The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
It may well be 12:30am on Tuesday the something of February, but I had the urge to go to a website (which shall remain nameless for the time being...) and check out the Playstation 2 prices. The site loaded up nice and quickly, with the PS2 on the home page 'in stock now' or something to that description was what I managed to make out (it's very late and I'm tired...).
Clicking to find out mor information I was greeted by a list of specifications of this 'wonderful' console and to my horror founDthis!
128 bit "Emotion Engine"
produces superb, smooth game play
Does it really? Smooth game play. Ridge Racer 5. Turn a corner and Jagged-Jagged-Jagged-Jagged!!!
Plays DVDs
watch your favourite movies with digital quality picture and sound.
Well, that's true, but then there are different quality digital pictures, so nothing 'wrong' here...
Includes a Dual Shock 2 controller
this new controller features analogue buttons. the harder you press them, the higher you jump or the faster you accelerate.
Ok, now has anyone else found that the PS2 controllers were hyped to the death? Well this may be the case, because these 'features' aren't all that impressive really.
Requires PS2 8mb memory card to save games
to save your games, replays and highest scores you will need a playstation 2 8mb memory card. playstation 2 is 200 times faster than playstation one.
Is it really? Is the Playstation one really 200 times slower? How misleading! 1 piece of evidence for you - Ridge Racer 5. Oh yeah, and every other PS2 game other than SSX and Time Splitters (and maybe DoA2 and TTT!!).
Surely they're lying with this...
Plays nearly all original PlayStation games
99% of the games produced for playstation work with playstation 2. the graphics will be improved and they may load slightly quicker.
Ok, so it does play all the PSone games apart from a few. But to say the graphics will be improved??? The bare faced cheek of it! Methinks, Comet have been telling little fibs just to make a sale...
Please note here - I am not having a 'dig' at the Playstation 2, but the truth is - Comet - yes Comet, have got it wrong here and are telling their customers lies, which is, quite frankly, not on at all. I think we should report them? Or am I being too hasty. Perhaps, when they tested out the likes of RR5 and FIFA 2001, they were under the impression that they were PSone games, and so believed the graphics were slightly better than using the PSone...
Hmmm....
Anyone else?
Clicking to find out mor information I was greeted by a list of specifications of this 'wonderful' console and to my horror founDthis!
128 bit "Emotion Engine"
produces superb, smooth game play
Does it really? Smooth game play. Ridge Racer 5. Turn a corner and Jagged-Jagged-Jagged-Jagged!!!
Plays DVDs
watch your favourite movies with digital quality picture and sound.
Well, that's true, but then there are different quality digital pictures, so nothing 'wrong' here...
Includes a Dual Shock 2 controller
this new controller features analogue buttons. the harder you press them, the higher you jump or the faster you accelerate.
Ok, now has anyone else found that the PS2 controllers were hyped to the death? Well this may be the case, because these 'features' aren't all that impressive really.
Requires PS2 8mb memory card to save games
to save your games, replays and highest scores you will need a playstation 2 8mb memory card. playstation 2 is 200 times faster than playstation one.
Is it really? Is the Playstation one really 200 times slower? How misleading! 1 piece of evidence for you - Ridge Racer 5. Oh yeah, and every other PS2 game other than SSX and Time Splitters (and maybe DoA2 and TTT!!).
Surely they're lying with this...
Plays nearly all original PlayStation games
99% of the games produced for playstation work with playstation 2. the graphics will be improved and they may load slightly quicker.
Ok, so it does play all the PSone games apart from a few. But to say the graphics will be improved??? The bare faced cheek of it! Methinks, Comet have been telling little fibs just to make a sale...
Please note here - I am not having a 'dig' at the Playstation 2, but the truth is - Comet - yes Comet, have got it wrong here and are telling their customers lies, which is, quite frankly, not on at all. I think we should report them? Or am I being too hasty. Perhaps, when they tested out the likes of RR5 and FIFA 2001, they were under the impression that they were PSone games, and so believed the graphics were slightly better than using the PSone...
