Quote:
Originally posted by Perfect Stu
I've never once defened the PS2 as a piece of hardware, but I will say this: It gets the job done by providing me with the ability to play the software that gives me the best gaming experience available today.
PS2's hardware obviously can't match up against those of its competition, but the game library is the best available.
I thought this was all about the games, anyways? I don't defend the PS2 as an object. I defend it as the system that has provided me with the best gaming experiences I've ever encountered.
|
But when I used it in my post, it was referring to the early PS2 life, and it was lucky it didn't die.
Quote:
|
That seems to imply that the PS2's attach rate today would be higher than that. Why don't we compare attach rates when the number of consoles sold are equal?
|
Of course it is, MS put out these stats. Gotta love PR.
Quote:
|
Do we measure success by one's past? Microsoft didn't take off on its first day of existence.
|
Actually, we do. Sega was doubted twice due to the release of SegaCD and 32X. Nintendo was expected to be kiddy and lack 3rd party support because of Gamecube.
Quote:
|
But my main question is this: Do all these added features HURT your gaming experience? Do they make the games not run as well? Do they hurt the graphics or gameplay or sound? The answer... NO. Infact the addition of DVD features may actually help gamers by making the aaddition of better sound and video components more advantageous (sp?) to the console makers.
|
Possibly. If you say "we're including a DVD player" now you're limited to what technology you're using. There are better technologies out there, why not explore them? Look at this scenario: MS wants a DVD player, they choose DVD as a medium. Nintendo wants something different. They develop a new medium that loads 5x as quickly, and can hold just as much data. Now does your gaming experience suffer? Yes.