PS2 (contrary to popular belief) was the console that had the least correctly used hardware in history

Still the console with the worst picture quality of its gen, by far.

You said it. Piss poor screen res and jaggies everywhere. A major step down from the wonderful crisp clean DC 480P display.
The PS2 was the N64 of its day for crap display output and low-res graphics. It did push a ton of polygons to be fair mind LOL
 
[Eagerly awaits Silent Hill 2 shot of nodding man...]
First off he is shaking his head and....
tenor.gif

its Silent Hill 3
LUCurDH.gif
 
Last edited:
I need to re buy a PS2. Are they easy to set up via HDMI for modern TVs?
Lots of ways, cheap and expensive

But only the most expensive will actually make it look better. PS2's video output sucks.


This is what I use on PS2
 
More than anything the question is what an AAA PS2 game made with modern software looks like.
What can your AAA studio do with 8.5GB worth of PS2 game, no patches, no updates ever?
Hey now - no patches is hardly an AAA game :messenger_relieved:
But in all seriousness - a 'modern' retro console (with appropriate target specs - not just recycled off the shelf-GPU) is something I'd have liked to see too. The PlayDate is kind of the same concept, and the software for it has a charm that none of the modern consoles do. But not exactly mainstream appeal either of course.

Sony's had an updated EE GS with 32MB eDram since 2000 but for obvious reasons they couldn't change PS2 HW.
Fixed that for you.
Anyway a 'PS2 Pro' was actually conceptualised in variety of prototypes. Some that even got made, sort of - like the PSX. And like the Pro's we eventually got over a decade later - they could have released something that would get bespoke 'pro enabled' versions of games, while still maintaining BC with the 'amateur'. Probably wasn't worth the hassle when already outselling all of competition combined by more than 3:1 though.

Cerny's points make no logical sense - PS1/2 are the obvious sweet spots for fastest game dev times at the lowest prices.
Cerny was referencing 'time to polygon' metric - not 'time to publish a 100M budget title'.

Sony could either buy or reverse engineer RenderWare and modernize it to make the world's best PS2 middleware engine. Making this PS2 engine available to developers for free would effectively be adding a 5% bonus to their earnings by making Unreal unnecessary while stopping games from becoming ubiquitous across x86 platforms. Sony owning PS2 development from the get-go would make it a platform built on PS2 exclusives where Unreal would never be able to catch up and syphon away games and profits.
Ok at this point I don't know if my sarcasm meter's off - but in the unlikely chance you're serious. Sony owns plenty of tech that could take that role if they wanted it to. But clearly it's not a strategy they chose to pursue. And given the historical precedent of companies that have failed to do this... repeatedly... over decades - I can't say I blame them really, it's a LOT easier said than done. Or rather - it's never been successfully done yet - period.
 
One of the things that anyone can observe is that games like Alone in the Dark 2001 didn't use the power of the PS2, many ports that came early from the Dreamcast were released just to try to make easy money even games from 2003 like Sonic Heroes, Burnout 2001, Ridge Race V. They are not games that use the PS2 hardware and in a way they serve as negative marketing where the dev's skill tarnishes the console's reputation.

The truth is that making a PS2 game look good on the screen required much more effort than making a game look good on other sixth generation consoles, add all this to a huge number of shovelware and we have as a result the most underused console in history, paradoxically the best-selling console in history.
 
Wouldn't surprise me. The library was great, but it was the worst hardware by far at the time and the worst place for any multiplats. Playing Soul Calibur 2 on PS2 and Xbox was a huge difference. Gamecube had a better looking RE4. Etc.
PS2 had a better looking Hot Pursuit 2. 3rd parties that prioritized it did decent at least.
 
PS2 Hot Pursuit 2 was a completely different game, it shared almost nothing with the other version except for car roster.
but the other NFS are the same game, ps2 version ran with all the effects, it's true that the xbox version is better but the important thing is the quality of the use, ps2 hardware in these games was above average.
 
PS2 was heavily criticized during its first months for the graphic quality of its games and the Dreamcast ports... but as soon as Gran Turismo 3 came out, the haters fell silent.
 
PS2 had a better looking Hot Pursuit 2. 3rd parties that prioritized it did decent at least.

I remember being so confused when I had Need For Speed HP2 on Xbox & it looked bland after I had played the PS2 demo months before & it looked really good.
 
Last edited:
I feel like "Crazy" Ken Kutaragi was a genius far ahead of his time.

I can't wait until the PS2 homebrew scene takes off and we can finally see its true potential!
This is not happening, the homebrew scene is basically Sega fans , N64 fans, you know Sega left the console market in 2001, while Sony and Nintendo are still active. What happened to the PS2 was a tragedy because of the thousands of games, no more than two hundred are actually pure PS2 games.
 
What your talking about? The game is a same, and more crisp on PS2 in 480i CRT due to field rendering and no mipmapping, also, the game running on PS2 hardware in the arcade version.

1mjaqFP.png

9SwQmV1.png


PS2

uosbplu.png


GameCube

VNuOST9.png


Xbox

3vOtSCP.png


What a F huge difference man... 🙃



Of course, because is a GameCube exlusive game. The final game was never project to be on the PS2. The port is made by a Capcom second team on Inafume direction, less than 6 months after the GameCube Release.
To be fair, the fine print at the bottom of the first two pictures, points out that they purposely are not running the Xbox version at 720p, for a like for like comparison.
 
but the other NFS are the same game, ps2 version ran with all the effects, it's true that the xbox version is better but the important thing is the quality of the use, ps2 hardware in these games was above average.
Right BlackBox was very good at targeting the PS2, there are even PS2 exclusive effects on later titles like the reflections on Underground 2. I just don't feel its right to compare HP2 since it's a completely different game, like comparing apples to oranges.
 
yes it is true, only Shadow of the Colossus, MGS3 and Hitman made decent use of the console, all those 60fps games you know could have been even better at 25~30fps all them.

There are many factors, whether related to planning or causality.

The initial dev kits were broken, generating games that were noticeably below what we see in future games with the exception of Tekken Tag where the developer really defended the honor of the series his merit, not the dev kit's.

the causal reasons were strictly commercial, it was enough to make a functional game and sell it
an example was Sonic Heroes, a game completely made out of spite, it sold almost 3M more on the ps2 than the sum of the other versions and the examples only grow.
this was the central reason why the ps2 was almost unexplored.

Difficulty programming

Working with the PlayStation 2 required time and money, its texturing system required care that most devs were not willing to take, making proper use of VU's was not something that many devs did. Despite, the developer called ERP said that there was a positive point, updated dev kits gave the developer a fabulous range of activities, almost everything could be done, so we return to the initial question again , reasons strictly commercial.

Conspiracy theory

There is a theory that Sony vetoed the use of techniques that imitated shaders and bump mapping in order to present such techniques as new on the PS3.
Yes, the PS2 didn't have dot3 but due to the fill rate the PS2 could implement this technique, completely modifying any game but Sony vetoed.
Another supposedly vetoed technique concerns texturing. The technique was developed in 2005 and would be a game changer, but at the end of 2006 Sony would launch the PS3.


PS2 (contrary to popular belief) was the console that had the least correctly used hardware in history.
Stopped reading at the bolded.
 
Last edited:
To be fair, the fine print at the bottom of the first two pictures, points out that they purposely are not running the Xbox version at 720p, for a like for like comparison.
They were all great versions on their respective hardware strengths IMO.

PS2 had the best fx/specular highlights, best draw distance resulting in the best track cam positioning, but with weakest texture filtering, and probably the highest polygon counts, but the more vibrant crushed colours and less concentrated specular highlights on the others make it harder to be sure. Heihachi was an excellent bonus character. It was my 2nd main version I played because few games supported Progressive scan in my library and 480i on projector even by component was rubbish, so was used only on TV, as fighting gaming with latency using a progressive scaler from s-video wasn't suitable.

Cube version as always was the best middle ground, greatest texture filtering and best bonus character, but neither had the higher resolution of the Xbox or the advantages of the PS2 version, but was my main version being the console with the best support of progressive scan across my imported library for projector use.

Xbox version was the cleanest image -especially on projector at 720p - even if it lacked advantages of the PS2 version and had the most generic of bonus characters, and it lacked the better texture filtering of the Cube - but it wasn't noticeable because of the higher render resolution making the textures look great - but it did have the weakest default pad and so was the version me and friends played least, but might have been my choice had I owned one and had a arcade stick for it.
 
They were all great versions on their respective hardware strengths IMO.

PS2 had the best fx/specular highlights, best draw distance resulting in the best track cam positioning, but with weakest texture filtering, and probably the highest polygon counts, but the more vibrant crushed colours and less concentrated specular highlights on the others make it harder to be sure. Heihachi was an excellent bonus character. It was my 2nd main version I played because few games supported Progressive scan in my library and 480i on projector even by component was rubbish, so was used only on TV, as fighting gaming with latency using a progressive scaler from s-video wasn't suitable.

Cube version as always was the best middle ground, greatest texture filtering and best bonus character, but neither had the higher resolution of the Xbox or the advantages of the PS2 version, but was my main version being the console with the best support of progressive scan across my imported library for projector use.

Xbox version was the cleanest image -especially on projector at 720p - even if it lacked advantages of the PS2 version and had the most generic of bonus characters, and it lacked the better texture filtering of the Cube - but it wasn't noticeable because of the higher render resolution making the textures look great - but it did have the weakest default pad and so was the version me and friends played least, but might have been my choice had I owned one and had a arcade stick for it.
Dude what do you smoke?
Higher polycounts on PS2? Better FX? Best draw distance? Loo At this point I am sure you are just trolling.

The PS2 version is the only only one of the 3 that has framerate drops at some points (very rarely but they are there) also runs at a laughable interlaced internal resolution, Heihachi was a great addition, I'll give you that.
 
Until it's Swan song and one of the greatest games of all time…… God of War. At the time, I couldn't believe the graphics, all the on screen action with hardly any real stutter , the game was just beautiful , and the gameplay was so so fluid.
 
Last edited:
Look, man. PS2 had Silent Hill 2 and Final Fantasy XI. If those were the result of incorrect usage, I'd wish more devs had used it incorrectly.
FFXI was such a technical marvel for a PS2 game.

Day/night/weather cycles, footprints in snow/sand/water puddles, characters breathing and seeing their breath in cold environments, realistic/weighty animations, absolutely bonkers sized zones, the amount of characters the game could show on screen at any given time...

That shit blew my mind.
 
Dude what do you smoke?
Higher polycounts on PS2? Better FX? Best draw distance? Loo At this point I am sure you are just trolling.

The PS2 version is the only only one of the 3 that has framerate drops at some points (very rarely but they are there) also runs at a laughable interlaced internal resolution, Heihachi was a great addition, I'll give you that.
I agree with him, the PS2 version even in 480i has more details, better textures and color depth
but Tekken 4 was a better game, the first one in 480p.
 
Last edited:
FFXI was such a technical marvel for a PS2 game.

Day/night/weather cycles, footprints in snow/sand/water puddles, characters breathing and seeing their breath in cold environments, realistic/weighty animations, absolutely bonkers sized zones, the amount of characters the game could show on screen at any given time...

That shit blew my mind.
Now imagine that + the first MMO ever as a young lad.

it was like magic to me.
 
Top Bottom