The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
PS2.
Now what has the PS2 really and truly going for it now?
Metal Gear Substance Hmm?
Well possibly, that's if you don't have the truly excellent MGS2 though.
But then there is Devil May Cry 2, all those pointless Mario Clones that will never succeed in Bettering Mario Sunshine such as Ratchet and Clank, because lets face it Mario Sunshine WILL be good, great in fact, Miyamoto is on Full Time with this one.
But really, think about it now of any other release that is a genuine buy will also be on Gamecube and Xbox. And when that happens we get better visuals with the GC and Xbox so why bother with PS2 versions?
And its been done before- Burnout it is Visually Better on GC than it is on PS2. Like- oooh so many others.......
Which brings me onto the PS2 graphics, they are sub standard!
The Majority of Games are very washed out looking- GTA3 for one and most have Jagged Edges too, plus the Flickering is appalling in some games.
Face it Sonyphiles, out of the three consoles that is out there the PS2 is the worst in terms of Visuals. The best in Visuals has to be the Gamecube followed by the Xbox. Im not being biased either, but its what I have seen and witnessed and played on EACH system to form that opinion, I own each system and take a very un-biased approach to each, if a game looks crap or plays crap ill not be afraid to say to others that it is crap, full stop.
Then we have the PS2 Controller, which is quite frankly against the other three consoles ranking Number two next to the Mighty Comfortable Gamecube effort. Having Nintendo ideas welded onto the Dual Shock (And inside the Plastic thing) it still gets a little too un-comfortable, which is shocking given where the ideas come from, the left analogue stick is awkwardly placed- fidgety and a pain. And the Analogue buttons are useless.
But lets ask one thing...A beloved machine? yes by countless millions, is the mightey PS2!.
It is only in the position it is now due to its older brother and its older brother was only successful because of Nintendo.
It is loved and cherished for all the wrong reasons, many people out there who stick by it are just too biased, too darn built up with their own mystic fantasies of it that they refuse to sample the delights of any other system. These same people, which the majority are teens, not the Teens that Sony claim to be aiming for but Children! Little children and older children. They have all got it into their head that the PS2 is the best thing ever created, they are the same people who's first console was the PS and never owned a non-Sony console in their life, which makes them blinkered even further.
Nintendo on the other hand have an average age group of 23 who own Gamecube's, consider that. And the Nintendo players have a long history with the company.
Sonyphiles, open your eyes. Sample the delights that is out there that hasn't a Sony Logo on it. You see, what I think is that Sonyphiles are afraid to do that, afraid to sample other machines to spend hours and nights and days on the greats of the XBox and GC in case they are drawn from the Sickly Beloved PS2's and realising there is better out there...by a mile!.
Am I right?
Now what has the PS2 really and truly going for it now?
Metal Gear Substance Hmm?
Well possibly, that's if you don't have the truly excellent MGS2 though.
But then there is Devil May Cry 2, all those pointless Mario Clones that will never succeed in Bettering Mario Sunshine such as Ratchet and Clank, because lets face it Mario Sunshine WILL be good, great in fact, Miyamoto is on Full Time with this one.
But really, think about it now of any other release that is a genuine buy will also be on Gamecube and Xbox. And when that happens we get better visuals with the GC and Xbox so why bother with PS2 versions?
And its been done before- Burnout it is Visually Better on GC than it is on PS2. Like- oooh so many others.......
Which brings me onto the PS2 graphics, they are sub standard!
The Majority of Games are very washed out looking- GTA3 for one and most have Jagged Edges too, plus the Flickering is appalling in some games.
Face it Sonyphiles, out of the three consoles that is out there the PS2 is the worst in terms of Visuals. The best in Visuals has to be the Gamecube followed by the Xbox. Im not being biased either, but its what I have seen and witnessed and played on EACH system to form that opinion, I own each system and take a very un-biased approach to each, if a game looks crap or plays crap ill not be afraid to say to others that it is crap, full stop.
Then we have the PS2 Controller, which is quite frankly against the other three consoles ranking Number two next to the Mighty Comfortable Gamecube effort. Having Nintendo ideas welded onto the Dual Shock (And inside the Plastic thing) it still gets a little too un-comfortable, which is shocking given where the ideas come from, the left analogue stick is awkwardly placed- fidgety and a pain. And the Analogue buttons are useless.
But lets ask one thing...A beloved machine? yes by countless millions, is the mightey PS2!.
