The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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:
Belldandy, I think your getting slightly confused with all you opinions.
As for the X-Box being the most powerful, sure, so Microsoft says it is with the specs they tell people of, but can those specs hold out with all the pressure of Effects in-Game turned on and heaped upon them.... the answer is No!
The 485 MHZ GC however, or atleast Nintendo released info of specs that handle everything with 'everything' turned on. Nintendo isn't feeding blind info to people like Sony and Microsoft regarding what their system can and cannot do, people just can't understand this, and want to praise the system with 'dummy' specs, then claim to people that the X-Box is the most powerful.
As for the X-Box being the most powerful, sure, so Microsoft says it is with the specs they tell people of, but can those specs hold out with all the pressure of Effects in-Game turned on and heaped upon them.... the answer is No!
The 485 MHZ GC however, or atleast Nintendo released info of specs that handle everything with 'everything' turned on. Nintendo isn't feeding blind info to people like Sony and Microsoft regarding what their system can and cannot do, people just can't understand this, and want to praise the system with 'dummy' specs, then claim to people that the X-Box is the most powerful.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> Not in all areas, though. More polys on PS2. But games obviously
> aren't all about polygons.
The PS2's poly count was done through raw tests.
The GC's 12 million was what Nintendo expected the average develloper to manage (some of the better ones have managed to push it up to 15 million).
In actual games, the PS2's poly count is meant to be generally lower than the Gc's, although I've not quite been keeping up with technical reports.
> Not in all areas, though. More polys on PS2. But games obviously
> aren't all about polygons.
The PS2's poly count was done through raw tests.
The GC's 12 million was what Nintendo expected the average develloper to manage (some of the better ones have managed to push it up to 15 million).
In actual games, the PS2's poly count is meant to be generally lower than the Gc's, although I've not quite been keeping up with technical reports.
Belldandy wrote:
> Technically the PS2 is inferior - on paper at least.
Not in all areas, though. More polys on PS2. But games obviously aren't all about polygons.
> Technically the PS2 is inferior - on paper at least.
Not in all areas, though. More polys on PS2. But games obviously aren't all about polygons.
Well, I've read the opening post and a few others but there's no way I'm reading all five pages so here goes.....
Technically the PS2 is inferior - on paper at least. Yes, the XBOX and GC can outperform it, do 4 player games better e.t.c But having limited resources is often a way to create better games for any system as it means developers cannot be lazy in their programming of the game. Take a look at PC games, can any developer be bothered to work out a way of compressing HD installed files ? No, you just need 1GB for every game you want to install when a few years back you needed about 200mb. PC developers know that users will fork out hard earned cash for yet another upgrade because they can. The XBOX and GC have the resources, but you'll be waiting a while to see them used fully. True, the same initially happened with the PS2 but now owners are seeing really good titles. As for 4 player....XBOX 4 player Halo is enough to make anyone laugh ! I haven't seen a GC 4 player title going yet but if GC is less powerful than Microsofts machine.. PS2 does do 4 player badly but who really wants to sit around a TV straigin to look at their own little quarter of the screen with 3 other people ? Two player is great but four player is a pain, use a linkup cable for that! Then we have the great internet/braodband thing. All three companies are planning on it whilst Microsoft lead the way with Sony and Nintendo bringing up the rear. Yes, good job Mr Gates.....but internet gaming on consoles is a waste of time as it will simply repeat, to a lesser extent, what has happened on the PC. A small minority of the overall online gaming population will become masters at their chosen game and spend 50% of the week online gaming. Another small bunch of less able players will also continue playing, trying to join the elite players, the other 80% of people will give up and not be interested in paying £30-40 for game, money for broadband and then money for online gaming.
The games, the great be all and end all of any console. What has Sony got that should keep us interested in the PS2...erm exclusive licence for all GTA's until end of 2004 ? MGS3 ? USSOCOM ? The Getaway ? Stuntman ? Devil May Cry 2 ? Silent Hill 3 ? Timesplitters 2? Primal ? Zone Of Enders 2 ? Plenty coming along this year alone ! And there is already a massive catalogue of titles like MGS2, GTA3, Vampire Night, Medal Of Honour Frontline, Final Fantasy X, Virtua Fighter 4, Maximo, Resident Evil code Veronica e.t.c And lets not forget Platinum either...best racing game ever GT3 for 19.99 ? Not bad at all. What do the others have, right now, not in the future. XBOX lives off it's golden three titles - Halo, DOA3 and Project Gotham - whilst GC is piggybacking on the Star Wars craze of the moment and a few other Nintendo games like Pikmin, hoping no one will notice its rather aged release like Crazy Taxi, XG3, 007 AUF e.t.c. Sure. all great games, but not at £40-45 when on PS2 they are £20 at most ! Most of the PS2 conversion are poor with little added - take the two starfighter games on XBOX, they look identical !
