The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Seriously, this isn't one of those post where they just post it in becuase its such a common question.I really wanna know which console out of them three is the best, i dont wanna answer like " Well, the Xbox is good because of its online and the PS2 is good becuase.....blah blah blah" i just wanna know which one is the best overall, please, i really wanna know before i choose the wrong one, many thanks.
Page:
ÂLŠ†ÂÎR wrote:
>Der Nazi wrote:
> The XBox has a hard drive and the best graphics
>This still cracks me up. How many times will people continue to say the >Xbox has the best graphics? Its down to the developer and how much time >they are willing to invest in the hardware, capiche? Certain PS2 games >look equally as good as anything on the market and GT3 to this day >remains arguably the prettiest driving game ever yet the PS2 is classed >as inferior hardware
When people say the Xbox is the most powerful machine i think they mean it is capable to do handle really good graphics.Im getting an XBOX now, because of Live and because of the graphics and because of Halo 2 and all those other great shoot-em-ups.
>Der Nazi wrote:
> The XBox has a hard drive and the best graphics
>This still cracks me up. How many times will people continue to say the >Xbox has the best graphics? Its down to the developer and how much time >they are willing to invest in the hardware, capiche? Certain PS2 games >look equally as good as anything on the market and GT3 to this day >remains arguably the prettiest driving game ever yet the PS2 is classed >as inferior hardware
When people say the Xbox is the most powerful machine i think they mean it is capable to do handle really good graphics.Im getting an XBOX now, because of Live and because of the graphics and because of Halo 2 and all those other great shoot-em-ups.
Greatest things about the PS2 is that it keeps a lot of morons off of live. This I am thankful for.
Also it draws away a lot of cheap cash-ins and crap tie-ins. This I am also thankful for.
Also it draws away a lot of cheap cash-ins and crap tie-ins. This I am also thankful for.
Messy wrote:
> Riiiiight.
>
> Everyone loves the XBox and the GameCube. OK?
Yeah because they have a lower proportion of 'gaming effluent' on them.
Outta the way. XBox
> have Live!. Wow. Like, they're doing something so new! I've been
> playing games over the internet for 4 years now, I don't need to get
> a big box to do it on.
Stupid argument. If you want to play RS6 online you get an Xbox it's as simple as that.
The PS2 is online aswell, with SOCOM II
> looking great,
Whoop-di-doo, we've already had the Ghost Recons and should get Operation Flashpoint soon. Did I mention we've moved on to the likes of RS3?
> as well as XIII
Multiformat, and you have the worst version, some have said the PS2 version is verging on the criminal.
, FIFA 2004 (it's no Pro Evo, but it'll
> do)
Oh joy, it's always amusing when someone uses Fifa to defend a console. Usually it's people deriding the console for having the greatest sales of Fifa.
and THUG.
mmmmmmm, lovely more of the same rubbish.
Those, bar XIII and SOCOM, are multi-platform, which
> isn't really helping.
No.
Even XIII is on the PC. And the graphics are
> better, but frankly, SSX 3 looks great, MGS 2 has arguably (and I
> will) the best graphics in any game, ever.
SSX 3 you mean the multiformat title? And Xbox has an updated version of MGS 2 so it's pointless using that in any kind of defence.
And who cares? So your
> XBox has a faster processor and better graphics and so does the
> GameCube, big deal. Get over it. Half of you have mentioned it, end
> it there. In the words of MegaTokyo, "Relax, we understand
> j00."
And brand new ideas with willingness to experiment.
>
> The PS2 has worse graphics because it was released a year and a bit
> before the others, to get that all important edge.
Ah yes the casual gamers and the idiots who'll fork out a stupid 300 quid.
Surely it would
> have been less of a success if it hadn't,
not likely because of the casual gamers and idiots.
> but it would have probably
> been equaly as good specs wise as the XBox or the Gamecube.
>
> As for hitting out at the controller, I do not understand, you must
> all (especially you Hedfix) have hands the size of India. All my
> friends have PS2's. Period. None of them are going "Arrrrrgh!
> Damn this stupid controller, I wish we had a big fat one with
> luminescent buttons because for some reason my thumbs cannot press
> the right button without extreme mental strength." in the middle
> of a Capture the Bag in TimeSplitters 2. Everyone's just playing,
> fine.
Your friends are obviously making do. Tell them "better luck next time".
The controllers design is quite frankjly laughable in this day and age. Why not just stick analogue sticks on a snes controller, oh hang on, that's what they did.
>
> If my memory serves me well I'm pretty sure the DC was critised
> because you needed huge hands to play it. I'm pretty sure the XBox
> released a smaller controller because their first one was too big.
and yet the nanalogue sticks are still better placed and the D-pad actually enables people to go forwards when the want to rather than diagonally left/right.
> I'm pretty sure the GameCube controller (don't kid yourself, look at
> it) has had a pretty direct influence from the Dual Analog 2. So
> don't complain about the controller.
If I see crap, I will say it's crap. 'Fraid you can't stop me. Dual Analog 2: crap.
I think you'll find the Sony controller was inspired by the SNES controller.
>
> The PS2, as it stands, is the most diverse, obviously, it doesn't
> need anything extra. It doesn't need £20. It plays DVD's
> straight out of the box.
At poorer quality.
For a lot of people, this is great! I know,
> three years ago, that there was no way I could afford to buy a DVD
> player. In fact, it's only recently that I've decided to buy one,
> thanks to the PS2 I haven't needed to.
If you're happy with the 'quality' then there you go.
>
> To be honest I like them all. There is, in fact, very little
> difference between them. SONY is generally classed for the casual
> gamer which is generally why it is picked on so badly by the forum
Plus it has the highest ratio of crap games and is generally a bit rubbish compared to the more modern offerings.
> going public, the XBox is for the PC people, so it's obviously going
> to to do well if you ask online,
I'm not a PC person. I'm an FPS person the PS2 can hardly manage a good fPS nowadays.
and the GameCube inherits Nintendo's
> only true asset, a pretty hardcore fanbase.
And just a 'few' exclusive characters and games.
The truth is the PS2 is
> the cheapest, and that means more money which means more games. The
> PS2 has cheaper games as well, especially seeing as it's been out
> longer and more games have gone platinum.
>
> For me, the PS2 is my favourite, obviously, but I'll happily sit and
> play the XBox or the GameCube. Offline, nobody likes XBox, by the
> way.
QUANTITY doesn't make QUALITY.
The PS2 is the worst pick of the bunch.
> Riiiiight.
>
> Everyone loves the XBox and the GameCube. OK?
Yeah because they have a lower proportion of 'gaming effluent' on them.
Outta the way. XBox
> have Live!. Wow. Like, they're doing something so new! I've been
> playing games over the internet for 4 years now, I don't need to get
> a big box to do it on.
Stupid argument. If you want to play RS6 online you get an Xbox it's as simple as that.
The PS2 is online aswell, with SOCOM II
> looking great,
Whoop-di-doo, we've already had the Ghost Recons and should get Operation Flashpoint soon. Did I mention we've moved on to the likes of RS3?
> as well as XIII
Multiformat, and you have the worst version, some have said the PS2 version is verging on the criminal.
, FIFA 2004 (it's no Pro Evo, but it'll
> do)
Oh joy, it's always amusing when someone uses Fifa to defend a console. Usually it's people deriding the console for having the greatest sales of Fifa.
and THUG.
mmmmmmm, lovely more of the same rubbish.
Those, bar XIII and SOCOM, are multi-platform, which
> isn't really helping.
No.
Even XIII is on the PC. And the graphics are
> better, but frankly, SSX 3 looks great, MGS 2 has arguably (and I
> will) the best graphics in any game, ever.
SSX 3 you mean the multiformat title? And Xbox has an updated version of MGS 2 so it's pointless using that in any kind of defence.
And who cares? So your
> XBox has a faster processor and better graphics and so does the
> GameCube, big deal. Get over it. Half of you have mentioned it, end
> it there. In the words of MegaTokyo, "Relax, we understand
> j00."
And brand new ideas with willingness to experiment.
>
> The PS2 has worse graphics because it was released a year and a bit
> before the others, to get that all important edge.
Ah yes the casual gamers and the idiots who'll fork out a stupid 300 quid.
Surely it would
> have been less of a success if it hadn't,
not likely because of the casual gamers and idiots.
> but it would have probably
> been equaly as good specs wise as the XBox or the Gamecube.
>
> As for hitting out at the controller, I do not understand, you must
> all (especially you Hedfix) have hands the size of India. All my
> friends have PS2's. Period. None of them are going "Arrrrrgh!
> Damn this stupid controller, I wish we had a big fat one with
> luminescent buttons because for some reason my thumbs cannot press
> the right button without extreme mental strength." in the middle
> of a Capture the Bag in TimeSplitters 2. Everyone's just playing,
> fine.
Your friends are obviously making do. Tell them "better luck next time".
The controllers design is quite frankjly laughable in this day and age. Why not just stick analogue sticks on a snes controller, oh hang on, that's what they did.
>
> If my memory serves me well I'm pretty sure the DC was critised
> because you needed huge hands to play it. I'm pretty sure the XBox
> released a smaller controller because their first one was too big.
and yet the nanalogue sticks are still better placed and the D-pad actually enables people to go forwards when the want to rather than diagonally left/right.
> I'm pretty sure the GameCube controller (don't kid yourself, look at
> it) has had a pretty direct influence from the Dual Analog 2. So
> don't complain about the controller.
If I see crap, I will say it's crap. 'Fraid you can't stop me. Dual Analog 2: crap.
I think you'll find the Sony controller was inspired by the SNES controller.
>
> The PS2, as it stands, is the most diverse, obviously, it doesn't
> need anything extra. It doesn't need £20. It plays DVD's
> straight out of the box.
At poorer quality.
For a lot of people, this is great! I know,
> three years ago, that there was no way I could afford to buy a DVD
> player. In fact, it's only recently that I've decided to buy one,
> thanks to the PS2 I haven't needed to.
If you're happy with the 'quality' then there you go.
>
> To be honest I like them all. There is, in fact, very little
> difference between them. SONY is generally classed for the casual
> gamer which is generally why it is picked on so badly by the forum
Plus it has the highest ratio of crap games and is generally a bit rubbish compared to the more modern offerings.
> going public, the XBox is for the PC people, so it's obviously going
> to to do well if you ask online,
I'm not a PC person. I'm an FPS person the PS2 can hardly manage a good fPS nowadays.
and the GameCube inherits Nintendo's
> only true asset, a pretty hardcore fanbase.
And just a 'few' exclusive characters and games.
The truth is the PS2 is
> the cheapest, and that means more money which means more games. The
> PS2 has cheaper games as well, especially seeing as it's been out
> longer and more games have gone platinum.
>
> For me, the PS2 is my favourite, obviously, but I'll happily sit and
> play the XBox or the GameCube. Offline, nobody likes XBox, by the
> way.
QUANTITY doesn't make QUALITY.
The PS2 is the worst pick of the bunch.
Riiiiight.
Everyone loves the XBox and the GameCube. OK? Outta the way. XBox have Live!. Wow. Like, they're doing something so new! I've been playing games over the internet for 4 years now, I don't need to get a big box to do it on. The PS2 is online aswell, with SOCOM II looking great, as well as XIII, FIFA 2004 (it's no Pro Evo, but it'll do) and THUG. Those, bar XIII and SOCOM, are multi-platform, which isn't really helping. Even XIII is on the PC. And the graphics are better, but frankly, SSX 3 looks great, MGS 2 has arguably (and I will) the best graphics in any game, ever. And who cares? So your XBox has a faster processor and better graphics and so does the GameCube, big deal. Get over it. Half of you have mentioned it, end it there. In the words of MegaTokyo, "Relax, we understand j00."
The PS2 has worse graphics because it was released a year and a bit before the others, to get that all important edge. Surely it would have been less of a success if it hadn't, but it would have probably been equaly as good specs wise as the XBox or the Gamecube.
As for hitting out at the controller, I do not understand, you must all (especially you Hedfix) have hands the size of India. All my friends have PS2's. Period. None of them are going "Arrrrrgh! Damn this stupid controller, I wish we had a big fat one with luminescent buttons because for some reason my thumbs cannot press the right button without extreme mental strength." in the middle of a Capture the Bag in TimeSplitters 2. Everyone's just playing, fine.
If my memory serves me well I'm pretty sure the DC was critised because you needed huge hands to play it. I'm pretty sure the XBox released a smaller controller because their first one was too big. I'm pretty sure the GameCube controller (don't kid yourself, look at it) has had a pretty direct influence from the Dual Analog 2. So don't complain about the controller.
The PS2, as it stands, is the most diverse, obviously, it doesn't need anything extra. It doesn't need £20. It plays DVD's straight out of the box. For a lot of people, this is great! I know, three years ago, that there was no way I could afford to buy a DVD player. In fact, it's only recently that I've decided to buy one, thanks to the PS2 I haven't needed to.
To be honest I like them all. There is, in fact, very little difference between them. SONY is generally classed for the casual gamer, which is generally why it is picked on so badly by the forum going public, the XBox is for the PC people, so it's obviously going to to do well if you ask online, and the GameCube inherits Nintendo's only true asset, a pretty hardcore fanbase. The truth is the PS2 is the cheapest, and that means more money which means more games. The PS2 has cheaper games as well, especially seeing as it's been out longer and more games have gone platinum.
For me, the PS2 is my favourite, obviously, but I'll happily sit and play the XBox or the GameCube. Offline, nobody likes XBox, by the way.
Everyone loves the XBox and the GameCube. OK? Outta the way. XBox have Live!. Wow. Like, they're doing something so new! I've been playing games over the internet for 4 years now, I don't need to get a big box to do it on. The PS2 is online aswell, with SOCOM II looking great, as well as XIII, FIFA 2004 (it's no Pro Evo, but it'll do) and THUG. Those, bar XIII and SOCOM, are multi-platform, which isn't really helping. Even XIII is on the PC. And the graphics are better, but frankly, SSX 3 looks great, MGS 2 has arguably (and I will) the best graphics in any game, ever. And who cares? So your XBox has a faster processor and better graphics and so does the GameCube, big deal. Get over it. Half of you have mentioned it, end it there. In the words of MegaTokyo, "Relax, we understand j00."
The PS2 has worse graphics because it was released a year and a bit before the others, to get that all important edge. Surely it would have been less of a success if it hadn't, but it would have probably been equaly as good specs wise as the XBox or the Gamecube.
As for hitting out at the controller, I do not understand, you must all (especially you Hedfix) have hands the size of India. All my friends have PS2's. Period. None of them are going "Arrrrrgh! Damn this stupid controller, I wish we had a big fat one with luminescent buttons because for some reason my thumbs cannot press the right button without extreme mental strength." in the middle of a Capture the Bag in TimeSplitters 2. Everyone's just playing, fine.
If my memory serves me well I'm pretty sure the DC was critised because you needed huge hands to play it. I'm pretty sure the XBox released a smaller controller because their first one was too big. I'm pretty sure the GameCube controller (don't kid yourself, look at it) has had a pretty direct influence from the Dual Analog 2. So don't complain about the controller.
The PS2, as it stands, is the most diverse, obviously, it doesn't need anything extra. It doesn't need £20. It plays DVD's straight out of the box. For a lot of people, this is great! I know, three years ago, that there was no way I could afford to buy a DVD player. In fact, it's only recently that I've decided to buy one, thanks to the PS2 I haven't needed to.
To be honest I like them all. There is, in fact, very little difference between them. SONY is generally classed for the casual gamer, which is generally why it is picked on so badly by the forum going public, the XBox is for the PC people, so it's obviously going to to do well if you ask online, and the GameCube inherits Nintendo's only true asset, a pretty hardcore fanbase. The truth is the PS2 is the cheapest, and that means more money which means more games. The PS2 has cheaper games as well, especially seeing as it's been out longer and more games have gone platinum.
For me, the PS2 is my favourite, obviously, but I'll happily sit and play the XBox or the GameCube. Offline, nobody likes XBox, by the way.
Notorious Biggles wrote:
> Urgh, I hate the dual shock. Sony pads are just so uncomfortable. I
> use 3rd party ones that are bigger.
Stupid company needs to make an alternative controller.
How they haven't got around to doing this is still shocking.
Hopefully Sony are arrogant enough to do the same for the PS3, if so they should expect to wave goodbye to a piece of the games market.
THE. CONTROLLER. CANNOT. CUT. IT.
> Urgh, I hate the dual shock. Sony pads are just so uncomfortable. I
> use 3rd party ones that are bigger.
Stupid company needs to make an alternative controller.
How they haven't got around to doing this is still shocking.
Hopefully Sony are arrogant enough to do the same for the PS3, if so they should expect to wave goodbye to a piece of the games market.
THE. CONTROLLER. CANNOT. CUT. IT.
Urgh, I hate the dual shock. Sony pads are just so uncomfortable. I use 3rd party ones that are bigger.
I have a PC game pad modelled on the Dual Shock 2 controller so I don't really see much of a difference other than the fact that technically PC games are leagues ahead of their console counterparts. I still prefer mouse and keyboard for FPS games and certain 3rd person games. I agree though that on the whole its better to be in the comfort of a control pad and sofa.
Rectify it even more. Get one now. It might look rather pathetic now, but Daytona is still one of the most fun racing games ever. In history.
As for PC FPS, yeah I like them. Especially with a 2.3 GHz Barton, 1 Gb of RAM and a 256 Mb 9800 XT. But whilst they look nicer, I'm more comfortable on my leather gaming seat and footstool.
Not to mention fewer cheats and a level playing field as far as hardware is concerned.
As for PC FPS, yeah I like them. Especially with a 2.3 GHz Barton, 1 Gb of RAM and a 256 Mb 9800 XT. But whilst they look nicer, I'm more comfortable on my leather gaming seat and footstool.
Not to mention fewer cheats and a level playing field as far as hardware is concerned.
Notorious Biggles wrote:
> This is true. But the hardware gap remains, so if the PS2 was pushed
> to its limit it still wouldn't look as good as the Xbox or GC pushed
> to their limit.
From a pure technical point of view; spec for spec, yes. From a practical point of view no. Have you seen some of the stuff Final Fantasy XII produces (none sexual of course;), it's not that far behind even the top Xbox and Cube games.
On the Zelda topic, for me the whole graphical package is the best of this current generation. Artistic design, the colors, the character models, the suprebly animated environments, the lot; it all looks damn near perfection. It may not be everyones cup of tea but it certainly does it for me.
I know one game I missed off my graphical achievement list, Panzer Dragoon Orta, now that was a game to look at!
> This is true. But the hardware gap remains, so if the PS2 was pushed
> to its limit it still wouldn't look as good as the Xbox or GC pushed
> to their limit.
From a pure technical point of view; spec for spec, yes. From a practical point of view no. Have you seen some of the stuff Final Fantasy XII produces (none sexual of course;), it's not that far behind even the top Xbox and Cube games.
On the Zelda topic, for me the whole graphical package is the best of this current generation. Artistic design, the colors, the character models, the suprebly animated environments, the lot; it all looks damn near perfection. It may not be everyones cup of tea but it certainly does it for me.
I know one game I missed off my graphical achievement list, Panzer Dragoon Orta, now that was a game to look at!
Icarus wrote:
> Hang on a sec, you're saying that a GBA graphics chip runs at the same
> speed as modewrn GPUs found in PCs?
Heh!
My 9800 XT only runs at 418MHZ, hell if my SP can do half that then the games I have been looking at over recent weeks have a serious problem ;)
Buck, you are getting things mixed up, the GBA GPU doesn't work at 200MHZ +, its a 32bit hand held console, not a desktop PC used for the bulk of modern high end gaming. Think about it.
> Hang on a sec, you're saying that a GBA graphics chip runs at the same
> speed as modewrn GPUs found in PCs?
Heh!
My 9800 XT only runs at 418MHZ, hell if my SP can do half that then the games I have been looking at over recent weeks have a serious problem ;)
Buck, you are getting things mixed up, the GBA GPU doesn't work at 200MHZ +, its a 32bit hand held console, not a desktop PC used for the bulk of modern high end gaming. Think about it.
Page: