• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

BBC: PS2 hype "never really materialised".

Zer0 said:
wtf :D explain pls

:D a little joke, having read the other thread. But it's not a great comparison, since of course no developer is trying to optimise for a top end PC from 2000 anymore. But well, an xbox is comparable to a mid to top range pc from 2000 and I don't think there's an argument over the xbox technically bettering the ps2.

Then again the PS2 really held up very well over the course of the years, no question about it.
 
hadareud said:
:D a little joke, having read the other thread. But it's not a great comparison, since of course no developer is trying to optimise for a top end PC from 2000 anymore. But well, an xbox is comparable to a mid to top range pc from 2000 and I don't think there's an argument over the xbox technically bettering the ps2.

Then again the PS2 really held up very well over the course of the years, no question about it.

its a good argument,xbox its superior to ps2 ( not in every aspect) thats for sure,but not extremelly superior as ps2 hataz want to belive
 
Anyone have the pic with the verticle PS2, the PS2 LCD monitor, the PS2 HDD, the PS2 keyboard and mouse and the PS2 network adapter?

Preferably with the caption "release November 2001"
 
PS2 didn't come close to living up to the ridiculous hype. Where that hype came from is irrelevant...some people in the media clearly had a vested interest to be spewing some of the shit that I was reading (50 times more powerful than Dreamcast? Bitch please). Having said that PS2's overhype wasn't nearly as bad as that of the N64, which is probably the most overhyped console in history.
 
jamesinclair said:
Anyone have the pic with the verticle PS2, the PS2 LCD monitor, the PS2 HDD, the PS2 keyboard and mouse and the PS2 network adapter?


13e.jpg

e3p2202.jpg
 
Shinobi said:
PS2 didn't come close to living up to the ridiculous hype. Where that hype came from is irrelevant...some people in the media clearly had a vested interest to be spewing some of the shit that I was reading (50 times more powerful than Dreamcast? Bitch please). Having said that PS2's overhype wasn't nearly as bad as that of the N64, which is probably the most overhyped console in history.

1.) PS2 was claimed to be 10 to 20 times more powerful than Dreamcast by Sony and most of the media. Next-Generation magazine was careful to point out, from the start in 1999, that PS2 would realistically be 5x more powerful than DC.

2.) the 50x Dreamcast comment was about PS2 handling 50x more 'image data' than Dreamcast. that was derived from graphics memory bandwidth: DC: 800 MB sec, PS2: 48 GB/sec. it wasnt about processing power.
 
xexex said:
1.) PS2 was claimed to be 10 to 20 times more powerful than Dreamcast by Sony and most of the media. Next-Generation magazine was careful to point out, from the start in 1999, that PS2 would realistically be 5x more powerful than DC.

2.) the 50x Dreamcast comment was about PS2 handling 50x more 'image data' than Dreamcast. that was derived from graphics memory bandwidth: DC: 800 MB sec, PS2: 48 GB/sec. it wasnt about processing power.

1. 10 to 20 times was still bullshit.

2. I didn't read "50 times in terms of handling image data"...I read 50 times, which when stated on it's own is gonna read to the vast majority of people as power relating to visuals. Of course, I also read the usual "IT DOES TOY STORY!!" type of lines that came along with it.

Again, where that bullshit came from is irrelevant...it was out there, and it went pretty much unchecked.
 
"People do seem to forget that Sony never said that was real time."

Perhaps not, but i guess this was in an era where people didn't think they were being decieved. And of course, what would be the point of putting out screen shots with a "oh, by the way , this isn't realtime" message when you are trying to sink the Dreamcast?

All we got in the UK press was "here are the screen shots of the Getaway on PS2".
I don't think many people went "hold on, these aren't real time." (unless it was just me who was naive at the time, i think the internet/gaf has possibly turned me into an old goat - i wasn't posting on GAF at that time)
 
inthezone said:
No emotion nor style, uh?... you should play the game.

As for the "hype" well it depends on your view really but games like Silent Hill 2, Silent Hill 3, RE4 (its on GC too but still), FFX, Shadow of the Colussuss, GOW, DMC series have completely justified the PS2 hype IMO.

