Slashdot Mirror
Grading the Sixth and Seventh Console Generations
GameDaily has up an article grading the current and next-gen consoles on their past and (apparently) future performance. Ratings come with an explanation, which is good because some of them seem just a bid dodgey. Only a B+ for the PS2? Really? From the article: "Considering the competition, the PS2's $129.99 price tag seems downright diminutive. The slim PS2 comes sans fan (meaning potential overheating for long-winded players) but the compact design makes it a must-have for anyone with limited space in the entertainment center. The DualShock 2 is arguably one of the best game controllers of all time and extras can be snapped up for a mere $20 for head-to-head or online multiplayer action." The Aeropause blog has a follow up on the ratings, giving you another perspective on the same consoles.
You can't grade something that hasn't been released. The Dreamcast was an awesome system before game support for it tanked. How would you have graded it before, and after?
For the number of quality games and the low cost, the PS2 is what I'd tell anybody looking for a new console to buy at the moment.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
The DualShock 2 is arguably one of the best game controllers of all time
I'd say there's very good reasons to argue against that. Split d-pad, for one. That's a real thumbwrecker. Nonsensical button names is another big issue. And who can forget putting the analog sticks into a secondary position on a console whose manufacturer openly hates 2d games that would be the only real reason to use the dpad as the primary input?
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
B+ for the Ps2, A for 360, A- for Wii, B+ for PS3, A for DS, B for PSP, C for Gamecube, D for Xbox????
It seems like as long as it's next gen you get a B+ and if it's this gen if it's sony you get a B+?
This isn't "Grading" This is "which should I buy for christmas" and the answer they give? any of them. Seriously this isn't a fluff piece, this is enuff piece. A article that is written with just "enuff" to count as an article. No one fails on it, no one wins. It's just "buy what ever you were going to buy in the first place". Personally I'd probably have graded it as follows, remember this is for a new system.
B for PS2, A- for 360, B for Wii, D for PS3, F for Gamecube, D for Xbox, B for DS, B for PSP (only because it plays music)
"The slim PS2 comes sans fan (meaning potential overheating for long-winded players)"
Wrong. If you take apart a slim PS2, you'll clearly see a fan on the inside of it. However, it's very quiet, which is a good thing. But yes, it does get warm - but the fan keeps the cpu/gpu from melting.
I think the big deal is that it seems odd for a system to tout its HD capabilities and not come with cables to display an HD signal out of the box.
Are cables cheap? Yes. But for a $500 system (and who's only standard a/v connections are HDMI and TOSLINK), I'd expect it to at least have component cables bundled.
Slashdot: where repeating an article in a post is "+5 Insightful"
The difference is none of those other consoles offered high definition graphics as a major feature. By comparison the PS3 will be the first console that doesn't supply cables that support it's own graphical standard for gaming. Also the component cables are proprietary, you might be able to buy $10 component cables for your DVD player but your subject to what the proprietary accessory will cost on the PS3. Hopefully it will accept the PS2 component cables (though those aren't very cheap either)
The idea that you'd pay $600 for a premium version console and still have to buy accessories that it didn't include is some kind of sick joke where clowns steal my money.
Collector's Edition