It is only in the position it is now due to its older brother and its older brother was only successful because of Nintendo.
It is loved and cherished for all the wrong reasons, many people out there who stick by it are just too biased, too darn built up with their own mystic fantasies of it that they refuse to sample the delights of any other system. These same people, which the majority are teens, not the Teens that Sony claim to be aiming for but Children! Little children and older children. They have all got it into their head that the PS2 is the best thing ever created, they are the same people who's first console was the PS and never owned a non-Sony console in their life, which makes them blinkered even further.
Nintendo on the other hand have an average age group of 23 who own Gamecube's, consider that. And the Nintendo players have a long history with the company.
Sonyphiles, open your eyes. Sample the delights that is out there that hasn't a Sony Logo on it. You see, what I think is that Sonyphiles are afraid to do that, afraid to sample other machines to spend hours and nights and days on the greats of the XBox and GC in case they are drawn from the Sickly Beloved PS2's and realising there is better out there...by a mile!.
Am I right?
Page:
PS2.
Now what has the PS2 really and truly going for it now?
Metal Gear Substance Hmm?
Well possibly, that's if you don't have the truly excellent MGS2 though.
But then there is Devil May Cry 2, all those pointless Mario Clones that will never succeed in Bettering Mario Sunshine such as Ratchet and Clank, because lets face it Mario Sunshine WILL be good, great in fact, Miyamoto is on Full Time with this one.
But really, think about it now of any other release that is a genuine buy will also be on Gamecube and Xbox. And when that happens we get better visuals with the GC and Xbox so why bother with PS2 versions?
And its been done before- Burnout it is Visually Better on GC than it is on PS2. Like- oooh so many others.......
Which brings me onto the PS2 graphics, they are sub standard!
The Majority of Games are very washed out looking- GTA3 for one and most have Jagged Edges too, plus the Flickering is appalling in some games.
Face it Sonyphiles, out of the three consoles that is out there the PS2 is the worst in terms of Visuals. The best in Visuals has to be the Gamecube followed by the Xbox. Im not being biased either, but its what I have seen and witnessed and played on EACH system to form that opinion, I own each system and take a very un-biased approach to each, if a game looks crap or plays crap ill not be afraid to say to others that it is crap, full stop.
Then we have the PS2 Controller, which is quite frankly against the other three consoles ranking Number two next to the Mighty Comfortable Gamecube effort. Having Nintendo ideas welded onto the Dual Shock (And inside the Plastic thing) it still gets a little too un-comfortable, which is shocking given where the ideas come from, the left analogue stick is awkwardly placed- fidgety and a pain. And the Analogue buttons are useless.
But lets ask one thing...A beloved machine? yes by countless millions, is the mightey PS2!.
It is only in the position it is now due to its older brother and its older brother was only successful because of Nintendo.
It is loved and cherished for all the wrong reasons, many people out there who stick by it are just too biased, too darn built up with their own mystic fantasies of it that they refuse to sample the delights of any other system. These same people, which the majority are teens, not the Teens that Sony claim to be aiming for but Children! Little children and older children. They have all got it into their head that the PS2 is the best thing ever created, they are the same people who's first console was the PS and never owned a non-Sony console in their life, which makes them blinkered even further.
Nintendo on the other hand have an average age group of 23 who own Gamecube's, consider that. And the Nintendo players have a long history with the company.
Sonyphiles, open your eyes. Sample the delights that is out there that hasn't a Sony Logo on it. You see, what I think is that Sonyphiles are afraid to do that, afraid to sample other machines to spend hours and nights and days on the greats of the XBox and GC in case they are drawn from the Sickly Beloved PS2's and realising there is better out there...by a mile!.
Am I right?
Now what has the PS2 really and truly going for it now?
Metal Gear Substance Hmm?
Well possibly, that's if you don't have the truly excellent MGS2 though.
But then there is Devil May Cry 2, all those pointless Mario Clones that will never succeed in Bettering Mario Sunshine such as Ratchet and Clank, because lets face it Mario Sunshine WILL be good, great in fact, Miyamoto is on Full Time with this one.
But really, think about it now of any other release that is a genuine buy will also be on Gamecube and Xbox. And when that happens we get better visuals with the GC and Xbox so why bother with PS2 versions?
And its been done before- Burnout it is Visually Better on GC than it is on PS2. Like- oooh so many others.......
Which brings me onto the PS2 graphics, they are sub standard!