I have the game, thx.

SotC has style, but SH does not float my boat style-wise. Dry and without emotion. Part is their purpose, but I don't like it.

I'm not jumping all over the PS2 hype thing, neg or pos. Style is totally seperate from tech prowess.
 
Sathsquatch said:
Does anyone remember how Trip Hawkins said that the PS2 was as revolutionary as the printing press and would change society in a fundamental way? No matter how bad the PS3 hype gets, it simply can't reach the level of retardation the PS2 hype got to.
That's the quote I was going to bring up, though I didn't remember it was Trip making it. Crazy man!
 
Agent Icebeezy said:

This can be done with the PS2 Linux Dev Kit. It seems the reason the whole thing didn't come to fruitition was because Sony didn't back a viable OS on the PS2 (Linux) and make it mainstream. This is being done though, full force, on the PS3 with the Cell based Linux OS.
 
Reilly said:
Regardless of the hype, the PS2 was and is the best console of this generation.

The best console this generation is definitely the Xbox. The best games though? Totally different question.
 
I think alot of that "hype" was targeted at japan. In japan the PS2 was huge in dvd adoption alone. Also at the time of the ps2 home pc's were not anywhere near as popular in japan as in the US. I think the ps2 lived up to the hype in japan where it filled a void, but in the US who the hell needed it for that extra stuff when most people already had a PC and dvd player. In japan it was perfect get a PS2 and i can finally have a reasonably priced dvd player, and it will have online capabilites and harddrive functionality. In the US it was like..yeah wheres the next MGS game i streamed a sneak peak on my computer , burned the SVCD and watched it on my dvd player gimme my maddenplzkthxgbye..
 
This thread is bunk! We all know that the EE killed AMD and Intel. In fact I have one in my PC right now. Trip Hawkins was right. The PS2 was the next printing press.
 
I find it amazing that:

A) Anyone would believe the hype.
B) Anyone would be surprised the PS2 didn't live up to the hype.

and especially

C) Anyone would claim that it did live up to the hype.

People are funny.
 
Trip Hawkins should bear a lot of the blame for the hype. Non real time screens (like the non real time E3 2K4 videos LOL) was bad on Sony's part though. And the whole "it will be like jacking into the matrix" was pure Kutaragi hype.
 
The awful controls and camera in The Getaway were more dissapointing than the graphics. The SCEE teams seem to have more trouble than not getting their games solid. There wasnt a HUGE downgrade in the graphics.

the_getaway08.jpg
 
Agent Icebeezy said:

Perfect!

Incidently, howd you find it? I hit gogole but came up short.

Now we just need the quotes from E3 2001 that promissed all that stuff in retail by November (including web browser) with downloadable movies/music coming 2002.
 
Speevy said:
While the PS2 has some very pretty games, it took the Xbox a whole day to technically outclass its entire library at the time (Halo). And while it's true that not every Xbox game showed the system's power, there are at least a couple dozen that make the difference clear.
:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol
also, i thought it was "all about the games" and not graphics
:lol
i just love you guys
 
With regard to "the games", the hype most certainly materialized.

Over 1,000 games in every conceivable genre (except for an exclusive FPS genre king and WRPG). The PS2 delivered with regard to game library. But the graphics of the PS2 have been much more about winning a fight against limitations than technical triumph.
 
Btw Gek, insult me all you want. I've posted nothing that's factually incorrect.

1) There are many pretty games on the PS2.
2) Halo (at the time it was released) was technically more advanced than any PS2 game to that point. Polygon counts, effects, bump mapping, size and scope, it was just phenomenal.
3) The PS2 is limited in certain ways specifically relating to textures, image quality, lighting, and the lack of many effects the Xbox and Gamecube utilize.
4) The library of the PS2 makes up for these limitations tenfold, which I pointed out, so in that way the system "lived up to the hype".
 
Sathsquatch said:
Read the whole post. It was like one or two lines in total.


I read it. He backs up his comments with absolutely nothing. He said The XBOX is the best console this generation. I asked why.
 
Reilly said:
I read it. He backs up his comments with absolutely nothing. He said The XBOX is the best console this generation. I asked why.
He was talking about hardware. He said the quality of the games was open to debate.
 
Reilly said:
I read it. He backs up his comments with absolutely nothing. He said The XBOX is the best console this generation. I asked why.


It's awesome!

:D

(Seriously, there's no way to prove to him that another console is better, because he obviously likes Xbox games more)
 
2) Halo (at the time it was released) was technically more advanced than any PS2 game to that point. Polygon counts, effects, bump mapping, size and scope, it was just phenomenal.
Not quite there bud.

There was but one and only one thing that Halo was doing that the PS2 could not and that was DX8 class perpixel lighting. There weren't even any PC games doing what Halo was doing at the time.

The polygon counts were NOT high at all and the size and scope had been matched already (though not in the same inspired way...but that wasn't hardware related).
 
Speevy said:
It's awesome!

:D

(Seriously, there's no way to prove to him that another console is better, because he obviously likes Xbox games more)

No, I like (largely) PS2 games more, but I wish that library had been made on Xbox hardware, with better graphics, Hard Drive, 5.1 and broadband. You know, FTW...

Xbox console is better than PS2 console

PS2 games library is better than Xbox games library.

It's important to note, that in spite of protestations to the contrary from certain other manufacturers, great hardware can improve gameplay. It can increase immersion, aesthetic flexibility, load times, connectivity, lots of directly gameplay related stuff.
 
It's not necessarily about graphics, even though I must say the hype surrounding the graphics never did materialize, yes it was much better than the DC but the hype was much grander than that.

And even then things were said about internet and how everybody would order their games online, and live in a cyberspace, those things might still happen but they were clearly point out to be last generation and that didn't materialize. They've already said PS3 would be 1000 times as powerful as PS2 5 years ago. The thing is, even if you're setting your stakes high, there's a lot of overpromising that happens on the part of Sony that we should take with a grain of salt(we didn't do that with PS2).
 
Sathsquatch said:
I know, but that's not what he was doing when he wrote that post. He was talking about hardware.

Actually I'd say even the hardware is debatable as the PS2 does some things quite a bit nicer than the Xbox. Though the Xbox also a good amount of things better than the PS2.

For instance, from my experience PS2 games have nicer image quality on an HDTV than Xbox games for the most part because of the way they are rendered. PS2 games are sharp and crisp, while Xbox games tend to be muddy looking.
 
Xbox progressive scan looks much nicer than PS2 progressive scan or not on an HDTV IMO. And the extra sharpness and lowres look of many PS2 games actually make it look nicer on an SDTV, not HDTV. That is why I am not using my PS2 on my WS WEGA tv as it looks awful awful awful, while the GC and Xbox look very very nice on it.
 
dark10x said:
Not quite there bud.

There was but one and only one thing that Halo was doing that the PS2 could not and that was DX8 class perpixel lighting. There weren't even any PC games doing what Halo was doing at the time.

The polygon counts were NOT high at all and the size and scope had been matched already (though not in the same inspired way...but that wasn't hardware related).


I didn't say "could not". I said "did not".
 
Bebpo said:
Actually I'd say even the hardware is debatable as the PS2 does some things quite a bit nicer than the Xbox. Though the Xbox also a good amount of things better than the PS2.

For instance, from my experience PS2 games have nicer image quality on an HDTV than Xbox games for the most part because of the way they are rendered. PS2 games are sharp and crisp, while Xbox games tend to be muddy looking.

I respect your opinion, but the Xbox does almost every single hardware-related task better than the PS2. Including image quality. But then the Xbox doesn't have MGS3 or RE4 or Katamari or.......etc.
 
SkinSider said:
I respect your opinion, but the Xbox does almost every single hardware-related task better than the PS2.

This is utterly false.

Where would you get such a silly notion?
 
I've got an idea.

Instead of goading people, why doesn't the first person who said the PS2 is equal to the Xbox in terms of hardware, and even image quality, PROVE it.
 
Top Bottom