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.
"4.6
The attach rate for Xbox (number of games owned per console). It's the highest such number ever
at this stage of a console's life"
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?
and I couldn't care less what the ratio WAS. Give me ratios today. Do we measure success by one's past? Microsoft didn't take off on its first day of existence.
This is a loaded arguement for me. Bond, gekko, (I'm sure the Strangler and PuPPet will make cameos
) and maybe more to come vs. Stu. I love it!
Threaded Mode