The Majority of Games are very washed out looking- GTA3 for one and most have Jagged Edges too, plus the Flickering is appalling in some games.
Face it Sonyphiles, out of the three consoles that is out there the PS2 is the worst in terms of Visuals. The best in Visuals has to be the Gamecube followed by the Xbox. Im not being biased either, but its what I have seen and witnessed and played on EACH system to form that opinion, I own each system and take a very un-biased approach to each, if a game looks crap or plays crap ill not be afraid to say to others that it is crap, full stop.
Then we have the PS2 Controller, which is quite frankly against the other three consoles ranking Number two next to the Mighty Comfortable Gamecube effort. Having Nintendo ideas welded onto the Dual Shock (And inside the Plastic thing) it still gets a little too un-comfortable, which is shocking given where the ideas come from, the left analogue stick is awkwardly placed- fidgety and a pain. And the Analogue buttons are useless.
But lets ask one thing...A beloved machine? yes by countless millions, is the mightey PS2!.
It is only in the position it is now due to its older brother and its older brother was only successful because of Nintendo.
It is loved and cherished for all the wrong reasons, many people out there who stick by it are just too biased, too darn built up with their own mystic fantasies of it that they refuse to sample the delights of any other system. These same people, which the majority are teens, not the Teens that Sony claim to be aiming for but Children! Little children and older children. They have all got it into their head that the PS2 is the best thing ever created, they are the same people who's first console was the PS and never owned a non-Sony console in their life, which makes them blinkered even further.
Nintendo on the other hand have an average age group of 23 who own Gamecube's, consider that. And the Nintendo players have a long history with the company.
Sonyphiles, open your eyes. Sample the delights that is out there that hasn't a Sony Logo on it. You see, what I think is that Sonyphiles are afraid to do that, afraid to sample other machines to spend hours and nights and days on the greats of the XBox and GC in case they are drawn from the Sickly Beloved PS2's and realising there is better out there...by a mile!.
Am I right?
*sob* just please don't let everyone start on the controller thing again ; )
Interesting post though. The thing with these arguments though, is that when someone makes this kind of sweeping statement about owners of one console, they usually get accused of basically being a blind fanboy. Only in accusing someone of being a fanboy, the reasons for this will more often than not sound pretty fanboyish (is that a word? Well, it is now :0) ) themselves, so it all to often degenerates into everyone sounding like a fanboy, which sort of supports the points made in the original post, but shows the same things to apply to the people that argue on the side of that post as well as against it.
Plus it does seem to throw stereotypes around a bit freely fo my liking.
Is everyone ready to look like a blind, mindless follower of their console company of choice? Then let's-a-go...
: D
(Oh, and, god bless people who can afford more than one console. The rest of us are just jealous - but only bless them if they really are objective in their opinions :0) )
Interesting post though. The thing with these arguments though, is that when someone makes this kind of sweeping statement about owners of one console, they usually get accused of basically being a blind fanboy. Only in accusing someone of being a fanboy, the reasons for this will more often than not sound pretty fanboyish (is that a word? Well, it is now :0) ) themselves, so it all to often degenerates into everyone sounding like a fanboy, which sort of supports the points made in the original post, but shows the same things to apply to the people that argue on the side of that post as well as against it.
Plus it does seem to throw stereotypes around a bit freely fo my liking.
Is everyone ready to look like a blind, mindless follower of their console company of choice? Then let's-a-go...
: D
(Oh, and, god bless people who can afford more than one console. The rest of us are just jealous - but only bless them if they really are objective in their opinions :0) )
Yeah, I know what you mean at the end there about how they won't even go anywhere near something that has been created by their beoved SONY!
I know loads of people at school who are like that, and they instantly dismissed the GameCube as 5hi+ as soon as pictres were released of it's final design, and what it was going to look like.
Some of them still called it the 'Dolphin' - a good few months at least after the name had been announced as 'GameCube'!
I take a look into other consoles and their games (including the PS2) and I don't instantly 5lag it off or go for nothing but my 'beloved Ninty'!
I've been a SEGA fan for the last decade, and I was a proud owner of a MegaDrive while I had my SNES and NES!
I don't see why they can't give other companies a chance, especially when they ARE the 'true gamers' they claim to be!
I know loads of people at school who are like that, and they instantly dismissed the GameCube as 5hi+ as soon as pictres were released of it's final design, and what it was going to look like.
Some of them still called it the 'Dolphin' - a good few months at least after the name had been announced as 'GameCube'!
I take a look into other consoles and their games (including the PS2) and I don't instantly 5lag it off or go for nothing but my 'beloved Ninty'!
I've been a SEGA fan for the last decade, and I was a proud owner of a MegaDrive while I had my SNES and NES!
I don't see why they can't give other companies a chance, especially when they ARE the 'true gamers' they claim to be!
SMÉAGOL wrote:
> But really, think about it now of any other release that is a genuine
> buy will also be on Gamecube and Xbox.
Many are, but there are plenty that aren't.
> And when that happens we get better visuals with the GC and Xbox so why
> bother with PS2 versions?
Because it's not always the case. And in many cases, the PS2 version is there first.
> And its been done before- Burnout it is Visually Better on GC than it
> is on PS2.
It has, umm, a few more reflections on the cars. Other than that, it's identical. Apart from that, it's hardly a game worth buying any particular machine for.
> The Majority of Games are very washed out looking- GTA3 for one and
> most have Jagged Edges too
Washed-out colours depend on the palette chosen by the developer and have nothing at all to do with the power of the machine. As for jagged edges, there are some. But considering the age of the technology, it stands up very well.
> plus the Flickering is appalling in some games.
You've baffled me there. None of my games flicker on any platform. You sure your TV's okay?
> Face it Sonyphiles, out of the three consoles that is out there the
> PS2 is the worst in terms of Visuals. The best in Visuals has to be
> the Gamecube followed by the Xbox.
Fortunately, visuals don't make a game. If you buy games based on graphics, you must have a lot of crap in your collection.
> Im not being biased either, but its what I have seen and witnessed and
> played on EACH system to form that
> opinion, I own each system and take a very un-biased approach to each
Same here. I prefer the PS2 above both of the others. It's amazing how many times people keep dragging up the same things in console wars topics. Nothing ever changes, and no-one ever just accepts that the best machine is the one you prefer, and that's different for different reasons for everyone that owns a console.
> It is only in the position it is now due to its older brother and its
> older brother was only successful because of Nintendo.
Excuse me? If the PSone was successful because of Nintendo, it's only because they offered no serious competition.
They approached Sony to help make a CD-based system. Then they got cold feet and decided that CD had no future as a games medium. Sony, left in the lurch by Nintendo's panic attack, decided to go it alone. There is no Nintendo technology in the PSone.
> It is loved and cherished for all the wrong reasons, many people out
> there who stick by it are just too biased, too darn built up with
> their own mystic fantasies of it that they refuse to sample the
> delights of any other system.
If that's the case...
> And the Nintendo players have a long history with the company.
Why don't these people do the same?
> But really, think about it now of any other release that is a genuine
> buy will also be on Gamecube and Xbox.
Many are, but there are plenty that aren't.
> And when that happens we get better visuals with the GC and Xbox so why
> bother with PS2 versions?
Because it's not always the case. And in many cases, the PS2 version is there first.
> And its been done before- Burnout it is Visually Better on GC than it
> is on PS2.
It has, umm, a few more reflections on the cars. Other than that, it's identical. Apart from that, it's hardly a game worth buying any particular machine for.
> The Majority of Games are very washed out looking- GTA3 for one and
> most have Jagged Edges too
Washed-out colours depend on the palette chosen by the developer and have nothing at all to do with the power of the machine. As for jagged edges, there are some. But considering the age of the technology, it stands up very well.
> plus the Flickering is appalling in some games.
You've baffled me there. None of my games flicker on any platform. You sure your TV's okay?
> Face it Sonyphiles, out of the three consoles that is out there the
> PS2 is the worst in terms of Visuals. The best in Visuals has to be
> the Gamecube followed by the Xbox.
Fortunately, visuals don't make a game. If you buy games based on graphics, you must have a lot of crap in your collection.
> Im not being biased either, but its what I have seen and witnessed and
> played on EACH system to form that
> opinion, I own each system and take a very un-biased approach to each
Same here. I prefer the PS2 above both of the others. It's amazing how many times people keep dragging up the same things in console wars topics. Nothing ever changes, and no-one ever just accepts that the best machine is the one you prefer, and that's different for different reasons for everyone that owns a console.
> It is only in the position it is now due to its older brother and its
> older brother was only successful because of Nintendo.
Excuse me? If the PSone was successful because of Nintendo, it's only because they offered no serious competition.
They approached Sony to help make a CD-based system. Then they got cold feet and decided that CD had no future as a games medium. Sony, left in the lurch by Nintendo's panic attack, decided to go it alone. There is no Nintendo technology in the PSone.
> It is loved and cherished for all the wrong reasons, many people out
> there who stick by it are just too biased, too darn built up with
> their own mystic fantasies of it that they refuse to sample the
> delights of any other system.
If that's the case...
> And the Nintendo players have a long history with the company.
Why don't these people do the same?
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> SMÉAGOL wrote:
>> And its been done before- Burnout it is Visually Better on GC than
>> it
>> is on PS2.
> It has, umm, a few more reflections on the cars. Other than that,
> it's identical. Apart from that, it's hardly a game worth buying any
> particular machine for.
That's not true. The PS2 version was appalingly jagged - the cars, all of them had terrible jagged edges. It was probably the worst case of jagged edges seen in a PS2 game. The GameCube version cleared up these issues - there were anti-aliased edges, much better reflections, a smoother frame rate, a 60hz option (not in the PS2 version) and most importantly (in my opinion), the roads and surfaces have bump mapping making them look a lot more like what they're trying to be.
> SMÉAGOL wrote:
>> And its been done before- Burnout it is Visually Better on GC than
>> it
>> is on PS2.
> It has, umm, a few more reflections on the cars. Other than that,
> it's identical. Apart from that, it's hardly a game worth buying any
> particular machine for.
That's not true. The PS2 version was appalingly jagged - the cars, all of them had terrible jagged edges. It was probably the worst case of jagged edges seen in a PS2 game. The GameCube version cleared up these issues - there were anti-aliased edges, much better reflections, a smoother frame rate, a 60hz option (not in the PS2 version) and most importantly (in my opinion), the roads and surfaces have bump mapping making them look a lot more like what they're trying to be.
½pint wrote:
> That's not true. The PS2 version was appalingly jagged - the cars,
> all of them had terrible jagged edges. It was probably the worst case
> of jagged edges seen in a PS2 game.
There are far worse looking games than Burnout on the PS2.
Ridge Racer V was far worse, for a start.
But - be perfectly honest - when a game is in full flow, especially something as fast as Burnout, do you ever *really* notice the edges of the graphics? I don't - not even on RRV. The only time I ever notice is when a game is paused.
I can even see jaggies on Rogue Squadron on the 'cube (very much so in the cutscenes), and Halo on the Xbox!
> That's not true. The PS2 version was appalingly jagged - the cars,
> all of them had terrible jagged edges. It was probably the worst case
> of jagged edges seen in a PS2 game.
There are far worse looking games than Burnout on the PS2.
Ridge Racer V was far worse, for a start.
But - be perfectly honest - when a game is in full flow, especially something as fast as Burnout, do you ever *really* notice the edges of the graphics? I don't - not even on RRV. The only time I ever notice is when a game is paused.
I can even see jaggies on Rogue Squadron on the 'cube (very much so in the cutscenes), and Halo on the Xbox!
½pint, get your facts right before you be biased and small-minded, the PS2 version does have a 60hz option and bump mapping. At least I play the games before I rubbish them.
TBN - The PS2 did have a 60hz option, perhaps, but no bump mapping. And don't steal my words. I criticised you with them in your post and now you're using them against me.
Anyway, Wookie's reply was true - graphics are not the main issue. But then again, it is true that the GC version was graphically superior.
Anyway, Wookie's reply was true - graphics are not the main issue. But then again, it is true that the GC version was graphically superior.
It's called Irony. And it does have bump mapping. I shall take my camera upstairs later and prove this.
Anyway, Wookiee is right, Burnout is still a damn good game, and it's exactly the same on both formats.
Anyway, Wookiee is right, Burnout is still a damn good game, and it's exactly the same on both formats.
Turbonutter wrote:
> Anyway, Wookiee is right, Burnout is still a damn good game, and it's
> exactly the same on both formats.
Oh but there is where you are wrong. The GC version looks better and indeed is a lot smoother which is very noticable up against the PS2 version. Go play it for yourself.
> Anyway, Wookiee is right, Burnout is still a damn good game, and it's
> exactly the same on both formats.
Oh but there is where you are wrong. The GC version looks better and indeed is a lot smoother which is very noticable up against the PS2 version. Go play it for yourself.
Page: