/vr/ - Retro Games

>>10122569
>It only outperforms the Dreamcast
Also the GameCube. Coming 2nd out of 4 isn't bad.

>>10122569
Idk PS2 hardware seems reasonable to me for a console that was released 1.5 years earlier than GC and Xbox. The only thing that is really lacking is framebuffer size. Also it started being developed around the same time as Dreamcast.

>>10122569
what do you mean,PS2 had some impressive games like the silent hill,mgs,and if the gamecube is so good why didnt it had burnout 3.

>>10122569
>PS2 launched with 3x as many launch titles as the GameCube would launch with a whole 1 year later, including system seller Tekken Tag.
>Hardware launch price was expensive compared to competition (if you consider the Dreamcast competition, which by 2000 had already flopped).
>Consumers were arguably desperate for the next big thing and I think there's suitable grounds to say that the PS2 avoided any potential of another 1983 stagnation/crash.
>games and peripherals were dirt cheap at RRP.
>Price drop came relatively quickly after launch and further huge titles that came out in 2001 (MGS2, SH2, THPS3, GTA3, GT3) along with sniping entire genre markets such as jrpg and horror, were monumental to its success. No competitor had the library it was already amassing regardless of hardware.
>Dvd player built-in media format made it easy for Devs to make games for the hardware (compared to Nintendo's record in 5th gen of awkward hardware and media format (cartridge) along with anti-piracy/Dev format discs with the gcn).
>Nintendo also having a weird policy of being anti-adult games at the time
Compare how successful PS2 was and it's price point along with library to the PS3, and then look at how badly PS3 did in its first couple of years. The right price, features, and most importantly library of exclusive games work in combination to ensure success. PS3 was gadget packed and sold poorly to begin with due to price. 5th gen 3DO sold poorly due to a list of factors too long to type. Now fast forward to today and MS can't compete with Sony due to a handful of exclusives despite buying up half the AAA industry. Solely because they launch everything cross-platform on pc too.

>>10122569
>why is a system that came out almost 2 years before its competition weaker than them?

I would argue the only “problem” it really had is being unnecessarily complex from an architecture perspective, apparently Sony had a “it’ll weed out the shitters from the big boys” type attitude which seems really stupid given how the PSX was well documented as being quite easy to develop for, however at that point they had built a massive lead and had good will to burn through. As other anons have mentioned as well, the name of the game is the games and Sony ensured they had exclusives. We’ve seen difficult architectures cause massive issues for consoles historically however Sony was basically Too Big to Fail at this point.

>>10122605
>5th gen 3DO sold poorly due to a list of factors too long to type.

I’m seriously laughing at this comment! It’s such a strange system and I didn’t know anyone then or now who had/has one. Most guys had Genesis, SNES, or PS1 at the time of 3DO.

>>10122584
Games looked better on GCN than Ps2.

>>10122569
most powerful or well-designed console rarely if ever won a console war. usually it was the cheapest one.
NES: a huge clusterfuck, mappers and all, SMS games looked way better anyway
SNES: much harder than Genesis to program for—which is probably the main reason it gets much less homebrew these days. slower CPU than Genesis too. and btw, Mega Drive even got outsold hard by PCE in Japan. where's your god now?
PS1: lots of good and lots of bad. famous for texture distortion. not exactly great 3D, perhaps worse than N64. but good for devs. at least it was better than Saturn which was the clusterfuck of the 5th gen.
PS2: notorious clusterfuck, but still the best selling console of all time. Xbox was a literal PC with the best graphics, selling at a loss—and it still lost.
on the other hand…
PS3: literally proved no one will pay $599 for slightly better specs, even if you have PS brand and the competitor is a meme console from Bill "Vaxman" Gates.
Moral of the story: HW is secondary. all the matters is the games and the console price. if the opponent has less games and sells for $100 more they will lose.

>>10122731
>PS2: notorious clusterfuck, but still the best selling console of all time. Xbox was a literal PC with the best graphics, selling at a loss—and it still lost.
>on the other hand…
Ps2 released like two years ahead, and the Xbox graphics didn't look that much better.

