I don't know either way. Everytime I work at the store, I see more people come in looking to purchase PS2 games. We only have approx 5 NEW titles at any given time, but the used prices are SOOO much better than used PS3 or 360...people love them. Plus, there are so many thousands of games out there for the PS2...it will be around for quite a while. I know when I go to Cali for a week next week, I am taking the PS2 slim...tiny console, DVD player...perfect portable system. IF it gets damaged in the flight, only costs $100 for a brand new in box...or $50 for a used slim...can't get that with a PS3 or 360!
elprincipe, I doubt there's any console of which most games were awesome. Take the NES for example. I have the powerpak with the entire library loaded, and I find more than half are really dull. There are 800+ ROMS in my powerpak (including licensed, nonlicensed, homebrews, protos...), so if 300 are really good games I'd be surprised. Same with PSP for example, I once compared the amount of good games the PSP vs the DS had, and both had a ton of crapware (though the DS had much more), and even though there are much less PSP games than DS ones, their amount of good games are comparable (I used Gamespot grades, comparing their entire database). The PS2 is one of the systems with more games ever, and even if 75% are crap, the other 25% ought to be a lot in absolute numbers.
The problem is not that there aren't good games, it's that you have to dig them up from all the garbage.
You're right that most systems have mainly crap. NES is actually the only exception to this rule in my book, which is why it's still the best system with the best games out there. I'm thinking more like there are around 2-3% of PS2 games that are worthwhile, a great improvement from PS1.
Most PS2 games were horrible, but I was quite pleased that PS2 has been a much better system than PS1. Actually leaps and bounds ahead of PS1, which has few worthwhile games (and only one really great game). PS2 has quite a few good games. I still much prefer GameCube to PS2, but it's a system worth owning. If only it were more reliable...although there I guess it also beats PS1, one of the crappiest-built systems out there from any generation.
How do you figure that PS2 is leaps and bounds ahead of PS1? PS1 was great for the time, and it has FAR more than a few good games. If you think the PS1 is one of the worst built systems out there, then I'm convinced you've never even played one.
I figure PS2 is leaps and bounds ahead of PS1 because there are so many more good games. In my experience most games that are hyped for PS1 are poor games, with a few exceptions. Perhaps if I were a fan of traditional RPGs I'd feel differently.
And of course you're wrong about me not playing a PS1. Is there any way I could miss Symphony of the Night, one of the best games ever made, and by far the best game for PS1? Not on your life. I actually have had a PS1 since its (crappy) launch.
PS1 is indisputably one of the worst-built systems out there. I worked in a game store years ago during the PS1/N64 generation. I never saw a single N64 that broke, but literally hundreds of PS1s. You don't remember the "turn it upside down" trick? The thing is a cheaply made POS.
I personally prefer the PS1, but PS2 is good too. I could accept liking one over the other, but the fact is that they're both great systems. It's funny how you say PS1 has very few good games, yet you're a GameCube fan (or at least you prefer GameCube to PS2). I know the PS1 wasn't the best built console ever, but the failure rate isn't all that bad considering the millions of consoles out there. I've never had to turn it upside down because my console was fine, but I'm aware of that problem. I think you need to find a list of "best Playstation games" and play some of them.
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/top-ten-gt-countdown/18703 You should give this a watch. GameTrailers Top 10 Consoles, and guess who came in at #1? I'm not saying it's fact, but it does support that the Playstation is at least one of the best consoles ever made, and far from one of the worst.
Well obviously you can't compare the N64 and Ps1 in terms of reliability. The N64 had the distinct advantage of being a cart based system with no moving parts which means less parts that wear and break. The Ps1 had a sliding laser assembly so of course parts got worn, laser got dirty due to the flip top design ect... So yes the N64 was more reliable but that doesn't make the Ps1 a POS.
Well obviously you can't compare the N64 and Ps1 in terms of reliability. The N64 had the distinct advantage of being a cart based system with no moving parts which means less parts that wear and break. The Ps1 had a sliding laser assembly so of course parts got worn, laser got dirty due to the flip top design ect... So yes the N64 was more reliable but that doesn't make the Ps1 a POS.
Well obviously you can't compare the N64 and Ps1 in terms of reliability. The N64 had the distinct advantage of being a cart based system with no moving parts which means less parts that wear and break. The Ps1 had a sliding laser assembly so of course parts got worn, laser got dirty due to the flip top design ect... So yes the N64 was more reliable but that doesn't make the Ps1 a POS.
Good point. Plus cartridges had been around for like 20 years by the time the N64 came around. CD games were relatively new, so you can't expect it to be perfect right away. Over 10 years later, the X Box 360 had no excuse. Those really were a poorly made POS.
I don't really see why there can be so much hate for any one console. They all have their good and bad games. Like the whole 360 vs PS3 thing. I guess you can argue till your blue in the face about which is better while i play the shit out of both consoles and enjoy the best games from both. Same with PS1/N64, Sega/SNES, etc.
PS2 is the shit btw. There are plenty of great games for it. As well as PS1(SOTN, Twisted Metal series, FF series, Grandia, etc).
I personally prefer the PS1, but PS2 is good too. I could accept liking one over the other, but the fact is that they're both great systems. It's funny how you say PS1 has very few good games, yet you're a GameCube fan (or at least you prefer GameCube to PS2). I know the PS1 wasn't the best built console ever, but the failure rate isn't all that bad considering the millions of consoles out there. I've never had to turn it upside down because my console was fine, but I'm aware of that problem. I think you need to find a list of "best Playstation games" and play some of them.
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/top-ten-gt-countdown/18703 You should give this a watch. GameTrailers Top 10 Consoles, and guess who came in at #1? I'm not saying it's fact, but it does support that the Playstation is at least one of the best consoles ever made, and far from one of the worst.
There's not really any facts here, just opinions. In your opinion, PS1 is a "great system." That's fine, but IMO it's not, and is far from it. In fact, it's probably not in the top 20 game machines that I own. Obviously you can tell I don't really give a shit what GameTrailers or whoever says is the best system.
PS1 had a large failure rate, and so did PS2. I had a friend go through 7 (!!) PS2s in six months near the launch (no joke). These are not well-made machines. You can come up with whatever excuses you want, but GameCubes and Xboxes (original, not the horrible 360) haven't had anywhere near the failure rates of PS1/PS2, and those are disc-based systems...not that it's an excuse anyway for breaking all the time. That doesn't mean they don't have good games or aren't good consoles, just that they are cheaply/poorly made.
I don't really see why there can be so much hate for any one console. They all have their good and bad games. Like the whole 360 vs PS3 thing. I guess you can argue till your blue in the face about which is better while i play the shit out of both consoles and enjoy the best games from both. Same with PS1/N64, Sega/SNES, etc.
PS2 is the shit btw. There are plenty of great games for it. As well as PS1(SOTN, Twisted Metal series, FF series, Grandia, etc).
Not hate, just an opinion that something is vastly overrated. Some good examples are the games you listed. SOTN is an all-time classic and in the top 10 games of all time to be sure, but I find Twisted Metal, Final Fantasy VII-IX and Grandia to be poor games at best.
I personally prefer the PS1, but PS2 is good too. I could accept liking one over the other, but the fact is that they're both great systems. It's funny how you say PS1 has very few good games, yet you're a GameCube fan (or at least you prefer GameCube to PS2). I know the PS1 wasn't the best built console ever, but the failure rate isn't all that bad considering the millions of consoles out there. I've never had to turn it upside down because my console was fine, but I'm aware of that problem. I think you need to find a list of "best Playstation games" and play some of them.
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/top-ten-gt-countdown/18703 You should give this a watch. GameTrailers Top 10 Consoles, and guess who came in at #1? I'm not saying it's fact, but it does support that the Playstation is at least one of the best consoles ever made, and far from one of the worst.
There's not really any facts here, just opinions. In your opinion, PS1 is a "great system." That's fine, but IMO it's not, and is far from it. In fact, it's probably not in the top 20 game machines that I own. Obviously you can tell I don't really give a shit what GameTrailers or whoever says is the best system.
PS1 had a large failure rate, and so did PS2. I had a friend go through 7 (!!) PS2s in six months near the launch (no joke). These are not well-made machines. You can come up with whatever excuses you want, but GameCubes and Xboxes (original, not the horrible 360) haven't had anywhere near the failure rates of PS1/PS2, and those are disc-based systems...not that it's an excuse anyway for breaking all the time. That doesn't mean they don't have good games or aren't good consoles, just that they are cheaply/poorly made.
