>was the weakest of the three consoles of it's generations
>it was infamous for being hard to develop for due to it's poor architecture
>hardware was shit and a mess with a high failure rate, especially with earlier models
>optical drives constantly having problems
>some famous devs even went out of their ways to force publishers to not make them release games for it
>and yet it was the most popular console of all time
>cheap dvd player
>advertising, hype, and some retarded claims like being able to fire missles with the device's power
>established brand name
There you go. I personally am iffy on the console, because of its shit spec, but I love some of the titles that came for it.
DC never got anywhere near the graphical demand of the PS2. The DC also had a shitty proprietary disc in an attempt to kill piracy.
The PS2 also had one of the strongest launch line up of a system that I can remember. Picking anything else was just being wrong.
It was popular due to effective marketing and its functionality as a DVD player.
It also ended up having the best selection of games available on any console, but that came afterwards.
Insn't that why consoles are made for?
It took PS2 games around a year to look as good as DC games. Most devs had major problems with the hardware in the beginning. Of course, later games looked better than DC games but still early PS2 games were pretty disappointing in regard to graphics.
OK? That doesn't really prove me wrong. Most consoles have rocky third party development at the start, Sony ones in particular. DC didn't have a ton of third party, what was was also available on the same old-gen consoles, and I think it may have been easier to figure out since it was windows based.
>it was infamous for being hard to develop for due to it's poor architecture
when did "good architecture" helped in the popularization of a platform?, ever heard what carmack said about early iphone opengl and shit?
DC was running windows CE and directx, didn't do shit to make the platform successful, that's why "its like a PC" is always bullshit and irrelevant marketing shit
I was just trying to give you some info on the graphics discussion.
Also, there is no right or wrong. I owned all four consoles of the generation and got each of them on release. All of them had great exclusives worth playing.
24 y/o here. PS2 is practically my SNES. Still playing good shit on it to this day.
I recognize of course that multiplats were bad. But most multiplats were western dog shit anyway. The good stuff like Splinter Cell Chaos Theory was few and far between.
>Cheap DVD player
Pretty much this.
Playstation = First affordable CD console.
Playstation 2 = Cheap DVD player.
Playstation 3 = Cheap Blu-ray player.
Playstation 4 = The not-Xbone console.
If the Playstation brand has survived to these days is more by pure luck or thanks to the ineptitude of their rivals than anything else.
PS2 dominated the RPG market. If there was a familiar name in the era, it was either Gamecube or Playstation. Xbox had tons of new IPs and was the best for multi-plats that weren't developed on the GC, but it was the dude bro console. Hell, Halo started that shit. PS2 had the largest number of "bestest game of all time"s.
SOCOM was dope, too.
>If the Playstation brand has survived to these days is more by pure luck or thanks to the ineptitude of their rivals than anything else.
Isn't that the case with every other company ever made?
I might be wrong but if I rememebr correctly, the PS3 did beat the 360 at the very end of the generation, it just took a really long time for it to catch up. The difference was barely even there though.
1 year isn't much later, many people don't buy a new console in the first year of release because there are not many games and the console prices are just absurd. The PS2 was released at $299, which by then was a little fortune.
>Fighting games SF Anniversary collection, KoF Collections, CvS2
>DDR/Gitaroo Man/countless music games
>Grand Theft Auto 3, Vice City, San Andreas
>Dat perfect ps2 controller design
>Countless, countless other games.
Sure it got some crappier versions of multiplats but at that time I was a teenager and I was happy to be playing RE4 on a PS2 controller.
You're terrible at trolling.
Yeah PS3 overtook 360 in 2013 I think, but Xbox had a one year headstart.
7th gen was really competitive, 8th is already over.
2016 for Xbone is the equivalent of 2009 for PS3, by then it had a big library of excellent exclusives.
I hope the NX is a proper console and not a weird "bonus" thing you have in addition to a primary gaming device like the Wii and Wii-U.
But how can you say that Timesplitters is a reason to buy a PS2 when it's sequels are available elsewhere? Especially when the sequels are actually regarded as being better games.
to be fair, the dreamcast is to 6th gen as the wii-u is to 8th.
I don't think anyone bought a ps1 just for the CD player, without in-built speakers it wouldn't be very appealing even if it was cheap.
But people bought the Ps2 just for the DVD player because it was the cheapest option, playing games was a bonus and "something the kids will enjoy".
Because of pirating
Games outside countries like USA or Japan were extremely expensive back then, so people had to choose the cheapest console for gaming
Since the PS2 was easy to pirate (just like the PS1) and DVD burners made it even easier, the console had huge amount of sales in places like South America, Eastern Europe and Middle East
This. I'm from Eastern Europe, you could even buy pirated copies with boxes and cover art for like 10 dollars at the time, also the same stores sold original copies and fresh consoles however most people went there to get modded consoles, we even had repair shops that would mod consoles for you and other shit, it was a glorious time. Then I started burning games myself and I had like 100+ burned PS2 games which all worked flawlessly.
>>was the weakest of the three consoles of it's generations
I wasn't. Your 2nd meme arrow explains the sole reason why were the PS2 versions of multiplats most of the time worse. If we are talking about raw horsepower, it outshines GC and even some departments of Xbox with no issues.
RE4 is a former GC exclusive with a PS2 version as an afterthought. I don't believe it had infinite anything, but comparing stuff like GFLOPS or polys/s clearly shows a difference in favor of PS2.
What does it matter?
In the end, PC always wins.
This "gen" was over before it even started. How many so called exclusives are already on PC? More and more are getting there every year. Xbone no longer has Tomb Raider and how long is it really until Bloodborne moves to PC. What will the consoles have then?
Nintenbabbies need not apply as nobody cares.
>>optical drives constantly having problems
I suppose you're talking about DRE and the lawsuit regarding that.
DRE happens mostly on 50k models and some early slims because Sony's engineers went a bit too far with the anti-piracy modifications to the main board which also affected legitimate users. Anything before but mostly after those models is safe from these issues.
>RE4 is a former GC exclusive with a PS2 version as an afterthought.
All other ports were made for the PS2 then ported to the Xbox and GC as an afterthough.
They still shat all over the Ps2 versions, visually and in performance.
>but comparing stuff like GFLOPS
Which is FP performance, which Sony claimed it was almost "infinite" and gave the 6.5 GFLOPS figure. Which of course no software on it ever came close to getting it.
Again, no game on the PS2 ever came close to getting the figure Sony gave.
GC and Xbox had games in their first years with 10 million polys per second, no PS2 game ever went above 5 million in a game.
>Which of course no software on it ever came close to getting it.
6.2 to be precise and that figure is actually correct, it just requires a shitload of parallelization across the EE and VUs and a lot of skill and hand-crafted assembly if you want to efficiently pair the code which is near impossible in game development.
>no game on the PS2 ever came close to getting the figure Sony gave
I'd doubt that, even though precalculating data on the VU1 before it goes to GS (Path 1) is quite difficult, it's nowhere near impossible.
I find it funny that the only games i'm interested in are only coming out for PS4.
Aside from Scalebound I haven't really cared so much about what's coming out for PC and XBONE.
PS2 always felt "cheap" to me. Like it was one of those weird obscure consoles that look like a VCR, but this time around it just happened to take off. The thing felt like it would always break whenever I touched it.
It is universally regarded as the best of the three and some people claim that it has the best library of any console to ever be released.
I don't know who you've been talking to or what you have been reading but obviously you're a Nintendrone/Xbox faggot who has never owned a ps2.
So much ignorance it fucking hurts
Playstation has always had better exclusives than Xbox. Even if xbox had better hardware for the 360 (and it was marginal at best), the PS4 blows the xbone out of the water. Xbox can't even compete with playstation right now.
>Reason to buy a ps2
Nigga he was just spouting off exclusives that made the PS2 worth while at the time, a single never justified the purchase of a console (unless it's MGS1-4).
Alright pc uck, tell me what exclusives have actually come out FOR the PC other than your meme iPhone-grade games like Undertale, papers please, and prison architect, or your shit-tier early-access open world games like ARK (which is going to have a PS4 release anyway) that are even worth playing?
There are no worthwhile PC exclusives anymore. There is a reason why you never see consolefags bitching about not getting a specific game whereas all you pc ucks do is cry about console exclusives.
I bought my PS2 and PS3 because I knew MGS was an exclusive on those systems along with many other great titles.
Xbox had Gears and Halo, both are mediocre and became dated very quickly.
Fast forward to today, nobody cares about halo or gears anymore, the Xbone has no exclusives worth playing. The system is dead in the water. Meanwhile PS4 has an amazing lineup of exclusives for 2016.
>PC always wins
Tell me some big name PC exclusives coming out. Only thing I've waiting for is Star Citizen.
Tell me when last time consolefags were begging for a PC game, and not vice versa.
If it wasn't for console ports and Steam, PC gaming would be dead.
And this is coming from an idort.
Mustards are fucking cancer.
>how long is it really until Bloodborne
Try never because Sony.
I love how you're trying to imply PC wins when in your very post you're hoping for console games.
In terms of gameplay destiny is...refreshing compared to Halo, but it suffers where the original Halo games' succeed in story and lore.
Also it looks like they change multiplayer gameplay in 5 a lot, don't know how it works though since I don't have a Xbone