>>10122725
Name five multiplats that look better on GCN. Hardmode: none of the Capcom five.

>>10122731
>PS2: notorious clusterfuck, but still the best selling console of all time.
It only sold that well because it doubled as a DVD player

>>10122752
there he goes again. "but muh DVD player!!!" cope. let me guess, you had GC and are still butthurt everyone played on PS2, not your bing bang wahoo machine?

>>10122751
I meant games in general. Metroid Prime, for example. Ps2 wasn't good at anti aliasing, so lots of games look pretty pixelated.

>>10122732
No, let's be serious.
Be it Halo, DoA2 or even Amped.
Those launch games were already half a generation ahead of what the PS2 could offer at its best.
I'm not talking about art direction, just about the technical aspect of games.

>>10122752
PS1 BTFOd the N64 and it didn’t have a DVD player. Why is it impossible for the PS2 to just have a good library like the PS1?

>>10122757
I meant DoA3

>>10122757
Halo? You mean the library?

PS1 design was not good but having a monopoly on CD and DVD was the reason they were successful in fact sony's first good design was the PSP

>>10122758
It does pain me to see the ps1 vs the ps2 library. Ps2 library is “ok” to me, but it’s just not the same level of what the fuck discovery you have with the ps1. Adding in a bunch of JP stuff like sega ages and shmups helps the ps2 but again, it feels like the corporate culling had already set in by ps2 time.

>>10122761
I'm afraid I don't understand your question.

>>10122751
Beyond Good And Evil
Sands Of Time
Viewtiful Joe 2
Metal Arms
Sonic Heroes -> 30FPS on PS2 while 60 on GC (seriously wtf?)

There are more, but you asked for only 5.

>>10122772
I still think the PS2 has a lot of great games but I know what you mean. It’s also when modern game design and feel started

>>10122753
stop being a console warrior for a system that released over 20 years ago, it's so tiring

>>10122605
::buy up half the industry. Only release one exclusive in like 2 years and it is one of the lowest rated games of all time::

Yea Microsoft seems hellbent on killing their own product like blizzard, ironically which they are trying to buy. Yea just look at old release windows it’s insane how many triple a titles were coming out for each system during the ps2 era. But in the end hardware is pretty irrelevant if you don’t have any game or you have all the games. Ps3 is a great example like you said.

>>10122605
I like the PS3 library better but the console was a pain to use
>PSN was dogshit
>Poor multiplatform performance
>PS3 control was shit
Modding is free on it which makes it a good value for money even though it doesn't have the native VGA input of the XBOX.

>>10122752
I disagree even flops sold 1 million copies PS1 on the other hand was a glorified CD player

>>10122772
it's true, this has been discussed here before. PS2 felt less experimental than PS1.
I think this boils down to the sales. PS1 had a lot of titles that were new IPs from new devs; they came out of nowhere and became huge hits. Even crazier stuff like Oddworld sold big. In Japan, games like Parappa or Intelligent Cube were surprisingly big sellers too. So making crazier, more daring games was worth it, especially in the new era of 3D on a new Sony console, where anything could be tried.
But then came PS2, and it just felt so much more "corporate". So many of the best sellers on it were sequels—GT3/4, MGS2/3, FFX/XII, Tekken 5, and so on. But worst of all, even those games got overshadowed by the elephant in the room—GTA, the harbinger of the dudebro era to come. Sports games were on the rise too. But original games were flopping, and arcades were slowly but surely dying.
You'd think Japan would fix this, but they were even worse. All that sold there was Dynasty Warriors, Musou Orochi and other KOEI slop. That and PES.
It's not to say it was all bad; there was definitely a LOT of good games on PS2. but still, sadly this was the gen when soul died.

>>10122831
People used the PS1 as a (primary) cd player?
Sytem playing CDs sounded more like a novelty thing to me.

>>10122752
>>10122831
>PS1 was a glorified CD player
>PS2 was a glorified DVD player
>PS3 was a glorified Blu-Ray player
>no one ever played a single game on Sony consoles
>everyone only ever played on Nintendo consoles

>>10122858
This is kind of true for the PS1 and PS3

>>10122837
I agree.
Some amazing titles were born and died on the PS2 and the endless series of sequels won. As much as I like this gen, originality died there.

>>10122858
you forgot SEGA, why are you so obsessed with Nintendo?

>>10122731
>PS3
>slightly better specs
citation needed

>>10122931
I think around year 2000 there was a small heyday for that kind of original games. I think this is why Sega went and created Seaman, for example. it sold pretty well in Japan, too. Or why they made crazy looking games like Jet Set Radio or Samba de Amigo and Space Channel 5, but those never got much traction. sadly I guess same happened to most other "weirdo" PS2 games like Dog's Life, Mr. Mosquito and so on.
Also it felt like in PS1 era, new genres were being created left and right. You had sudden rise of horror games in RE/SH, rhythm games in Bemani / DDR / Parappa, Pokemon-esque games and Yu-Gi-Oh, and so on—and they all could sell big. hell, even Puzzle games like Intelligent Cube, Devil Dice and Doko Demo Issho could sell a lot.
Then came PS2, and… picrelated. the slop had won.

>>10122780
>Beyond Good And Evil
looks the same on ps2
>Sands Of Time
has ps2 exclusive effects
>Viewtiful Joe 2
doesn't look good on any console
>Metal Arms
only advanced version is xbox
>Sonic Heroes -> 30FPS on PS2 while 60 on GC (seriously wtf?)
bad game only cubekids bring up despite it being best on xbox

>>10122984
>looks the same on ps2
At worse framerates, but you only look at screenshots right?
Also downplaying the other examples with "but the game looks shit", "XBOX has the best version", "Lazy DEVS"
Keep moving goalposts if that makes you feel better.

>>10122953
Sega hasn't been relevant past Genesis. It was a glorified door stopper
>>10122968
Look, I'm not gonna go into this. Perhaps it was the same as X360. All I'm saying is that in 2006 or so it was hyped as being more powerful. Turned out to be classic Sony marketing bullshit on the level of "PS2 can aim ballistic missiles". I just remember everyone got sick of Sony even despite those rumors that PS3 was technically more powerful.

>>10122987
if you want the best looking version of beyond good and evil, xbox wins by having exclusive effects.

true crime ny
gauntlet dark legacy
tony hawk underground
spider-man 2
007 nightfire
crash wrath of cortex
baldurs gate dark alliance
spyhunter

all inferior on cube by a huge margin. Nobody actually wants to play sonic heroes, its victory is pointless because the game is terrible.

>>10122995
>Name five multiplats that look better on GCN (compared to PS2)
Gives 5 examples
>Noooo that doesn't count since they are bad and/or look better on xbox

Really?

>>10122992
PS3 could peak higher but for 99% of games 360 ran better. Maybe because of RAM? PS3 had 256MB and 360 had 512MB.

>>10122752
PIRACY, PES AND FIFA

>>10123017
complicated design vs the 360, and the ps3 GPU wasn't even all that great

>>10122837
>>10122931
here I have the real psx sales, you can call whole Argentina, Mexico, Portugal and Italia to check it.

>>10123023
Didn't Xbox use an arm chip like PS3

>>10123019
>muh piracy
>muh DVD player
>same attach ratio as GC
now move the goal post to "b-but at least [muh platform] had better games"

>>10123028
>Didn't Xbox use an arm chip like PS3
360 used a "conventional" PowerPC CPU

ps3 had this weird cell CPU that nobody knew how to use properly for a long time
It was a design mess to be honest. Originally the Cell was also supposed to handle the graphics, once they found out it didnt perform as hoped they had to slap in a real GPU later in the design stage.

>>10123001
wanting to play a game should be a good baseline yes

>>10123041
But not in scope of the original question.
To be fair the original question was a snarky comment to begin with.

>>10123039
I think early PS3 also had super expensive devkits that were in short supply which probably didn't help.