I'm fine with the fact that you think the hardware isn't as high quality as others, but that doesn't make it a terrible system, it's only one part. The library of games matters far more than the hardware quality. GameCube and XBox may have better hardware, but neither of them really have any good games. They both have a few, but that's nothing compared to the original Playstation or PS2. If it wasn't for Nintendo first party franchises or Halo, nobody would have even bothered with GameCube or XBox (not many people bothered with them anyway compared to the PS2). The only point you really make is that the hardware isn't great, yet that's not what matters. There is a limit though, Your friend having to go through 7 PS2s in six months is unacceptable, I can understand him being pissed about that. Same with the 360, I can accept some failure rate but when so many people are on their third or fourth console, that's just ridiculous.
I'll accept that you don't like the PS1 or PS2, as long as you accept the fact that the majority of people are going to disagree, and tell you that they are excellent consoles (not just judging hardware, but judging the library of games, which is more important). The fact that both the PS1 and PS2 completely dominated in their respective generations supports my claim that people are going to disagree. Sales don't necessarily reflect quality though. Look at how well the Wii sold.
Whats with all the Playstation hate here? The Ps1 was not a crappy system at all and mine still runs as good as it did 10 years ago. Ps1 also has a massive library full of classic games that are still fun to play.
Probably because the very scarily most comparable system is the Wii. A mountain of turds and some gems if you go looking. I don't agree with the hate, considering the volume of titles for the PS1 you can easily get a good 50 game pile going to be more than enough or upwards near that.
The SNK collection is pretty rad too. Both of the Capcom sets are well worth your time and as far as RPGs go, the PS2 library isn't as strong but many of the sequels were quality. I dug Suikoden 3 and 5 and Grandia 3 and Star Ocean: Til the End of Time were all awesome. Star Ocean in particular is a huge game with tons of extra stuff to do.
I really like the sega classics collection on there too, but the one on the PS3 (of course) blows it out of the water. Getting the Plat trophy for that game was too much fun, to where I did it in one sitting over a 16 hour period.
My personal favorite would be Contra: Shattered Soldier, that game changed my life! There were tons of sweet throwbacks like Maximo, Rygar, and Shinobi. Original game series quality was very good. I was totally addicted to the first Devil May Cry. Up until that point, I thought it was the raddest thing ever. It was the first time I felt like I was playing an old school game with updated graphics. The boss battles were fucking crazy like the giant spider spewing lava.
I loved the PS1, and loved the PS2, and I still love them both. Both are amazing consoles with an excellent library of games. Yes, there are a ton of crappy games for both systems, but this is the case with every console. I still think there are soooooo many good games for both systems. I am a huge RPG fan and the other consoles of both generations failed miserably in the RPG department compared to the offerings for the PS1 and PS2.
PS2 was my least favorite of the previous generation of consoles (I preferred GC, DC, then XBOX, in that order). Too much of a casual demographic, with only a handful of notable gems for this player. I actually enjoy my PSP much much more. I mine as well forget about collecting PS2 and just mod the damn thing already to play Espgaluda or something, seeing as mine has barely gotten any use otherwise.
I never grouped these together before.. The DC was toast by the time the PS2 came out, and the other 2 didn't come out until over a year later. (Plus, I didn't even know the xbox existed pretty much until the 360 came out and I still don't believe the gamecube ever existed.)
Heck, PS2 almost sold as many units before xbox or GC ever hit the shelves. as either "competitor" did in their entire lifecycle.
Most PS2 games were horrible, but I was quite pleased that PS2 has been a much better system than PS1. Actually leaps and bounds ahead of PS1, which has few worthwhile games (and only one really great game). PS2 has quite a few good games. I still much prefer GameCube to PS2, but it's a system worth owning. If only it were more reliable...although there I guess it also beats PS1, one of the crappiest-built systems out there from any generation.
How do you figure that PS2 is leaps and bounds ahead of PS1? PS1 was great for the time, and it has FAR more than a few good games. If you think the PS1 is one of the worst built systems out there, then I'm convinced you've never even played one.
I figure PS2 is leaps and bounds ahead of PS1 because there are so many more good games. In my experience most games that are hyped for PS1 are poor games, with a few exceptions. Perhaps if I were a fan of traditional RPGs I'd feel differently.
And of course you're wrong about me not playing a PS1. Is there any way I could miss Symphony of the Night, one of the best games ever made, and by far the best game for PS1? Not on your life. I actually have had a PS1 since its (crappy) launch.
PS1 is indisputably one of the worst-built systems out there. I worked in a game store years ago during the PS1/N64 generation. I never saw a single N64 that broke, but literally hundreds of PS1s. You don't remember the "turn it upside down" trick? The thing is a cheaply made POS.
OMG a disc based system has a higher failure rate then a solid state system??? What are the chances? Alert the media. PS1 had average failure rates for a disc based game system. DOesn't matter what your friend or you did. Hear say is hear say. Find the reported numbers, and they match up with the average console. There are tricks for every system.
Bottom line is if you polled 1000 random people, 90% would have the PS1 in their top 5 or at least top 10. Those are the facts.
Sad how this has degraded into talking about the PS2 and it's so-called greatness, or the breakdown rates on PS1. The PS1 wasn't that bad, but the motor was notoriously flaky but I really well remember in a lot of cases you could stupidly flip the system upside down (door to the floor) and it would work again when it would normally fail.
Sure disc based systems fail far more than chip based stuff, but that's a given with the moving parts. The issue though is some laser based disc systems crapped out worse than others is all. If I remember though the PS2 was of the two the larger in crap out rate as they commonly after so long would start by choking on blue bottom discs, then fail on dvds, then just failed...people commonly though on both ps1 and ps2 much like on xb360(yet still not as bad for sure) would have a system crap out and would just buy another helping to contribute to the systems puffed up numbers. In all cases (PS1, 2, and 360) they never sold as many as they claimed, a good many were replacements to current owners, not new customers.
I hate it when people compare other system failures to the 360. There is no comparison, to the 360's epic failure rate. Look at the numbers. First of all most disc based systems are failures due to the laser. 90% of the failures can be solved be wiping off the lens, or a adjusting the screw. They aren't failures really, it is just common wear on the system that needs common maintenance, as you will find with any DVD player CD player, ETC, no matter who makes it. The NES doesn't fail.. it's 72 pin gets worn out from use, and needs to be maintained. The 360 doesn't wear out or suffer from lack of maintenance. The hardware was designed wrong and the system can't handle it's own functions. It overheats and dies.
The 360 has a 54% failure rate. That is simply astounding. It is in a league of it's own. For every system that works, more than one doesn't work. The average electronic has a 5-15% failure rate. Which both PS1 and PS2 fall into. I'm sure everyone knows someone who's PS2 broke. I'm sure you also know someone with a bum TV. That is the nature of electronics.
Actually, reading through the thread it seems most people share my opinion.
Maybe I was a bit harsh on xbox, but it is a "meh" console to me
I just get pretty defensive when somebody badmouths my two favorite consoles that I spent my childhood with playing GREAT GAMES ON. I'm not going to degrade the PS2; it is a respectable system, but it is just not one of my favorites. You can go about defending a single console by knocking every other one down, but it will be a pretty hollow victory.
People can talk all the shit they want about PS1 or PS2 but just remember both Playstation's won the console wars by a huge margin.I mean Sony came out the gate and pretty much beat nintendo's ass.
Originally posted by: JBOGames First of all most disc based systems are failures due to the laser. 90% of the failures can be solved be wiping off the lens, or a adjusting the screw. They aren't failures really, it is just common wear on the system that needs common maintenance, as you will find with any DVD player CD player, ETC, no matter who makes it. The NES doesn't fail.. it's 72 pin gets worn out from use, and needs to be maintained.
I disagree.
Wiping off a lens I consider to be common maintenance. Anything that requires dissembling the system (read, changing or repairing a 72-pin connector on a toaster, adjusting potentiometers on an optical based system) goes beyond common maintenance and becomes a repair at which point the system has failed.
Originally posted by: JBOGames First of all most disc based systems are failures due to the laser. 90% of the failures can be solved be wiping off the lens, or a adjusting the screw. They aren't failures really, it is just common wear on the system that needs common maintenance, as you will find with any DVD player CD player, ETC, no matter who makes it. The NES doesn't fail.. it's 72 pin gets worn out from use, and needs to be maintained.
I disagree.
Wiping off a lens I consider to be common maintenance. Anything that requires dissembling the system (read, changing or repairing a 72-pin connector on a toaster, adjusting potentiometers on an optical based system) goes beyond common maintenance and becomes a repair at which point the system has failed.
Well I only really consider it a failure if it's within a certain time period. If I had to replace the 72 pin in my NES within a year, I'd consider that a failure. Changing it 25 (or even 10!) years later isn't a failure, at that point it becomes maintenance.
Comments
elprincipe, I doubt there's any console of which most games were awesome. Take the NES for example. I have the powerpak with the entire library loaded, and I find more than half are really dull. There are 800+ ROMS in my powerpak (including licensed, nonlicensed, homebrews, protos...), so if 300 are really good games I'd be surprised. Same with PSP for example, I once compared the amount of good games the PSP vs the DS had, and both had a ton of crapware (though the DS had much more), and even though there are much less PSP games than DS ones, their amount of good games are comparable (I used Gamespot grades, comparing their entire database). The PS2 is one of the systems with more games ever, and even if 75% are crap, the other 25% ought to be a lot in absolute numbers.
The problem is not that there aren't good games, it's that you have to dig them up from all the garbage.
You're right that most systems have mainly crap. NES is actually the only exception to this rule in my book, which is why it's still the best system with the best games out there. I'm thinking more like there are around 2-3% of PS2 games that are worthwhile, a great improvement from PS1.
Most PS2 games were horrible, but I was quite pleased that PS2 has been a much better system than PS1. Actually leaps and bounds ahead of PS1, which has few worthwhile games (and only one really great game). PS2 has quite a few good games. I still much prefer GameCube to PS2, but it's a system worth owning. If only it were more reliable...although there I guess it also beats PS1, one of the crappiest-built systems out there from any generation.
How do you figure that PS2 is leaps and bounds ahead of PS1? PS1 was great for the time, and it has FAR more than a few good games. If you think the PS1 is one of the worst built systems out there, then I'm convinced you've never even played one.
I figure PS2 is leaps and bounds ahead of PS1 because there are so many more good games. In my experience most games that are hyped for PS1 are poor games, with a few exceptions. Perhaps if I were a fan of traditional RPGs I'd feel differently.
And of course you're wrong about me not playing a PS1. Is there any way I could miss Symphony of the Night, one of the best games ever made, and by far the best game for PS1? Not on your life. I actually have had a PS1 since its (crappy) launch.
PS1 is indisputably one of the worst-built systems out there. I worked in a game store years ago during the PS1/N64 generation. I never saw a single N64 that broke, but literally hundreds of PS1s. You don't remember the "turn it upside down" trick? The thing is a cheaply made POS.
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/top-ten-gt-countdown/18703 You should give this a watch. GameTrailers Top 10 Consoles, and guess who came in at #1? I'm not saying it's fact, but it does support that the Playstation is at least one of the best consoles ever made, and far from one of the worst.
Well obviously you can't compare the N64 and Ps1 in terms of reliability. The N64 had the distinct advantage of being a cart based system with no moving parts which means less parts that wear and break. The Ps1 had a sliding laser assembly so of course parts got worn, laser got dirty due to the flip top design ect... So yes the N64 was more reliable but that doesn't make the Ps1 a POS.
N64 had better games for girls.
Well obviously you can't compare the N64 and Ps1 in terms of reliability. The N64 had the distinct advantage of being a cart based system with no moving parts which means less parts that wear and break. The Ps1 had a sliding laser assembly so of course parts got worn, laser got dirty due to the flip top design ect... So yes the N64 was more reliable but that doesn't make the Ps1 a POS.
Good point. Plus cartridges had been around for like 20 years by the time the N64 came around. CD games were relatively new, so you can't expect it to be perfect right away. Over 10 years later, the X Box 360 had no excuse. Those really were a poorly made POS.
PS2 is the shit btw. There are plenty of great games for it. As well as PS1(SOTN, Twisted Metal series, FF series, Grandia, etc).
I personally prefer the PS1, but PS2 is good too. I could accept liking one over the other, but the fact is that they're both great systems. It's funny how you say PS1 has very few good games, yet you're a GameCube fan (or at least you prefer GameCube to PS2). I know the PS1 wasn't the best built console ever, but the failure rate isn't all that bad considering the millions of consoles out there. I've never had to turn it upside down because my console was fine, but I'm aware of that problem. I think you need to find a list of "best Playstation games" and play some of them.
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/top-ten-gt-countdown/18703 You should give this a watch. GameTrailers Top 10 Consoles, and guess who came in at #1? I'm not saying it's fact, but it does support that the Playstation is at least one of the best consoles ever made, and far from one of the worst.
There's not really any facts here, just opinions. In your opinion, PS1 is a "great system." That's fine, but IMO it's not, and is far from it. In fact, it's probably not in the top 20 game machines that I own. Obviously you can tell I don't really give a shit what GameTrailers or whoever says is the best system.
PS1 had a large failure rate, and so did PS2. I had a friend go through 7 (!!) PS2s in six months near the launch (no joke). These are not well-made machines. You can come up with whatever excuses you want, but GameCubes and Xboxes (original, not the horrible 360) haven't had anywhere near the failure rates of PS1/PS2, and those are disc-based systems...not that it's an excuse anyway for breaking all the time. That doesn't mean they don't have good games or aren't good consoles, just that they are cheaply/poorly made.
I don't really see why there can be so much hate for any one console. They all have their good and bad games. Like the whole 360 vs PS3 thing. I guess you can argue till your blue in the face about which is better while i play the shit out of both consoles and enjoy the best games from both. Same with PS1/N64, Sega/SNES, etc.
PS2 is the shit btw. There are plenty of great games for it. As well as PS1(SOTN, Twisted Metal series, FF series, Grandia, etc).
Not hate, just an opinion that something is vastly overrated. Some good examples are the games you listed. SOTN is an all-time classic and in the top 10 games of all time to be sure, but I find Twisted Metal, Final Fantasy VII-IX and Grandia to be poor games at best.
I personally prefer the PS1, but PS2 is good too. I could accept liking one over the other, but the fact is that they're both great systems. It's funny how you say PS1 has very few good games, yet you're a GameCube fan (or at least you prefer GameCube to PS2). I know the PS1 wasn't the best built console ever, but the failure rate isn't all that bad considering the millions of consoles out there. I've never had to turn it upside down because my console was fine, but I'm aware of that problem. I think you need to find a list of "best Playstation games" and play some of them.
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/top-ten-gt-countdown/18703 You should give this a watch. GameTrailers Top 10 Consoles, and guess who came in at #1? I'm not saying it's fact, but it does support that the Playstation is at least one of the best consoles ever made, and far from one of the worst.
There's not really any facts here, just opinions. In your opinion, PS1 is a "great system." That's fine, but IMO it's not, and is far from it. In fact, it's probably not in the top 20 game machines that I own. Obviously you can tell I don't really give a shit what GameTrailers or whoever says is the best system.
PS1 had a large failure rate, and so did PS2. I had a friend go through 7 (!!) PS2s in six months near the launch (no joke). These are not well-made machines. You can come up with whatever excuses you want, but GameCubes and Xboxes (original, not the horrible 360) haven't had anywhere near the failure rates of PS1/PS2, and those are disc-based systems...not that it's an excuse anyway for breaking all the time. That doesn't mean they don't have good games or aren't good consoles, just that they are cheaply/poorly made.
I'll accept that you don't like the PS1 or PS2, as long as you accept the fact that the majority of people are going to disagree, and tell you that they are excellent consoles (not just judging hardware, but judging the library of games, which is more important). The fact that both the PS1 and PS2 completely dominated in their respective generations supports my claim that people are going to disagree. Sales don't necessarily reflect quality though. Look at how well the Wii sold.
Whats with all the Playstation hate here? The Ps1 was not a crappy system at all and mine still runs as good as it did 10 years ago. Ps1 also has a massive library full of classic games that are still fun to play.
Probably because the very scarily most comparable system is the Wii. A mountain of turds and some gems if you go looking. I don't agree with the hate, considering the volume of titles for the PS1 you can easily get a good 50 game pile going to be more than enough or upwards near that.
Favorite PS2 game though, is SoC.
Originally posted by: Rosenkreuz
PS2 was my least favorite of the previous generation of consoles (I preferred GC, DC, then XBOX, in that order). Too much of a casual demographic, with only a handful of notable gems for this player. I actually enjoy my PSP much much more. I mine as well forget about collecting PS2 and just mod the damn thing already to play Espgaluda or something, seeing as mine has barely gotten any use otherwise.
I never grouped these together before.. The DC was toast by the time the PS2 came out, and the
other 2 didn't come out until over a year later. (Plus, I didn't even know the xbox existed pretty much until the 360 came out and I still don't believe the gamecube ever existed.)
Heck, PS2 almost sold as many units before xbox or GC ever hit the shelves. as either "competitor" did in their entire lifecycle.
Whether or not you like sony, you have to admit these were 2 legendary consoles
You have to be kidding me...
PS2 was LEAPS AND BOUNDS over GC/XBOX/DC in terms of being a great console.
Theres so many wicked games on PS2.
Xbox just sucks.
Gamecube has a few good games.
Dreamcast has like maybe 20 good games...
Them's fightin' words 'round here, boy.
Maybe I was a bit harsh on xbox, but it is a "meh" console to me
Most PS2 games were horrible, but I was quite pleased that PS2 has been a much better system than PS1. Actually leaps and bounds ahead of PS1, which has few worthwhile games (and only one really great game). PS2 has quite a few good games. I still much prefer GameCube to PS2, but it's a system worth owning. If only it were more reliable...although there I guess it also beats PS1, one of the crappiest-built systems out there from any generation.
How do you figure that PS2 is leaps and bounds ahead of PS1? PS1 was great for the time, and it has FAR more than a few good games. If you think the PS1 is one of the worst built systems out there, then I'm convinced you've never even played one.
I figure PS2 is leaps and bounds ahead of PS1 because there are so many more good games. In my experience most games that are hyped for PS1 are poor games, with a few exceptions. Perhaps if I were a fan of traditional RPGs I'd feel differently.
And of course you're wrong about me not playing a PS1. Is there any way I could miss Symphony of the Night, one of the best games ever made, and by far the best game for PS1? Not on your life. I actually have had a PS1 since its (crappy) launch.
PS1 is indisputably one of the worst-built systems out there. I worked in a game store years ago during the PS1/N64 generation. I never saw a single N64 that broke, but literally hundreds of PS1s. You don't remember the "turn it upside down" trick? The thing is a cheaply made POS.
Sure disc based systems fail far more than chip based stuff, but that's a given with the moving parts. The issue though is some laser based disc systems crapped out worse than others is all. If I remember though the PS2 was of the two the larger in crap out rate as they commonly after so long would start by choking on blue bottom discs, then fail on dvds, then just failed...people commonly though on both ps1 and ps2 much like on xb360(yet still not as bad for sure) would have a system crap out and would just buy another helping to contribute to the systems puffed up numbers. In all cases (PS1, 2, and 360) they never sold as many as they claimed, a good many were replacements to current owners, not new customers.
The 360 has a 54% failure rate. That is simply astounding. It is in a league of it's own. For every system that works, more than one doesn't work. The average electronic has a 5-15% failure rate. Which both PS1 and PS2 fall into. I'm sure everyone knows someone who's PS2 broke. I'm sure you also know someone with a bum TV. That is the nature of electronics.
Actually, reading through the thread it seems most people share my opinion.
Maybe I was a bit harsh on xbox, but it is a "meh" console to me
I just get pretty defensive when somebody badmouths my two favorite consoles that I spent my childhood with playing GREAT GAMES ON. I'm not going to degrade the PS2; it is a respectable system, but it is just not one of my favorites. You can go about defending a single console by knocking every other one down, but it will be a pretty hollow victory.
First of all most disc based systems are failures due to the laser. 90% of the failures can be solved be wiping off the lens, or a adjusting the screw. They aren't failures really, it is just common wear on the system that needs common maintenance, as you will find with any DVD player CD player, ETC, no matter who makes it. The NES doesn't fail.. it's 72 pin gets worn out from use, and needs to be maintained.
I disagree.
Wiping off a lens I consider to be common maintenance. Anything that requires dissembling the system (read, changing or repairing a 72-pin connector on a toaster, adjusting potentiometers on an optical based system) goes beyond common maintenance and becomes a repair at which point the system has failed.
First of all most disc based systems are failures due to the laser. 90% of the failures can be solved be wiping off the lens, or a adjusting the screw. They aren't failures really, it is just common wear on the system that needs common maintenance, as you will find with any DVD player CD player, ETC, no matter who makes it. The NES doesn't fail.. it's 72 pin gets worn out from use, and needs to be maintained.
I disagree.
Wiping off a lens I consider to be common maintenance. Anything that requires dissembling the system (read, changing or repairing a 72-pin connector on a toaster, adjusting potentiometers on an optical based system) goes beyond common maintenance and becomes a repair at which point the system has failed.
Well I only really consider it a failure if it's within a certain time period. If I had to replace the 72 pin in my NES within a year, I'd consider that a failure. Changing it 25 (or even 10!) years later isn't a failure, at that point it becomes maintenance.