Lastly, lets look at the actual market the three manufacturers are selling to and what they've been up to. Sony released at 299.99 and dropped to 199.99 after a year, Xbox then releases at 299.99 and dropped after three months when Microsoft had previously said no drop would happen for a year until the console actually made some cash (in the first year manufacturers rely on software to make uop losses). Now even the most fanatical XBOX fan will have to admit that that price drop was not because of the massive sales of the console. Nintendo were going to release at 199.99 then two weeks before launch went down to 129.99. Now the price of components cannot change that fast, Nintendo are obviously making less...or fear they cannot compete. Sony entered this market first and they've got it sewn up tight, when the 129.99 price drop happens it will further damage XBOX and GC sales. Sure, to us on here the specs of a console might matter most, but in the shops, to many buyers, it is the price and what it can do, and what is cheapest. By december this year, unless further drops in price happen it will be like this in retail stores across the country;
Gamecube - 129.99, no DVD, 2nd powerful, games from 39.99
X Box - 199.99, DVD with extra 29.99 add on, games from 39.99
PS2 - 129.99, DVD, largae catalogue of games for all ages, games from 19.99
Now I know whose going to win the sales war if that is the case.........
~~Belldandy~~
Technically the PS2 is inferior - on paper at least. Yes, the XBOX and GC can outperform it, do 4 player games better e.t.c But having limited resources is often a way to create better games for any system as it means developers cannot be lazy in their programming of the game. Take a look at PC games, can any developer be bothered to work out a way of compressing HD installed files ? No, you just need 1GB for every game you want to install when a few years back you needed about 200mb. PC developers know that users will fork out hard earned cash for yet another upgrade because they can. The XBOX and GC have the resources, but you'll be waiting a while to see them used fully. True, the same initially happened with the PS2 but now owners are seeing really good titles. As for 4 player....XBOX 4 player Halo is enough to make anyone laugh ! I haven't seen a GC 4 player title going yet but if GC is less powerful than Microsofts machine.. PS2 does do 4 player badly but who really wants to sit around a TV straigin to look at their own little quarter of the screen with 3 other people ? Two player is great but four player is a pain, use a linkup cable for that! Then we have the great internet/braodband thing. All three companies are planning on it whilst Microsoft lead the way with Sony and Nintendo bringing up the rear. Yes, good job Mr Gates.....but internet gaming on consoles is a waste of time as it will simply repeat, to a lesser extent, what has happened on the PC. A small minority of the overall online gaming population will become masters at their chosen game and spend 50% of the week online gaming. Another small bunch of less able players will also continue playing, trying to join the elite players, the other 80% of people will give up and not be interested in paying £30-40 for game, money for broadband and then money for online gaming.
The games, the great be all and end all of any console. What has Sony got that should keep us interested in the PS2...erm exclusive licence for all GTA's until end of 2004 ? MGS3 ? USSOCOM ? The Getaway ? Stuntman ? Devil May Cry 2 ? Silent Hill 3 ? Timesplitters 2? Primal ? Zone Of Enders 2 ? Plenty coming along this year alone ! And there is already a massive catalogue of titles like MGS2, GTA3, Vampire Night, Medal Of Honour Frontline, Final Fantasy X, Virtua Fighter 4, Maximo, Resident Evil code Veronica e.t.c And lets not forget Platinum either...best racing game ever GT3 for 19.99 ? Not bad at all. What do the others have, right now, not in the future. XBOX lives off it's golden three titles - Halo, DOA3 and Project Gotham - whilst GC is piggybacking on the Star Wars craze of the moment and a few other Nintendo games like Pikmin, hoping no one will notice its rather aged release like Crazy Taxi, XG3, 007 AUF e.t.c. Sure. all great games, but not at £40-45 when on PS2 they are £20 at most ! Most of the PS2 conversion are poor with little added - take the two starfighter games on XBOX, they look identical !
Lastly, lets look at the actual market the three manufacturers are selling to and what they've been up to. Sony released at 299.99 and dropped to 199.99 after a year, Xbox then releases at 299.99 and dropped after three months when Microsoft had previously said no drop would happen for a year until the console actually made some cash (in the first year manufacturers rely on software to make uop losses). Now even the most fanatical XBOX fan will have to admit that that price drop was not because of the massive sales of the console. Nintendo were going to release at 199.99 then two weeks before launch went down to 129.99. Now the price of components cannot change that fast, Nintendo are obviously making less...or fear they cannot compete. Sony entered this market first and they've got it sewn up tight, when the 129.99 price drop happens it will further damage XBOX and GC sales. Sure, to us on here the specs of a console might matter most, but in the shops, to many buyers, it is the price and what it can do, and what is cheapest. By december this year, unless further drops in price happen it will be like this in retail stores across the country;
Gamecube - 129.99, no DVD, 2nd powerful, games from 39.99
X Box - 199.99, DVD with extra 29.99 add on, games from 39.99
PS2 - 129.99, DVD, largae catalogue of games for all ages, games from 19.99
Now I know whose going to win the sales war if that is the case.........