>>10123039
Cell was weird. You can tell they bet a lot on it. Sony said it would be put into TVs, fridges, etc… sounds very much like modern "smart" fridges, you know. Then it came out and turned out it was about same as X360. no one even talked about Cell after that.
Either they overhyped it way too hard, or they actually thought they made some groundbreaking CPU. Regardless, I think Snoy deserved a slap in the face, they had it too good for too long and got a bit complacent.
>>10123052
>PS1 had amazing devkits that were widely available and helped revolutionize gemdev
>PS3: is the opposite
JUST

>>10122569
You're completely right OP, the PS2 was only the best selling console in industry history for 20 years. Sony really could have done better.
Saged you fuckin retard.

>>10122731
>most powerful or well-designed console rarely if ever won a console war. usually it was the cheapest one.
This. See Game Boy vs. Game Gear.
Price > Games >>> Specs

>>10123024
That is actually really nice to see, some kid put effort in those.

>>10123024
Holy fucking sovl

>>10122838
For the time and a while after (not sure about now) the PS1 was an excellent CD player with great quality and controls. Later models even got a visualizer to prevent screen burn in.

>>10122569
I grew up around the PS2. By far it had the biggest library of games, and more exciting games for teenagers. It might not appear that way now when you are browsing a rom site. Kids would ask for a console because they desired certain games. Older folks at the time still preferred PC gaming. Later gens is when video games fixated on graphics, became a nerdy hobby, brown and bloom, and lost its soul.

>>10123039
>>10123080
The Cell, analogously, was an extreme version of Intel's P/E-Cores now. The PPE was a regular full fat core with all the instructions available. The 7 SPE were massively cut back in instructions. Many things that are easy to run on the PPE are slow or impossible on SPE. Needs quite a bit of manual wrangling to separate works that SPE can do. Also, no branch prediction. On a 40-stage long pipeline. This makes the already complex CPU even slower.
Meanwhile Microsoft took a look at Sony's leak and told IBM "Hey, can we get 3 of the PPE?"

>>10122569
Ps2 could play movies, and that's all any Sony console had ever needed to do

>>10123497
can you explain so that a jrpg playin consolefag like me could understand?

>>10122569

>why is the PS2 HW subpar

It isn't, and it wasn't, not at the time of release anyway. It was mind blowing at the time of release, especially for an affordable and modestly sized console.

You neglect the fact that it was released nearly 2 years before the others, and 1-2 years was a LONG time in hardware back then. Look at the difference between Half Life 1 and Half Life 2. That was only 6 years of advancement. Graphics hardware was moving so fast that despite only being a year older, the PS2 was almost a different generation compared to GC and XB.

This stuff is not comparable to modern gaming timeframes and hardware expectations where the basic architechture is fundamentally a solved problem, and each manufacturer is just offering a different configuration and price point for the same parts. Back then it was all bespoke, new shit was still being developed, and the PS2 was really very impressive for 2000.

>>10123772
Imagine that you have 2 kinds of printers. Type A can print any kind of information, 2 sides at a time. Type B can only print if the page has only letters, no numbers or pics, and only 1 side at a time.
The PS3 has 1 type A and 6 type B.
The Xbox 360 has 3 type A.
If you sort out your book so you can print a massive amount of text-only pages, the PS3 has the advantage.
But of course, that doesn't happen, and just printing straight forward with the Xbox is easier, and often faster.

>>10123829
I see. Did they just think type B would be much better or something? Any case where Cell would be a good processor? Because it sounds like they just made a poorly designed CPU.

>>10123805
Good post. 3D gaming was still being worked out in the sixth gen so each console featured different architecture based on the design philosophies of Sony/MS/Nintendo.

>>10123854
Not him, but Sony was a much bigger player in the consumer electronics market back in the 90s/early 00s so they were still developing a lot of their own custom shit in-house rather than outsourcing to Nvidia or AMD like pretty much everyone does now.

>>10123912
Yeah I do get it. My question was, was Cell just a bad CPU, or was it misunderstood / used the wrong way?

>>10123918
My guess is that Sony had plans to license out the Cell processor to a wide variety of devices like laptops, phones, kiosks, etc.

>>10123950
do you read the question? I just wanted to know if Cell was a bad processor or not.

>>10122725
>>10122584
Gamecube and PS2 are more or less equal in graphics.
Xbox>>>Gamecube=PS2>Dreamcast

>>10123975
Well, it’s not a simple answer. It was an advanced processor for the time, but it made the PS3’s architecture complicated to develop for compared to the 360. However it wasn’t solely designed just as a processor for a game console. It was made with other uses in mind beyond the PS3.

>>10123981
This is the correct answer. GameCube multiplats were also frequently hamstrung by the lack of disc storage space compared to the full sized proper DVDs on Xbox/PS2.

>>10122772
Agreed. I still also prefer the jankiness of the PS1 graphics Saturn too

>>10124024
PS2 still had a lot of experimental games but unlike PS1, many of them didn’t leave Japan. Weirdo art project games like Aquanauts Holiday and Tail of the Sun somehow managed to get published in the west on PS1 for example.

>>10124035
they were afraid that Bri'ish mags would trash their game for not being GTA3, with Tony Blair jokes and all

>>10124035
What weird games are you referring to I’m always trying to genuinely expand my library but I feel like I very quickly saw all the ps2 had to offer, way faster than the ps1

>>10124096
If you like tranquil underwater games, check out the Everblue series on PS2. It’s the JP/EU-only predecessor to the Endless Ocean games on Wii.

>>10124110
Have them already, and that’s only a handful of games, it’s not the dozens the ps1 has (in my opinion of course, it’s all subjective)

>>10123918
It was total garbage, they were never able to manufacture them without major failures so they disabled the broken parts and shipped.

>>10123918
Lets put it this way, cell was an expensive design and difficult to work with. Yet the games on the ps3 do not outclass what is on the 360.
In that sense, yes it's a bad (console) cpu.

>>10124409
would it fare better somewhere else then, not in a console I mean? but then again, where? electronics? maybe in a Sony TV or something, which makes most sense. then again, having a TV running on Cell in 2006 sounds like an overkill. or you could make a PC based on it, but who'd use such a thing? since it was expensive, I guess it wasn't a good choice for servers either.

>>10123981
I don't know how it goes hardware-wise, but I had Sonic Heroes on PS2 and my brother had the same on GameCube, and the PS2 version looked like obvious dogshit compared to the GCN one. Slower framerate, lower res & missing special effects

>>10123024
Holy shit.
"Jungla de Cristal"
Hahaha. That really took me back to shitposting /int/ memes.

>>10123981
Simpsons Hit and Run's framerate is also really bad on PS2. 60FPS on Gamecube, 30 with dips on PS2

>>10122605
PS2 was wildly successful because it was, at the time of its launch, the cheapest DVD player available to consumers.
Not knowing this is a telltale sign that you're a zoomer who wasn't there.

>>10125035
No, it was successful because following on from the PS1 which followed on SNES for being the RPG machine
Which at the time was the most popular genre

>>10125035
Telltale sign that you're a zoomer: Thinking the PS2 was the cheapest DVD player.
I can even tell the exact point how this line of thinking came into existence: Zoomers' first PlayStation was the PS3, which WAS the cheapest Bluray player. Therefore in the zoomer mind, the PS2 must have been the cheapest DVD player. Extreme zoomerism might even claim PS1 sold because CD player.

>>10125035
Telltale sign that you're a zoomer: Thinking the PS2 was the cheapest DVD player.
I can even tell exactly how this line of thinking came into existence: Zoomers' first PlayStation was the PS3, which WAS the cheapest Bluray player. Therefore in the zoomer mind, the PS2 must have been the cheapest DVD player. Extreme zoomerism might even claim PS1 sold because CD player.
People who WERE there know that you had to convince your parents to buy the $300 PS2 over the cheaper DVD players. The most common angle was "it also plays games dad"

>>10124471
>>10125025
I am talking about it on a whole, a few specific games won't make my statement untrue

Which console from the 2000's would be ideal for me?
>I hate the year 2002
>console that in 2002 did not exist
>anti-nintendo console
>Anti-PC console
>console without games released in 2002

>>10125372
PS3, PS4, PS5
Xbox 360, Xbox One, Xbox Series X

>>10125379
you forgot the PSP (PlayStation Portable) and PS Vita

>>10125358
Xbox > GC > PS2 > DC

Stop rewriting history

>>10125448
But I am not you fag, some games are better on GC, others on PS2

>>10123981
Doesn't matter since it had the most games. Or did xbox have that many? I haven't noticed that systems library enough to know

>>10122569
The CPU is better than GameCube I think, but the GPU is definitely way worse

It's impossible to tell which 6th gen console is best graphically because 95% of games were designed for the least common denominator between them (or just the PS2). We only have some way to see what the GC was capable of because of the Wii

>>10125348
>Zoomers' first PlayStation was the PS3
If you're born in 1995-2000 then you have definitely seen a PS1 to say nothing of the PS2's omnipresence

>>10122984
>these games don’t count because new rules I invented that are irrelevant to the original point
retard

>>10125762
the wii is significantly more powerful than the gamecube and can do all kinds of things the cube couldn't have. The GC's capabilities are plain as day. It's a good polygon cruncher and handles textures fine but not much else beyond that thanks to its fixed function shaders. Any effect thrown around on Xbox and PS2, had it no fixed equivalent (most did not) you'd have to get some uglier approximation on cube or miss it entirely. Particles also suffered.

>>10122569
The PS2's hardware was finalized in 1999, less than a year after the Dreamcast. If they tried to push anymore power out of it at the time it'd end-up being significantly more expensive and more people would've felt compelled to get a Dreamcast or a Gamecube instead, and DVD adoption rates would've been slower.

>>10125823
>muh shaders muh particles muh...
RE4
>b-but
best looking game of the gen, had all sorts of snazzy effects the PS2 version couldn't handle
>muh rushed port!!!
it had 6 additional months of dev time over the GC version and they began working on them at the same time.
>b-but muh Xbox, muh riddick, muh doom 3!
garbage looking games with N64 tier textures and character models propped up by nifty stencil shadow technology.

RE4 proves the GC was capable of amazing things when given the chance. cry about it.

>>10125836
>RE4
dull, green (ps2 version fixes this) and lots of twigs. Yep its a polygon focused game.

>>10125842
>dull, green (ps2 version fixes this)
Still looks better than the ugly brownan' blooman' 1970's grindhouse filter the PS2 version has.

>>10125842
oh look i summoned the RE4 PS2 autist. reminder about the PS2 version:
>dull
>red
>sprites for trees
i think we're done here, stay mad.

>>10125847
>brownan' blooman' 1970's grindhouse filter the PS2 version has.
RE4 *is* supposed to be a grindhouse game, so this fits it much better. It was never exactly a colorful game.

>>10125848
>i think we're done here
ok, bye I guess?

>>10125850
>ok, bye i guess?
woman moment

>>10125850
NTA, but the ps2 version still has shit textures and less polygons. Looks like absolute crap next to the gc version. At the time I didn't give a shit because no gamecube, but after trying the gc and/or especially the wii version, it's hard to go back. That said, if all you had was the ps2 game, the experience was pretty similar, despite the muddier visuals.

>>10125871
>NTA, but the ps2 version still has shit textures and less polygons
Yeah, it's a game designed for GC's strengths so it has more polygons and some higher res textures because this was what the GC could do. It has no interesting effects, no clever use of particles or advanced lighting. It's a very console war centered game with extremely sensitive gamecube fans still clinging to it despite it being exclusive for like 3 weeks.
>ps2 game, the experience was pretty similar, despite the muddier visuals
Yep, they even both have the same shitty forced widescreen.

>>10125836
>one of Capcom Five games
>supposed to the magnum opus of GC
>developed since 1999 only for GC
>only later got a port in a rare weird case of porting from GC to PS2
I'd be shocked if PS2 version didn't look worse.

>>10125880
Well it was done in a few months, but it's telling that's all it took to get it to run on the significantly weaker PS2 (supposedly 8 times weaker than the GC.) As for a no frills port, it did its jobs fine.

>>10125880
>developed since 1999
you mean conceptualized and scrapped a half dozen times?
>only got a port later
a "port" that was in development alongside the final GCN version and came out 6 months later

>>10125886
>in development alongside the final GCN version
No Mikami san...don't seppuku yourself....they're going to back stab you....

>>10125878
MGS3 was actually designed around the limitations of the PS2 it doesn't prove the PS2 superiority it just shows that the console was limiting game development

>>10125884
yeah. regardless, I just think RE4 is a very cherrypicked and artificial example of GC vs PS2 graphics. it was very obvious the game was made for GC hardware first and foremost and spent years in development—that's a very rare case for a GC game. it was SUPPOSED to take the most advantage out of GC hardware and show what it was capable of; it'd be baffling if it didn't, with all the hype and time in development.
one could as well take Burnout 3 and say GC would never be able to handle it (which technically would be true). or take a game like GTA, that ran on an engine tailor made for PS2, and its PC port that looked worse, and conclude that PS2 was more powerful than PC in 2002.
and after all, RE4 is perhaps the only game PS2 did worse, as opposed to dozens of games GC did worse or simply didn't get.

>>10125905
If it was a PS2 first game
>Cramped scenarios
>Lower number of enemies on screen
>Lower polygoncount
>worse textures
Most PS2 first games were like this GC and XBOX first games were the other way around

>>10125893
>RE4 proves the GC superiority
>nooo MGS3 was designed around PS2 stre-… I mean, weaknesses, so it doesn't prove the PS2 superiority

>>10125905
RE4 does take advantage of the cube well, it uses its power for high polygon counts that had to be culled in the PS2 version. The thing is, those polygon counts were mostly used for things like more tree branches. It does impact scenes and there's often less props in the environments too but when really looking at a game polygon counts (especially at the sub 480p image the game has on all consoles) isn't really something super obvious. It doesn't wow people with what it has.

Another game which makes use of high polycounts is Devil May Cry. Funny enough this one started as RE4 but that's irrelevant. I'm reminded of the cathedral with all its pulsating pillars and the polygonal detail of the spider boss, or when you revisit and there's hundreds of the little spiders running around. The game uses its high poly count for a grotesquely detailed but highly imaginative church. RE4 uses it for more twigs.

Polygon counts were the wrong horse to bet on for defining the visuals of the following generation because all consoles, even the dreamcast could pump out a shit ton of polygons without much stress, to the point players didn't really care and 20 years later are arguing about twigs in trees.

PS2 started Sonys californication trend, and they never recovered from it, look at what they’re cranking out today, only the goyest of slop

>>10125909
ok, and? it came out earlier and had a notoriously weird hardware. in the end, it doesn't matter which console was more powerful; what matters is whether the games looked better. and very few actually looked better on GC, because everyone optimized them for PS2; and no one wanted to optimize them for the least popular console where their games didn't sell shit anyway and everyone only bought Smash, Mario and Zelda.
if your whole argument is "but on paper GC was so much better", then you're no better than saturnfags who write walls of text about how Saturn was so powerful, except it never showed in a single game, and most games looked better on PS1 in the end.

>>10125905
Oh and Burnout 3 actually was working on gamecube without any problems. It was running beautifully, but they didn't want to ship the game on multiple discs, a huge problem for games like tiger woods and medal of honor. And no, removing the music wouldn't have been enough to get it to fit.

>>10125938
Really? If that's true, then I was wrong. But in any case, that's just one more argument against GC. Maybe it had better-looking games on paper, but if it almost never showed, then how does it matter? PS2 actually had good-looking games, not on paper. end of discussion.
World is full of "unrealized potential" and "it had better hardware" claims about Genesis, Saturn, DC, GC, PS3… funny how it's always the losing side making for excuses for why their games looked same or worse. And the more the console failed, the more cope there will be (see Saturn, DC, GC).

>>10125952
The burnout 3 thing isn't widely publicly known, but this should dispel any rumors about it. Also interestingly all the effects on xbox that were done on hardware were done in software rendering on PS2. PS2 also has more effects.

I agree with you about hardware claims, it's one thing to say it, but another to show it.

>>10125348

>>10122837
Yep. PS2 was the gen where vidya went from being seen as for kids and nerds to being socially acceptable because games became normie friendly. Proper vidya was too weird and cringe for normies so it had to go