliasing, which the DC does have (so do the Voodoo 5 and Ge-Force 2 GTS coincidentally), and this means that there are more jagged edges, despite the fact that the polygon count is the same.
So... I think the DC rules, but most people obviously don't because they still intend to buy a PS2 (at least that's what most of my friends are going to do). Which is fine. Hopefully I've enlightened a couple of people, but I'm probably only going to get flames for it. As I said before, I still think both consoles can and will do well, and I do not hate the PS2, I just prefer the DC. If someone handed me a PS2, I would keep it, not sell it, because it will do some games better than the DC (and vice versa) and it will play DVDs. So lets stop arguing over which console is better! There's no clear-cut answer, and you can prove anything with facts. In the end, we're better off if there's more competition in the market, anyway!
Sega have obviously learnt from their mistakes. The Dreamcast was launched over a year earlier than the PS2, compared to the Saturn's pitiful one week lead (which was a sign of weakness more than anything else). There were quite a few good launch games, and many great ones followed shortly. And there are loads in development too. Sega have made their system easy to program for and easy to port PC games to. This is very important - it's where the Saturn went wrong.
The PS2, on the other hand, has repeated the mistakes Sega made with the Saturn. Sure, the console's powerful, but it's damn difficult to program for and it has some serious hardware faults (a couple of which will be corrected for the western release, thank goodness). The PS2's video RAM is half that of the DC's, although its total RAM is actually 2 MB bigger than the DC's - it's a pity Sony didn't allocate the RAM where it was needed. This basically means you can expect PS2 games to have higher polygon counts most of the time, but with less detail mapped onto the polygons themselves - a big compromise. Oh yeah, and the fact that programmers have to use middleware to program for the PS2 (for the moment, anyhow), brings the PS2's sky-high polygon count down to the DC's level.
This sounds very one-sided, and I admit I am a DC owner myself, so I am biased. But I'm only presenting the facts. I think both the PS2 and the DC have their own strengths and weaknesses, and hopefully they will both be equally successful. I originally thought Sony was going to wipe the floor with the competition, but now I'm not so sure. The launch games aren't exactly awe-inspiring: Tekken Tag, Ridge Racer V, Grant Turismo 2000. Tekken Tag isn't as good as DOA2 (which is on the DC **AND** PS2); Ridge Racer V has received bad reviews in Japan; Gran Turismo 2000 has potential, but let's face it: it's just another rehash. From what I've heard about DOA2, the DC version has less game modes (but these WILL be in for the western release) and the cut-scenes run at half the frame-rate of the PS2 version. But.... the PS2 version runs at half the horizontal resolution: it simply interlaces the image to make it appear at the same resolution as the DC. The PS2 also lacks full-scene anti-aliasing, which the DC does have (so do the Voodoo 5 and Ge-Force 2 GTS coincidentally), and this means that there are more jagged edges, despite the fact that the polygon count is the same.
So... I think the DC rules, but most people obviously don't because they still intend to buy a PS2 (at least that's what most of my friends are going to do). Which is fine. Hopefully I've enlightened a couple of people, but I'm probably only going to get flames for it. As I said before, I still think both consoles can and will do well, and I do not hate the PS2, I just prefer the DC. If someone handed me a PS2, I would keep it, not sell it, because it will do some games better than the DC (and vice versa) and it will play DVDs. So lets stop arguing over which console is better! There's no clear-cut answer, and you can prove anything with facts. In the end, we're better off if there's more competition in the market, anyway!
You've made some genuinely good points, and its a shame most people don't see the situation like that.
I own both a PS and a DC and the DC is massive leap forward in technology. If I play a PS game now, the graphics are blocky and slow, and the loading times annoy me. But thats not to say I don't play on it. GT2 is an amazing game, and I purchased it months after I bought my DC.
I bought my DC because it offers a different type of game to what I was used to on my PS. The PS2 doesn't. Its obvious that the people who will buy it, will be the people who have bought Tomb Raiders 1-4 and Ridge Racers 1-4. There's a blind loyalty shown to Sony by PS owners and I'm mot sure why. Perhaps its because for a lot of them, its their first console and they know no other. However, having owned most consoles and home computers (from spectrum to Amiga and NES to DC) I know that to have a brand loyalty like that is stupid. You buy a console for games - not the other way around.
Personally, I've had enough of all the sequels and I want to play new, original games like MSR, Shenmue and Powerstone. Even PC ports are welcome, because as a console owner I've never experienced games like Quake3 and Half-life.