Hmmm....
Anyone else?
Page:
...and my share price would go up :-)
FantasyMeister wrote:
> meka_dragon wrote:
> FantasyMeister wrote:
It wouldn't be fair to make them do it all
> themselves.
I don't care if it's fair or not.
I think they should charge other companies as much as they can get away with to get on the Local Loop.
They can then give me a pay rise ;-)
> meka_dragon wrote:
> FantasyMeister wrote:
It wouldn't be fair to make them do it all
> themselves.
I don't care if it's fair or not.
I think they should charge other companies as much as they can get away with to get on the Local Loop.
They can then give me a pay rise ;-)
meka_dragon wrote:
> FantasyMeister wrote:
> Broadband DSL (ADSL and SDSL) should
> become widely available from
> July 2001 when they unbundle the
> local loop.
I think that these companies that want in on BT's
> loop should all sod off, and go build their own bloody UK
> networks.
I'd like to see them offer what they reckon they can if
> they have to do it all themselves.
It wouldn't be fair to make them do it all themselves. Before BT was privatised and was the old government run GPO, the Government law at the time was that no other company was allowed to create the infrastructure to allow them to run a public communications network. So, the government put all of the infrastructure in place (i.e., trench digging, pipe laying, telegraph poles, exchanges etc.,).
When BT was privatised, it was with the understanding that they would have to make their infracstructure available for other rival companies that were now allowed to compete to use. This ruling has been challenged many times by BT by their actions of making this network integration as difficult as they possibly can for other companies so that they can produce better share dividends for their own shareholders and also which is why OFTEL are constantly having to jump on BT's back. (And Anne Robinson, but she never gets her facts right in the first place.)
If BT didn't worry so much about their shareholders all the time, network integration would have been completed last year or earlier, and DSL technology would be widespread today instead of being in the fragile and uncertain state that it is today.
That's the picture I got when I worked for BT from 1992 to 1997.
> FantasyMeister wrote:
> Broadband DSL (ADSL and SDSL) should
> become widely available from
> July 2001 when they unbundle the
> local loop.
I think that these companies that want in on BT's
> loop should all sod off, and go build their own bloody UK
> networks.
I'd like to see them offer what they reckon they can if
> they have to do it all themselves.
It wouldn't be fair to make them do it all themselves. Before BT was privatised and was the old government run GPO, the Government law at the time was that no other company was allowed to create the infrastructure to allow them to run a public communications network. So, the government put all of the infrastructure in place (i.e., trench digging, pipe laying, telegraph poles, exchanges etc.,).
When BT was privatised, it was with the understanding that they would have to make their infracstructure available for other rival companies that were now allowed to compete to use. This ruling has been challenged many times by BT by their actions of making this network integration as difficult as they possibly can for other companies so that they can produce better share dividends for their own shareholders and also which is why OFTEL are constantly having to jump on BT's back. (And Anne Robinson, but she never gets her facts right in the first place.)
If BT didn't worry so much about their shareholders all the time, network integration would have been completed last year or earlier, and DSL technology would be widespread today instead of being in the fragile and uncertain state that it is today.
That's the picture I got when I worked for BT from 1992 to 1997.
PS2 £299.99 in 'Woolworths eh?'
Anyway, I call for an end of all 'bicerring'.
I don't know whether a widescreen Panasonic Television 24
(inch) is worth getting for £449.99 if I can get it for £399.99. It's just I have vouchers for Comet/Woolworths.
I'd be tempted to get a PS2, but then there's PS3 - I think Sony 'think' they need this as back up when the XBox lands, but to be honest, I can see PSone dominating games sales for another 5 years!
Anyway, I call for an end of all 'bicerring'.
I don't know whether a widescreen Panasonic Television 24
(inch) is worth getting for £449.99 if I can get it for £399.99. It's just I have vouchers for Comet/Woolworths.
I'd be tempted to get a PS2, but then there's PS3 - I think Sony 'think' they need this as back up when the XBox lands, but to be honest, I can see PSone dominating games sales for another 5 years!
Woolworths eh?
Was that because of absurd prices, or did you find PS2s there AFTER Xmas. I bet there weren`t any there for at least a month after launch.
Was that because of absurd prices, or did you find PS2s there AFTER Xmas. I bet there weren`t any there for at least a month after launch.
FantasyMeister wrote:
> Broadband DSL (ADSL and SDSL) should become widely available from
> July 2001 when they unbundle the local loop.
I think that these companies that want in on BT's loop should all sod off, and go build their own bloody UK networks.
I'd like to see them offer what they reckon they can if they have to do it all themselves.
> Broadband DSL (ADSL and SDSL) should become widely available from
> July 2001 when they unbundle the local loop.
I think that these companies that want in on BT's loop should all sod off, and go build their own bloody UK networks.
I'd like to see them offer what they reckon they can if they have to do it all themselves.
where as PS2 sold
> every single console which is er, let me think ... 100%.
Go to Woolworths.
Look, JUST REMEMBER that I wasn't ripping the Playstation 2 - I was simply stating that Comet was hyperbolling about it and giving a somewhat false impression to boost sales.
Anyway Dreamcast is 1000000 times faster than Sega Saturn...
(hehe)
Dan
> every single console which is er, let me think ... 100%.
Go to Woolworths.
Look, JUST REMEMBER that I wasn't ripping the Playstation 2 - I was simply stating that Comet was hyperbolling about it and giving a somewhat false impression to boost sales.
Anyway Dreamcast is 1000000 times faster than Sega Saturn...
(hehe)
Dan
> It certainly does not run PS2 games
> at a higher resolution, though.
Oops. I meant PS1 games, obviously!
> at a higher resolution, though.
Oops. I meant PS1 games, obviously!
Yes, the PS2 can improve the graphics of PS1 games by smoothing the texture maps. However, the quality of the results does depend on the textures used in each game. It certainly does not run PS2 games at a higher resolution, though.
> 128 bit "Emotion Engine" produces superb, smooth game play
>
> Does it really? Smooth game play. Ridge Racer 5. Turn a corner
> and Jagged-Jagged-Jagged-Jagged!!!
I think, Dan, you'll find that this refers to the speed of the gameplay, and not actually the graphics! :-)
> Ok, now has anyone else found that the PS2 controllers were
> hyped to the death? Well this may be the case, because these
> 'features' aren't all that impressive really.
They work well enough, but obviously only on games coded to use them. Moto GP works very well - I expect GT3 will too.
If anything, I'd say that the buttons are overkill - analogue buttons are nice, but 256 degrees of pressure? I don't think you could actually hit all of those 'degrees' with your thumb if you wanted to!
> playstation 2 is 200 times faster than playstation one.
>
> Is it really? Is the
> Playstation one really 200 times slower? How misleading!
Again, they're not talking literal speed here. When it comes to number-crunching, PS2 leaves PS2 standing, and the internal architecture allows much more internal speed than PS1.
> Plays nearly all original PlayStation games
> 99% of the games produced for playstation work
> with playstation 2. the graphics will be improved and they may load
> slightly quicker.
Graphics were covered at the start of this post; loading times *can* be improved, but again this depends on the game. Driver 2 took around 30 seconds to load each mission on my PS1, but on the PS2 it's more like 10 seconds.
Some PS1 games will refuse to work if you use these options, others will work fine. Some games have a definite visual improvement, some barely change. At the end of the day, with these 'enhancements' switched off, there are very few games which won't work - and most of those are obscure Japanese titles that you can't buy here anyway!
As for the reason the DC has sold many more units... well, it's been on the market a lot longer, and Sony have had production problems.
The quality of games will obviously have had its impact too, but I think on a level playing field (similar sales time and no production problems) the situation would be different.
Let's not forget that, despite being labelled a disaster in some quarters, the PS2 launch was actually the biggest, most successful console launch yet. If Sony could have had unlimited PS2's available at launch, the sales figures would have been phenomenal.
Sorry about repeating points that some have already mentioned, but this was supposed to be posted much earlier, just before I left work - but these forums seemed to be either very slow, or unavailable.
Anyway, some of these points can't be stressed enough! :-)
> 128 bit "Emotion Engine" produces superb, smooth game play
>
> Does it really? Smooth game play. Ridge Racer 5. Turn a corner
> and Jagged-Jagged-Jagged-Jagged!!!
I think, Dan, you'll find that this refers to the speed of the gameplay, and not actually the graphics! :-)
> Ok, now has anyone else found that the PS2 controllers were
> hyped to the death? Well this may be the case, because these
> 'features' aren't all that impressive really.
They work well enough, but obviously only on games coded to use them. Moto GP works very well - I expect GT3 will too.
If anything, I'd say that the buttons are overkill - analogue buttons are nice, but 256 degrees of pressure? I don't think you could actually hit all of those 'degrees' with your thumb if you wanted to!
> playstation 2 is 200 times faster than playstation one.
>
> Is it really? Is the
> Playstation one really 200 times slower? How misleading!
Again, they're not talking literal speed here. When it comes to number-crunching, PS2 leaves PS2 standing, and the internal architecture allows much more internal speed than PS1.
> Plays nearly all original PlayStation games
> 99% of the games produced for playstation work
> with playstation 2. the graphics will be improved and they may load
> slightly quicker.
Graphics were covered at the start of this post; loading times *can* be improved, but again this depends on the game. Driver 2 took around 30 seconds to load each mission on my PS1, but on the PS2 it's more like 10 seconds.
Some PS1 games will refuse to work if you use these options, others will work fine. Some games have a definite visual improvement, some barely change. At the end of the day, with these 'enhancements' switched off, there are very few games which won't work - and most of those are obscure Japanese titles that you can't buy here anyway!
As for the reason the DC has sold many more units... well, it's been on the market a lot longer, and Sony have had production problems.
The quality of games will obviously have had its impact too, but I think on a level playing field (similar sales time and no production problems) the situation would be different.
Let's not forget that, despite being labelled a disaster in some quarters, the PS2 launch was actually the biggest, most successful console launch yet. If Sony could have had unlimited PS2's available at launch, the sales figures would have been phenomenal.
Sorry about repeating points that some have already mentioned, but this was supposed to be posted much earlier, just before I left work - but these forums seemed to be either very slow, or unavailable.
Anyway, some of these points can't be stressed enough! :-)
ssxpro wrote:
> Dan2K1 wrote:
Anyway who cares about that, DC sales =
> higher
> than PS2 for some reason...people know...which console...has
>
> better...
Yeah, whatever. So when you have two PS2s to sell, its
> SOO easy to sell them to four people isn`t it!!
The only reasons
> the DC sold better is that it has better games around at the moment,
> though not for long (We`re comparing the DCs peak to the PS2s foot
> of the mountain), and because the DC was available in the shops
> where as PS2s weren`t.
I CONCUR!!
Perhaps success should have been judged on
> the percentage of sales.
That way, you`ll see that DC had left
> overs, so say 50% were sold (Only an example), where as PS2 sold
> every single console which is er, let me think ... 100%.
Which
> seems more successful now?
> Dan2K1 wrote:
Anyway who cares about that, DC sales =
> higher
> than PS2 for some reason...people know...which console...has
>
> better...
Yeah, whatever. So when you have two PS2s to sell, its
> SOO easy to sell them to four people isn`t it!!
The only reasons
> the DC sold better is that it has better games around at the moment,
> though not for long (We`re comparing the DCs peak to the PS2s foot
> of the mountain), and because the DC was available in the shops
> where as PS2s weren`t.
I CONCUR!!
Perhaps success should have been judged on
> the percentage of sales.
That way, you`ll see that DC had left
> overs, so say 50% were sold (Only an example), where as PS2 sold
> every single console which is er, let me think ... 100%.
Which
> seems more successful now?
Page: