PS2 Not Being Taken Advantage Of

[GT News]

Originally Posted by bobcat

That's a very logical and good point.

A logical and good point is a terrible thing to waste.

[Perfect Stu]

Lower-end companies can stick with PC games...overcoming challenge (PS2 architecture) reaps reward (insanely large userbase, potential million game seller). The PS2 is a unique architecture...it's a different technology. I'm not saying "tougher to develop for = good", I'm just saying Sony invested a lot of money into this type of tech, they wanted something different/ambitious, and I dont think anyone can really argue that it's been a bad thing.

PS2 was released to the public in March 2000...a full year and a half before GC/XBX...and it's still pumping out quality, good-looking games that are comparable to similar GC/XBX offerings. If they'd used Microsoft's exact tech, only a year and a half older, I'm betting we'd see a huge (worse)difference in PS2 graphics compared to XBox's

[thatmariolover]

Originally Posted by Perfect Stu

PS2 was released to the public in March 2000...a full year and a half before GC/XBX...and it's still pumping out quality, good-looking games that are comparable to similar GC/XBX offerings. If they'd used Microsoft's exact tech, only a year and a half older, I'm betting we'd see a huge (worse)difference in PS2 graphics compared to XBox's

Indeed, it's true that a system developed the way Xbox or GC were, using the technology available at the time the PS2 launched, would have looked very lackluster. However, I do think that Sony was a little over anxious to get the pig to the market. They had a big head start and they could have waited a bit in order to make their technology more accessable. Yes, I think they should have stuck with the Vector Processing Units, as that was the only way to utilize the futuristic abilities at the time. But they could have made it more developer friendly to tap them. It would have taken a few more months of development time and would have been great.

At this point, I've heard that the dev tools have been improving significantly. But if people are still having trouble they need to do even more. PS2 is a great system, and it's not like it's hurting (obviously); but why not take a great thing and make it even better?

[MuGen]

It's the developers choice to make, if they choose to take the easy way out and run it at 30fps and not utilize the PS2's power, then they are just lazy as stated above.

The unnamed title that was tested at 60fps and using PS2's VPU Emotion Engine was probably a great game by most people's opinions. But no one really pays attention to specs when it comes to gaming. It's either a great game or not...

Basically... when the PS3 comes out (and I highly believe, BEFORE the Xbox2 and Nintendo's new system) they should emphasize the importance of designing games under their unique technology, so that their games would look much better. Of course the ps2 did ship before xbox and gamecube, it's almost as if the PS2 serves as a BETA Test for the other companies ('cept for Nintendo since they've been the industry to ages).... PS2 was a test run for Microsoft, and they did their homework and release a better system when it shipped.

PS2 will always serve as the better host of Games of Higher Play.

Games of Higher Play : definition = Games that consist of gameplay worth more than a day and with an actual story. Flight sims, RPG's, and even sports games can have interesting stories. So basically... PS2 harbors the better games overall, and Xbox and Gamecube harbors the better games in graphics...ASIDE from Ninja Gaiden which was a HELL of a game...

[thatmariolover]

Originally Posted by rasengan

PS2 will always serve as the better host of Games of Higher Play.

Games of Higher Play : definition = Games that consist of gameplay worth more than a day and with an actual story. Flight sims, RPG's, and even sports games can have interesting stories. So basically... PS2 harbors the better games overall, and Xbox and Gamecube harbors the better games in graphics...ASIDE from Ninja Gaiden which was a HELL of a game...

I seriously disagree with that. Xbox and Gamecube both have games that are on par with anything on PS2. PS2 has a larger userbase and larger devbase and therefore more games. It's as simple as that. Sony could be having way more GREAT games if they would have made development easier. But they didn't. Sure, some of these guys are lazy and sloppy developers. But if you make it easy enough, even they can make really good games. You can say "tough, learn how to code", but in the end you're just shooting yourself in the foot and screwing yourself out of more A titles.

[MuGen]

I'm not saying Gamecube and Xbox misses out on the WHOLE thing.... I'm saying Ps2 just has more titles with that "Umph"

Let's think of this as a metaphor...

Xbox is a huge muscle car, all acceleration (graphics) and no top speed (games with depth). But with a little tuning, it can get that speed. (Games are looking better for Xbox in the 2004 (Splinter Cell, Ninja Gaiden...etc.)

PS2 is a speed demon from the ports of Japan, and is one of those speed demons that have a unique motor and will take a little more adjusting to get the right ratios we want. It has the speed already but it needs the power. But to get that power, things will need to be adjusted. Which is why the later model of this speed demon from Japan will be more accessible! (YAY! PS3)

Nintendo is a Nissan Skyline GT-R Vspec II R34... which basically is a car with acceleration and games with depth, but it packs up too early. (Release Mario and Luigi games, then a Smash Brothers and off the market they go)
They haven't done it with Gamecube so far, so they are headed in the right direction.

[GiMpY-wAnNaBe]

lol, and the N-gage is the bicycle with a seat missing, which makes riding it a pain in the ***