When Sony made the PS2 it looked at the DCs max polygon rate, trebled it and unfortunately thought that was enough. However, as we compare the games its obvious that Sony should have thought more about the other aspects to its system. At the moment its an expensive DVD player.
I own both a PS and a DC and the DC is massive leap forward in technology. If I play a PS game now, the graphics are blocky and slow, and the loading times annoy me. But thats not to say I don't play on it. GT2 is an amazing game, and I purchased it months after I bought my DC.
I bought my DC because it offers a different type of game to what I was used to on my PS. The PS2 doesn't. Its obvious that the people who will buy it, will be the people who have bought Tomb Raiders 1-4 and Ridge Racers 1-4. There's a blind loyalty shown to Sony by PS owners and I'm mot sure why. Perhaps its because for a lot of them, its their first console and they know no other. However, having owned most consoles and home computers (from spectrum to Amiga and NES to DC) I know that to have a brand loyalty like that is stupid. You buy a console for games - not the other way around.
Personally, I've had enough of all the sequels and I want to play new, original games like MSR, Shenmue and Powerstone. Even PC ports are welcome, because as a console owner I've never experienced games like Quake3 and Half-life.
When Sony made the PS2 it looked at the DCs max polygon rate, trebled it and unfortunately thought that was enough. However, as we compare the games its obvious that Sony should have thought more about the other aspects to its system. At the moment its an expensive DVD player.
You brought up some great points there Steven!
I too own an import Dreamcast with some cracking games (Shenmue, Powerstone 2, Marvel Vs Capcom 2, Sega GT, Code Veronica, Street Fighter 3: W Impact). I find it unfortuante that people are missing out on some of these terrific games due to blinded ignorance. But, at the end of the day, it's there loss not mine.
A lot of people are expecting the PS2 to be a step above the Dreamcast in terms of graphical ability and this simply isn't the case. (See Toyko Highway Challenge 2 or Metropolis Street Racer)
Why can't we just all enjoy the games Sony, Sega, Nintendo and Microsoft throw our way?
I too own an import Dreamcast with some cracking games (Shenmue, Powerstone 2, Marvel Vs Capcom 2, Sega GT, Code Veronica, Street Fighter 3: W Impact). I find it unfortuante that people are missing out on some of these terrific games due to blinded ignorance. But, at the end of the day, it's there loss not mine.
A lot of people are expecting the PS2 to be a step above the Dreamcast in terms of graphical ability and this simply isn't the case. (See Toyko Highway Challenge 2 or Metropolis Street Racer)
Why can't we just all enjoy the games Sony, Sega, Nintendo and Microsoft throw our way?
Exactly my point steven,
I would have brought PS2 at one time, BUT when I saw the machine up and running a few weeks ago, and still watching it now (Dont know why though), I am not impressed at all. What gets me is as you have already mentioned (as i have myself in previous posts), the pityful video RAM compared to the DC and also NO anti-aliasing, whats the point of all that power in the PS2, when it seems as though you can’t use it to its full potential.
You also mention that 'The PS2, on the other hand, has repeated the mistakes Sega made with the Saturn. Sure, the console's powerful, but it's damn difficult to program for' exactly, example:- Take NAMCO for instants, they know their stuff, BUT what happened to *Ridge Racer V and Tekken Tag*, who's to blame? surely not NAMCO, no way more like SONY, as they’re the ones who only gave 4MB of Video and also made it difficult to program for.
Reviews on Tekken Tag are not looking good at all, low marks, 6/10 compared to DOA2 8/10.
Also mentioned in this forum before, you are able to play PS games on the PS2, well i don't believe it as my friend as a PS2 and evey time he as tried, the Blo*%~y thing crashed on him, he's not to pleased i can tell you that, Oh yes he's decided to sell is PS2, don't know what price yet, but I know what he paid for it, £460.
I would have brought PS2 at one time, BUT when I saw the machine up and running a few weeks ago, and still watching it now (Dont know why though), I am not impressed at all. What gets me is as you have already mentioned (as i have myself in previous posts), the pityful video RAM compared to the DC and also NO anti-aliasing, whats the point of all that power in the PS2, when it seems as though you can’t use it to its full potential.
You also mention that 'The PS2, on the other hand, has repeated the mistakes Sega made with the Saturn. Sure, the console's powerful, but it's damn difficult to program for' exactly, example:- Take NAMCO for instants, they know their stuff, BUT what happened to *Ridge Racer V and Tekken Tag*, who's to blame? surely not NAMCO, no way more like SONY, as they’re the ones who only gave 4MB of Video and also made it difficult to program for.
Reviews on Tekken Tag are not looking good at all, low marks, 6/10 compared to DOA2 8/10.
Also mentioned in this forum before, you are able to play PS games on the PS2, well i don't believe it as my friend as a PS2 and evey time he as tried, the Blo*%~y thing crashed on him, he's not to pleased i can tell you that, Oh yes he's decided to sell is PS2, don't know what price yet, but I know what he paid for it, £460.
I agree. The Dreamcast and the PS2 are both great consoles. And I think Fogmaster is talking a load of bull. Hopefully, all consoles will be really good and will all sell well.
Steven Bailey wrote:
> Why does everyone think that only one super-console is going to
> survive? Doesn't anyone remember how the SNES and the Sega
> MegaDrive managed to co-exist quite happily? I think everyone is
> assuming that just because the original PlayStation dominated the
> space under our TVs for so long, the same's going to happen with
> the PS2. The only reason Sony became the market leader with the
> PlayStation is because Sega and Nintendo both made serious
> mistakes with their consoles' launches - that together with Sony's
> marketing muscle.
>
> Sega have obviously learnt from their mistakes. The Dreamcast was
> launched over a year earlier than the PS2, compared to the
> Saturn's pitiful one week lead (which was a sign of weakness more
> than anything else). There were quite a few good launch games, and
> many great ones followed shortly. And there are loads in
> development too. Sega have made their system easy to program for
> and easy to port PC games to. This is very important - it's where
> the Saturn went wrong.
>
> The PS2, on the other hand, has repeated the mistakes Sega made
> with the Saturn. Sure, the console's powerful, but it's damn
> difficult to program for and it has some serious hardware faults
> (a couple of which will be corrected for the western release,
> thank goodness). The PS2's video RAM is half that of the DC's,
> although its total RAM is actually 2 MB bigger than the DC's -
> it's a pity Sony didn't allocate the RAM where it was needed. This
> basically means you can expect PS2 games to have higher polygon
> counts most of the time, but with less detail mapped onto the
> polygons themselves - a big compromise. Oh yeah, and the fact that
> programmers have to use middleware to program for the PS2 (for the
> moment, anyhow), brings the PS2's sky-high polygon count down to
> the DC's level.
>
> This sounds very one-sided, and I admit I am a DC owner myself, so
> I am biased. But I'm only presenting the facts. I think both the
> PS2 and the DC have their own strengths and weaknesses, and
> hopefully they will both be equally successful. I originally
> thought Sony was going to wipe the floor with the competition, but
> now I'm not so sure. The launch games aren't exactly
> awe-inspiring: Tekken Tag, Ridge Racer V, Grant Turismo 2000.
> Tekken Tag isn't as good as DOA2 (which is on the DC **AND** PS2);
> Ridge Racer V has received bad reviews in Japan; Gran Turismo 2000
> has potential, but let's face it: it's just another rehash. From
> what I've heard about DOA2, the DC version has less game modes
> (but these WILL be in for the western release) and the cut-scenes
> run at half the frame-rate of the PS2 version. But.... the PS2
> version runs at half the horizontal resolution: it simply
> interlaces the image to make it appear at the same resolution as
> the DC. The PS2 also lacks full-scene anti-aliasing, which the DC
> does have (so do the Voodoo 5 and Ge-Force 2 GTS coincidentally),
> and this means that there are more jagged edges, despite the fact
> that the polygon count is the same.
>
> So... I think the DC rules, but most people obviously don't
> because they still intend to buy a PS2 (at least that's what most
> of my friends are going to do). Which is fine. Hopefully I've
> enlightened a couple of people, but I'm probably only going to get
> flames for it. As I said before, I still think both consoles can
> and will do well, and I do not hate the PS2, I just prefer the DC.
> If someone handed me a PS2, I would keep it, not sell it, because
> it will do some games better than the DC (and vice versa) and it
> will play DVDs. So lets stop arguing over which console is better!
> There's no clear-cut answer, and you can prove anything with
> facts. In the end, we're better off if there's more competition in
> the market, anyway!
Steven Bailey wrote:
> Why does everyone think that only one super-console is going to
> survive? Doesn't anyone remember how the SNES and the Sega
> MegaDrive managed to co-exist quite happily? I think everyone is
> assuming that just because the original PlayStation dominated the
> space under our TVs for so long, the same's going to happen with
> the PS2. The only reason Sony became the market leader with the
> PlayStation is because Sega and Nintendo both made serious
> mistakes with their consoles' launches - that together with Sony's
> marketing muscle.
>
> Sega have obviously learnt from their mistakes. The Dreamcast was
> launched over a year earlier than the PS2, compared to the
> Saturn's pitiful one week lead (which was a sign of weakness more
> than anything else). There were quite a few good launch games, and
> many great ones followed shortly. And there are loads in
> development too. Sega have made their system easy to program for
> and easy to port PC games to. This is very important - it's where
> the Saturn went wrong.
>
> The PS2, on the other hand, has repeated the mistakes Sega made
> with the Saturn. Sure, the console's powerful, but it's damn
> difficult to program for and it has some serious hardware faults
> (a couple of which will be corrected for the western release,
> thank goodness). The PS2's video RAM is half that of the DC's,
> although its total RAM is actually 2 MB bigger than the DC's -
> it's a pity Sony didn't allocate the RAM where it was needed. This
> basically means you can expect PS2 games to have higher polygon
> counts most of the time, but with less detail mapped onto the
> polygons themselves - a big compromise. Oh yeah, and the fact that
> programmers have to use middleware to program for the PS2 (for the
> moment, anyhow), brings the PS2's sky-high polygon count down to
> the DC's level.
>
> This sounds very one-sided, and I admit I am a DC owner myself, so
> I am biased. But I'm only presenting the facts. I think both the
> PS2 and the DC have their own strengths and weaknesses, and
> hopefully they will both be equally successful. I originally
> thought Sony was going to wipe the floor with the competition, but
> now I'm not so sure. The launch games aren't exactly
> awe-inspiring: Tekken Tag, Ridge Racer V, Grant Turismo 2000.
> Tekken Tag isn't as good as DOA2 (which is on the DC **AND** PS2);
> Ridge Racer V has received bad reviews in Japan; Gran Turismo 2000
> has potential, but let's face it: it's just another rehash. From
> what I've heard about DOA2, the DC version has less game modes
> (but these WILL be in for the western release) and the cut-scenes
> run at half the frame-rate of the PS2 version. But.... the PS2
> version runs at half the horizontal resolution: it simply
> interlaces the image to make it appear at the same resolution as
> the DC. The PS2 also lacks full-scene anti-aliasing, which the DC
> does have (so do the Voodoo 5 and Ge-Force 2 GTS coincidentally),
> and this means that there are more jagged edges, despite the fact
> that the polygon count is the same.
>
> So... I think the DC rules, but most people obviously don't
> because they still intend to buy a PS2 (at least that's what most
> of my friends are going to do). Which is fine. Hopefully I've
> enlightened a couple of people, but I'm probably only going to get
> flames for it. As I said before, I still think both consoles can
> and will do well, and I do not hate the PS2, I just prefer the DC.
> If someone handed me a PS2, I would keep it, not sell it, because
> it will do some games better than the DC (and vice versa) and it
> will play DVDs. So lets stop arguing over which console is better!
> There's no clear-cut answer, and you can prove anything with
> facts. In the end, we're better off if there's more competition in
> the market, anyway!
Why does everyone think that only one super-console is going to survive? Doesn't anyone remember how the SNES and the Sega MegaDrive managed to co-exist quite happily? I think everyone is assuming that just because the original PlayStation dominated the space under our TVs for so long, the same's going to happen with the PS2. The only reason Sony became the market leader with the PlayStation is because Sega and Nintendo both made serious mistakes with their consoles' launches - that together with Sony's marketing muscle.
Sega have obviously learnt from their mistakes. The Dreamcast was launched over a year earlier than the PS2, compared to the Saturn's pitiful one week lead (which was a sign of weakness more than anything else). There were quite a few good launch games, and many great ones followed shortly. And there are loads in development too. Sega have made their system easy to program for and easy to port PC games to. This is very important - it's where the Saturn went wrong.
The PS2, on the other hand, has repeated the mistakes Sega made with the Saturn. Sure, the console's powerful, but it's damn difficult to program for and it has some serious hardware faults (a couple of which will be corrected for the western release, thank goodness). The PS2's video RAM is half that of the DC's, although its total RAM is actually 2 MB bigger than the DC's - it's a pity Sony didn't allocate the RAM where it was needed. This basically means you can expect PS2 games to have higher polygon counts most of the time, but with less detail mapped onto the polygons themselves - a big compromise. Oh yeah, and the fact that programmers have to use middleware to program for the PS2 (for the moment, anyhow), brings the PS2's sky-high polygon count down to the DC's level.
This sounds very one-sided, and I admit I am a DC owner myself, so I am biased. But I'm only presenting the facts. I think both the PS2 and the DC have their own strengths and weaknesses, and hopefully they will both be equally successful. I originally thought Sony was going to wipe the floor with the competition, but now I'm not so sure. The launch games aren't exactly awe-inspiring: Tekken Tag, Ridge Racer V, Grant Turismo 2000. Tekken Tag isn't as good as DOA2 (which is on the DC **AND** PS2); Ridge Racer V has received bad reviews in Japan; Gran Turismo 2000 has potential, but let's face it: it's just another rehash. From what I've heard about DOA2, the DC version has less game modes (but these WILL be in for the western release) and the cut-scenes run at half the frame-rate of the PS2 version. But.... the PS2 version runs at half the horizontal resolution: it simply interlaces the image to make it appear at the same resolution as the DC. The PS2 also lacks full-scene anti-aliasing, which the DC does have (so do the Voodoo 5 and Ge-Force 2 GTS coincidentally), and this means that there are more jagged edges, despite the fact that the polygon count is the same.
So... I think the DC rules, but most people obviously don't because they still intend to buy a PS2 (at least that's what most of my friends are going to do). Which is fine. Hopefully I've enlightened a couple of people, but I'm probably only going to get flames for it. As I said before, I still think both consoles can and will do well, and I do not hate the PS2, I just prefer the DC. If someone handed me a PS2, I would keep it, not sell it, because it will do some games better than the DC (and vice versa) and it will play DVDs. So lets stop arguing over which console is better! There's no clear-cut answer, and you can prove anything with facts. In the end, we're better off if there's more competition in the market, anyway!
Sega have obviously learnt from their mistakes. The Dreamcast was launched over a year earlier than the PS2, compared to the Saturn's pitiful one week lead (which was a sign of weakness more than anything else). There were quite a few good launch games, and many great ones followed shortly. And there are loads in development too. Sega have made their system easy to program for and easy to port PC games to. This is very important - it's where the Saturn went wrong.
The PS2, on the other hand, has repeated the mistakes Sega made with the Saturn. Sure, the console's powerful, but it's damn difficult to program for and it has some serious hardware faults (a couple of which will be corrected for the western release, thank goodness). The PS2's video RAM is half that of the DC's, although its total RAM is actually 2 MB bigger than the DC's - it's a pity Sony didn't allocate the RAM where it was needed. This basically means you can expect PS2 games to have higher polygon counts most of the time, but with less detail mapped onto the polygons themselves - a big compromise. Oh yeah, and the fact that programmers have to use middleware to program for the PS2 (for the moment, anyhow), brings the PS2's sky-high polygon count down to the DC's level.
This sounds very one-sided, and I admit I am a DC owner myself, so I am biased. But I'm only presenting the facts. I think both the PS2 and the DC have their own strengths and weaknesses, and hopefully they will both be equally successful. I originally thought Sony was going to wipe the floor with the competition, but now I'm not so sure. The launch games aren't exactly awe-inspiring: Tekken Tag, Ridge Racer V, Grant Turismo 2000. Tekken Tag isn't as good as DOA2 (which is on the DC **AND** PS2); Ridge Racer V has received bad reviews in Japan; Gran Turismo 2000 has potential, but let's face it: it's just another rehash. From what I've heard about DOA2, the DC version has less game modes (but these WILL be in for the western release) and the cut-scenes run at half the frame-rate of the PS2 version. But.... the PS2 version runs at half the horizontal resolution: it simply interlaces the image to make it appear at the same resolution as the DC. The PS2 also lacks full-scene anti-aliasing, which the DC does have (so do the Voodoo 5 and Ge-Force 2 GTS coincidentally), and this means that there are more jagged edges, despite the fact that the polygon count is the same.
So... I think the DC rules, but most people obviously don't because they still intend to buy a PS2 (at least that's what most of my friends are going to do). Which is fine. Hopefully I've enlightened a couple of people, but I'm probably only going to get flames for it. As I said before, I still think both consoles can and will do well, and I do not hate the PS2, I just prefer the DC. If someone handed me a PS2, I would keep it, not sell it, because it will do some games better than the DC (and vice versa) and it will play DVDs. So lets stop arguing over which console is better! There's no clear-cut answer, and you can prove anything with facts. In the end, we're better off if there's more competition in the market, anyway!