I never owned one but my few experiences with it were enjoyable. Nintendo should have never refused to sign up with Sony.
[sub]Top of the page FTW[/sub]
[sub]Top of the page FTW[/sub]
Sony: PS2 "Forever Changed" Gaming
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Recommended Videos
while the claim 'forever changed gaming' is gross exaggerating, the PS2's success in my mind comes from the build quality, sure it may not have the prettiest graphics or high powered features of the xbox, but it could go what you asked of it reasonably well without fuss and was a very solid machine (and yes i do own one, one of the brick types and its still going strong)
also alongside the dvd player capability having the backwards compatibility thing partly helped, it meant that the system (and by extension the people who bought them) already had at least 500+ games to pick from on the very first day, and not having to wade through the launch titles while wating for the new game catalogue to build up
also alongside the dvd player capability having the backwards compatibility thing partly helped, it meant that the system (and by extension the people who bought them) already had at least 500+ games to pick from on the very first day, and not having to wade through the launch titles while wating for the new game catalogue to build up
What I admire about the PS2 is the lifespan of the thing, and how far they pushed the limits of their technology with the games that were coming out before the PS3's release.mjc0961 said:
However, if I had to pick a console that forever changed gaming, it would be first the NES, that became the first widely accepted home console system, and then the Xbox for having a hard drive and the Xbox Live network. There are others that are noteworthy, but to me, those are the biggest changes.
I always hate it when I get pushed to the next page, but... I guess you're happy about that? Congrats?Redlin5 said:
yea yea. there is still a TON of terrible games, namely everything square enix did. yes, even Kingdom hearts. STFU fanboys.
I thoroughly regret playing the mojority of games on there.
I thoroughly regret playing the mojority of games on there.
Exactly. It was just the console and the games. And it was awesome. So many great games and so many hours spent playing alone and with friends. I still remember how excited I was when I first opened the box and plugged in the PS2 for the first time. It was a glorious day indeed.FieryTrainwreck said:
I'd like to point out before responding that we're focusing on one small element neglecting everything else about the console.
Actually the PS2 was designed to stand on it's side WITHOUT the stand, the stand itself more of a large safety measure to those paranoid enough. Also there was the logo that could be switched around. Granted it was only cosmetic but at least they thought about it.Akalistos said:
No I'm not going to "forget designed to do so" since that's the point.Snotnarok said:
The PS2 changed....absolutely zero. There was nothing innovative about the PS2; it was simply a better PlayStation. Any new features it added were already done before and better (PC gaming, anyone?). To clarify, that doesn't mean the PS2 was a bad console (quite the contrary). But it did not "change gaming"...at all. It was simply the logical next step on the path that gaming had already undertaken.
Also, the fact that PS2's are still selling isn't just a testament to it's strength as a platform (hardware-wise, it wasn't actually impressive, but it has an absolutely enormous library of games), but a testament to the fact that better graphics are no longer a selling point for a system like they have been since the 16-bit era. For the majority of consumers, the PS3/360 were not a significant enough leap compared to the previous generations to really justify the expense, especially since most of them didn't (and probably still don't) have an HD TV. As a result, the adoption rate for the HD twins has been really slow. That's not the only reason why the PS3 has done so poorly compared to it's predecessor (Sony apparently bumped their head one too many times and forgot that flooding their consoles with software was the reason for the PS/PS2's success), but it is one of them.
Quite frankly, I don't think the PS2's continued popularity is actually a source of pride for Sony....at least, not by this point in the current console generation. On the contrary, they were probably even embarrased that the PS2 was outselling or at least selling just as strongly as the PS3 for many years. The fact is, a great portion of PS2 owners are not shifting to the PS3. They hoped cutting the cost in half and providing a new model (the Slim) would solve the issue, but it didn't...it gave the PS3 a temporary boost, but a significant amount of PS2 owners still eludes them. They are either unaware or unwilling to admit that they have a serious problem on their hands.
Also, the fact that PS2's are still selling isn't just a testament to it's strength as a platform (hardware-wise, it wasn't actually impressive, but it has an absolutely enormous library of games), but a testament to the fact that better graphics are no longer a selling point for a system like they have been since the 16-bit era. For the majority of consumers, the PS3/360 were not a significant enough leap compared to the previous generations to really justify the expense, especially since most of them didn't (and probably still don't) have an HD TV. As a result, the adoption rate for the HD twins has been really slow. That's not the only reason why the PS3 has done so poorly compared to it's predecessor (Sony apparently bumped their head one too many times and forgot that flooding their consoles with software was the reason for the PS/PS2's success), but it is one of them.
Quite frankly, I don't think the PS2's continued popularity is actually a source of pride for Sony....at least, not by this point in the current console generation. On the contrary, they were probably even embarrased that the PS2 was outselling or at least selling just as strongly as the PS3 for many years. The fact is, a great portion of PS2 owners are not shifting to the PS3. They hoped cutting the cost in half and providing a new model (the Slim) would solve the issue, but it didn't...it gave the PS3 a temporary boost, but a significant amount of PS2 owners still eludes them. They are either unaware or unwilling to admit that they have a serious problem on their hands.
It wasn't design that way when you realize that all components of any computer can also work on the side. I won't change my stance on this until you can prove to me that at some point in the development, i could have been hazardous for the console.Stabby Joe said:
I'm not referring to technical design.Akalistos said:
Besides if you feel THAT strongly on the matter take it up with GamesRadar since I'm just quoting them.
I have had a kind of love-hate relationship with the PS2.
I Hate the hardware with a passion.
I dislike the fact that it had 2 controller ports (addons don't count)
Seemed to have a reputation as the most 'powerful' console of the Generation but was in truth nothing of the sort.
But in the end it had fantastic 3rd party support and it was cheap.
And it will always have a special place in history as the console that truly brought gaming into the mainstream.
I Hate the hardware with a passion.
I dislike the fact that it had 2 controller ports (addons don't count)
Seemed to have a reputation as the most 'powerful' console of the Generation but was in truth nothing of the sort.
But in the end it had fantastic 3rd party support and it was cheap.
And it will always have a special place in history as the console that truly brought gaming into the mainstream.
Didn't the PC do the exact same things the PS2 did and better? I don't want to be a party pooper here but I can't see how the PS2 changed gaming.
I'm basically saying the PS2 was designed in it's shape to be up right or on it's side, as opposed to one position regardless of how well it worked. Again, take it up with them.Akalistos said: