Slashdot Mirror
PlayStation 2 Timeline, From Launch to Present
Decaffeinated Jedi writes "GameSpy has posted a timeline charting the history Sony's PlayStation 2, the third part in a series previously covered on Slashdot that includes similar retrospectives for the Xbox and for GameCube. The timeline traces the PlayStation 2's history from its initial boom, through its period as 'a repository for bad sports games, giant robot games, and other disappointing releases,' and up to the console's revitalization by such games as Gran Turismo 3, Metal Gear Solid 2, Devil May Cry, and Grand Theft Auto III." How has the PlayStation 2 measured up to your expectations?
For some reason, I've never felt any draw to the PS2 itself as a console. The Gamecube is cool (and these days ridiculously cheap too) and the Xbox ... well, the fact that I bought one says it all I think ... Guess the specs appealed to the geek in me and the games I wanted were available.
...
But the PS2, nope. Never any attraction. And that's despite the fact that I've played several great games on a friend's unit over the years. It's just never felt purchase-worthy. And I don't think it will even if it drops to 'Cube prices, but I'm always toying with the idea of picking up a 'Cube just to play Zelda and Metroid.
Perhaps it's simply that the PS2 has a lot of good and great games, just nothing that's a total drool-causer for me. Especially not drool-causers that don't show up on the other consoles if you're just a little patient
As was said before, the actual logic units of the playstation2 are well beyond both the xbox and the gamecube - the simple fact is, that the video memory does not hold nearly as many pretty textures, and cannot do anti-aliasing very well (mainly because of the lack of memory). If they had utilized something like 64mb or 128mb of memory, the system would have smoked either one of the other systems. The major problem with the emotion engine in floating point calculations, is that it only performs at 32-bit precision, not 64-bit. Of course, neither do the numerous pentium3 (And 4) based beowulf clusters out there.
"For as many failed units that Sony throws out, it still amazes me when people associate the word Sony with Quality. "
I worked at a video game retailer when the original Playstation was launched. From that Sept to just after XMAS, for every 100 PS's we sold, we got roughly 20-25 back defective. This was in the whole district, not just the store I was in. I can't imagine this was limited to just Kansas City.
Funny thing is, people actually deny that the original PS had this many problems. Even our competitors bitched about it.
"Derp de derp."
If you were going to buy a console for the primary purpose of mucking about with it, programmatically, which one would you get?
Does the Linux/PS2 port have a more 'fun' realm than the Linux/XBOX realm?
I've considered getting a couple of gaming platforms, mostly for the hack value - I'd love to make an XBOX or PS2 a workable terminal in my house for various net-related things.
Which system give best bang for the hacker buck, in your opinion?
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
and what matters in a console isn't the hardware, it's the software.
For my money, the software isn't that hot either.
I have all 3 systems, started with the GC. Now that Xbox has GTA3 and GTA:VC for it, I have fewer reasons than ever to want to keep the PS2. There are some genres were the PS2 is the best, but it's notably so-so at some stuff I like, for instance splitscreen multiplayer. (Stupid multitap) I know some people really think it has a super terrific library, but I think in the end, all 3 systems end up having about the same # of "really great" games, and the "really great" gams on PS2 don't interest me as a gamer as much as the other 2 systems.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
One major gripe I have about both GC and Xbox is the definitive lack of RPG's. Sure GC has it's tried and true Zelda, but that was a late comer game, and Xbox titles concentrate far more on Sports/Action/Fighing genres than RPG. The most definitive company representing this is Squaresoft, who only of late are coming back to Nintendo with FFCC. Not only that, but through Sony, I can play not only FFX, but virtually every final fantasy game every created, as well as numerous other great classics that on lazy afternoons I feel like revisiting, and I only need one console to do this with. If you go nintendo, I need 4 different consoles to play games from wayback, or I need to go search for roms (which is a pain for N64).
Now with the advent of Monolithsoft (breakoffs from Square) creating the Xenosaga series and furthering the Chrono line only for PS2, it seems that things are going to stay this way.
XBox does great with American companies, and Nintendo does great with First party games, but the only console I've seen that mature 3rd party japanese game companies develope for is Sony's.
It's the games that make the console, and in the RPG genre, Sony is the only real option. Until that changes, or my budget does, Sony is where I stay.
The article was outstanding, except it labeled PS2 as the best system of all time.
PS2 is the best system today but it hasn't destroyed its competitor the way NES did. Xbox and GC are still standing.
IMHO NES 8-bit is forever the most dominant monopoly the video game industry will ever see.