~~Belldandy~~
Turbonutter wrote:
> a) Acclaim are lazy. The PS2 could easily handle 4-player with XG3 -
> so many other games have done it, with better graphics too.
my point now?
How come I missed this one?
Let me tell you this, the PS2 can NOT properly handle 4 player and keep desirable effects up to an eye plaesing standard!
> a) Acclaim are lazy. The PS2 could easily handle 4-player with XG3 -
> so many other games have done it, with better graphics too.
my point now?
How come I missed this one?
Let me tell you this, the PS2 can NOT properly handle 4 player and keep desirable effects up to an eye plaesing standard!
Res€vilfan wrote:
>
> From basic, jagged, horrid looking PS1 graphics and stereo sound to
> crisp, gorgeous, STUNNING graphics/performance (with 5:1 surround
> sound) I'd have to disagree. Middleware has improved unmeasurably over
> the past 2 years for the PS2 making it easier for developers to work
> on and just take a look at it now.
>
>
> Might be treating myself to a gamecube on monday :-D
Stunning only to people who don't own a GC or X-Box to experience what stunning really is.
BTW, you get your GC?
>
> From basic, jagged, horrid looking PS1 graphics and stereo sound to
> crisp, gorgeous, STUNNING graphics/performance (with 5:1 surround
> sound) I'd have to disagree. Middleware has improved unmeasurably over
> the past 2 years for the PS2 making it easier for developers to work
> on and just take a look at it now.
>
>
> Might be treating myself to a gamecube on monday :-D
Stunning only to people who don't own a GC or X-Box to experience what stunning really is.
BTW, you get your GC?
Res€vilfan wrote:
>
>
> Might be treating myself to a gamecube on monday :-D
You won't be dissapointed, make sure you get Pikmin!
>
>
> Might be treating myself to a gamecube on monday :-D
You won't be dissapointed, make sure you get Pikmin!
Strafex wrote:
> Not really. The PS2 CAN do four player but only if the devellopers
> really desperately want to include it. The PS2 is hardly develloper
> friendly as it is and seeing as most PS2 owners haven't got a
> multitap, why bother the extra complications of a four player
> splitscreen?
The PS2 can do allsorts, you only have to look at GT3 to work that one out, however I think the reason developers don't bother with 4 player modes is because of the 2 ports, It was the same back in the old days of the NES and SNES, both had 2 ports and 4 player games were a rare thing.
>
> The Gamecube, however is specifically aimed at people who enjoy
> multiplayer. Not only is the four ports automatically included (which
> wouldn't really do much on it's own), there's already a host of
> fantastic multiplayer games of every type to encourage GC owners to
> get the extra pads. Also, I think the devellopment kits have been
> designed to help support four player splitscreen devellopment.
>
Can't argue with that, The gamecube is THE console to own for 4 player action, even with Timeplitters 2, Quake 3, Twisted Metal Black, Red Faction and many others it's difficult to compete with the gamecube's long list of entertaining multiplayer titles.
>>
> b) Game developers regularly push out all the stops for some
>consoles
>and all the others. Spiderman is better on the GC than tha PS2, and
>better on the Xbox than GC. This is because if theyw ere all teh
>same,
>they wouldn't sell as much, This is for it is, how it's been for
>years
>and how it'll always be. They'res till the same game though.
> Actually, they probably put in more work into the PS2 version - seeing
> as the PS2 has more customers to sell to.
> Naturally, they found it almost impossible to push the
> "develloper-unfriendly" PS2 to it's limit, and even if they
> had, it's still overpowered by the other two.
Actually GT4 will push the PS2 'to the limit' using specific software that boosts performance to the max, They used it on the PS1 titles of Gran Turismo and look at them, reflections and everything!!
>
> The PS2 is a powerful machine and the market leader, but at 2 years
> old, it's certainly showing its age!
From basic, jagged, horrid looking PS1 graphics and stereo sound to crisp, gorgeous, STUNNING graphics/performance (with 5:1 surround sound) I'd have to disagree. Middleware has improved unmeasurably over the past 2 years for the PS2 making it easier for developers to work on and just take a look at it now.
Might be treating myself to a gamecube on monday :-D
> Not really. The PS2 CAN do four player but only if the devellopers
> really desperately want to include it. The PS2 is hardly develloper
> friendly as it is and seeing as most PS2 owners haven't got a
> multitap, why bother the extra complications of a four player
> splitscreen?
The PS2 can do allsorts, you only have to look at GT3 to work that one out, however I think the reason developers don't bother with 4 player modes is because of the 2 ports, It was the same back in the old days of the NES and SNES, both had 2 ports and 4 player games were a rare thing.
>
> The Gamecube, however is specifically aimed at people who enjoy
> multiplayer. Not only is the four ports automatically included (which
> wouldn't really do much on it's own), there's already a host of
> fantastic multiplayer games of every type to encourage GC owners to
> get the extra pads. Also, I think the devellopment kits have been
> designed to help support four player splitscreen devellopment.
>
Can't argue with that, The gamecube is THE console to own for 4 player action, even with Timeplitters 2, Quake 3, Twisted Metal Black, Red Faction and many others it's difficult to compete with the gamecube's long list of entertaining multiplayer titles.
>>
> b) Game developers regularly push out all the stops for some
>consoles
>and all the others. Spiderman is better on the GC than tha PS2, and
>better on the Xbox than GC. This is because if theyw ere all teh
>same,
>they wouldn't sell as much, This is for it is, how it's been for
>years
>and how it'll always be. They'res till the same game though.
> Actually, they probably put in more work into the PS2 version - seeing
> as the PS2 has more customers to sell to.
> Naturally, they found it almost impossible to push the
> "develloper-unfriendly" PS2 to it's limit, and even if they
> had, it's still overpowered by the other two.
Actually GT4 will push the PS2 'to the limit' using specific software that boosts performance to the max, They used it on the PS1 titles of Gran Turismo and look at them, reflections and everything!!
>
> The PS2 is a powerful machine and the market leader, but at 2 years
> old, it's certainly showing its age!
From basic, jagged, horrid looking PS1 graphics and stereo sound to crisp, gorgeous, STUNNING graphics/performance (with 5:1 surround sound) I'd have to disagree. Middleware has improved unmeasurably over the past 2 years for the PS2 making it easier for developers to work on and just take a look at it now.
Might be treating myself to a gamecube on monday :-D
Turbonutter wrote:
> a) Acclaim are lazy. The PS2 could easily handle 4-player with XG3 -
> so many other games have done it, with better graphics too.
Not really. The PS2 CAN do four player but only if the devellopers really desperately want to include it. The PS2 is hardly develloper friendly as it is and seeing as most PS2 owners haven't got a multitap, why bother the extra complications of a four player splitscreen?
The Gamecube, however is specifically aimed at people who enjoy multiplayer. Not only is the four ports automatically included (which wouldn't really do much on it's own), there's already a host of fantastic multiplayer games of every type to encourage GC owners to get the extra pads. Also, I think the devellopment kits have been designed to help support four player splitscreen devellopment.
> b) Game developers regularly push out all the stops for some consoles
> and all the others. Spiderman is better on the GC than tha PS2, and
> better on the Xbox than GC. This is because if theyw ere all teh same,
> they wouldn't sell as much, This is for it is, how it's been for years
> and how it'll always be. They'res till the same game though.
Actually, they probably put in more work into the PS2 version - seeing as the PS2 has more customers to sell to.
Naturally, they found it almost impossible to push the "develloper-unfriendly" PS2 to it's limit, and even if they had, it's still overpowered by the other two.
The PS2 is a powerful machine and the market leader, but at 2 years old, it's certainly showing its age!
> a) Acclaim are lazy. The PS2 could easily handle 4-player with XG3 -
> so many other games have done it, with better graphics too.
Not really. The PS2 CAN do four player but only if the devellopers really desperately want to include it. The PS2 is hardly develloper friendly as it is and seeing as most PS2 owners haven't got a multitap, why bother the extra complications of a four player splitscreen?
The Gamecube, however is specifically aimed at people who enjoy multiplayer. Not only is the four ports automatically included (which wouldn't really do much on it's own), there's already a host of fantastic multiplayer games of every type to encourage GC owners to get the extra pads. Also, I think the devellopment kits have been designed to help support four player splitscreen devellopment.
> b) Game developers regularly push out all the stops for some consoles
> and all the others. Spiderman is better on the GC than tha PS2, and
> better on the Xbox than GC. This is because if theyw ere all teh same,
> they wouldn't sell as much, This is for it is, how it's been for years
> and how it'll always be. They'res till the same game though.
Actually, they probably put in more work into the PS2 version - seeing as the PS2 has more customers to sell to.
Naturally, they found it almost impossible to push the "develloper-unfriendly" PS2 to it's limit, and even if they had, it's still overpowered by the other two.
The PS2 is a powerful machine and the market leader, but at 2 years old, it's certainly showing its age!
Obviously not...
Page: