Smaller PS2s.
 

Because you hate your life.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3675700.stm

God, I don't wanna pay more bucks for a lighter, smaller one.

They just did it because they are getting ready to start marketing PS3....thats what they did to the first PS...they made that small one PSone which looked gay

Aight, now I get to buy a PSTwo and the PSP. Im glad.

BTW, This is not fucking sarcasm, I am Pro Sony to the MAX.

Sony makes great consoles, they have awsome ideas at hand, and they are still learning in console production, the PS3 will be a break through along with the PSP.

Don't let Raziel know that, he's pro-kiddy consoles.

But nonetheless, I doubt much people will buy this new Ps2, I mean, how much smaller of a space would you need to put it, they already make custom car boxes so you can install them in your vehicle, and tossing it in your entertainment system won't take up much room. But they may get some sales from it.

I think I'll be fine with my normal sized PS2 (its the original).

But still, I just looked at it, and the system looks pretty nice. I may get it, not sure yet. (Old ps2 is broken)

Why don't they stop wasting precious design money and make the PS3s already! ARGH

Why dont you stop complaining. Money says they designed a smaller PS2 for a reason. See how well it ran with externel power and smalling size and how much cooler it would stay. They are not rushing the PS3 like they did with the PS2. They are taking there time and making it a lot more reliable this time around. They are going the extra mile so assholes like you dont diss the PS3 like the PS2. If you cant wait, stfu.

Would you rather have a more Superior system over all other systems or just a system thats just better than the rest?

I don't care, my PC owns any PS.

Nor do I. I have a ps2 and I have to admit, I feel that it was a waste of money. I most definitly am not going to waste more on a smaller version of the same thing

1) The smaller PS2 has no HDD support. If you're playing FF11, and you want a new PS2, you're shit out of luck.

2) Sony isn't manufacturing any more of the old PS2s once this one is released. So, if you want an HDD and don't own a PS2 yet, you're double-SOL.

3) The functionality of this thing is going to be even worse than the old PS2. The parts will wear out quicker, the casing will be flimsier and there will be more people returning their old busted consoles for refurbished ones. Sony is just simply doing what they did with the smaller PS1 years ago, and those things were built like my grandma.

Don't waste your money on buying a slightly re-designed PS2 if you already own one. Buy a Gamecube. It'll last you until the next ice age.


I'm pro-Nintendo. I like Sony too, but the big N is my first choice. Sony has plenty of kids software on the PS2. Certainly more than Nintendo does.

Hmm. I think the new PS2 looks good. So does the PS3. Now the PS1's. Big grey house bricks. The new Ps1's. Small white igloo bricks. If the new PS2 can't play FFXI, trhen I bet you, either Square-Enix, or Sony will make some changes. Prob, Sony. Btw, can you get FF games on any other console but PS1/2, PC, and Gameboy? If not, then I think Sony will bring out a newer version of the PS"mini"2, it must be a v. big seller, so if the new PS"Mini"2 can't play it, how much money will Sony lose? They might just bring out a little HDD support add-on thingy. I don't know, they might not. The question is though, will games-makers bring out games that can only be played on the PS"Mini"2?

First, its PSTwo/Ps2, not PS'mini'2. I dont think they ahd people playing FFXI in mind, if your going to play FFXI than you dont need to get it. But remember, there are a lot of people out there who do not want to play FFXI. Plus money says in Japan, it was/is wanted really bad. It all originates in Japan, so there must be a good reason for it, like demand. Nuff said for now. No system is better than the other.

Actually no, hardware wise. the PC ownages all of them (Top of the line for both ;))

I dont give a fuck about PC owange. They are all awsome in there own fucking ways. All this talk about one system being better than the rest is bs.

Wrong, Tyrannicide. There is a way to objectively gauge the power and effectiveness of a console. You can't definitely say which system has a better game selection, because that's all up to personal opinion. You can, however, say with certainty that in terms of hardware, one system is obviously better than the other.

The PS2 is undoubtedly the weakest of the three in that regard. The hardware is flimsy, the processing power is far below that of it's competitors, the graphics are substandard in comparison, the load times are atrocious and the framerate stutters constantly even in AAA titles. The only genuine advantage it has over the Gamecube is that it provides true 5.1 surround sound as opposed to the Dolby Pro Logic II that Gamecube supports.

Of the three, the Gamecube uses the most of what it has to offer. It's about two thirds as powerful as the XBox, and it's capable of creating graphics that nearly match or sometimes exceed the XBox in that regard. The load times are much faster than the PS2 and the framerate rarely stutters with the vast majority of games (it never stutters in AAA titles). The one overwhelming flaw with the GCN is that it uses mini-DVDs to store the games. It was created this way in order to prevent piracy (which has worked, for the most part), but the trade-off is that there's less storage space for things like FMV. That and the DPLII support instead of true 5.1 surround sound.

The XBox is absolutely the most powerful of the three, but the one big drawback is that it doesn't effectively use it's massive amount of power. With all the hardware inside of that thing, it should be capable of graphics and sound that neither of the other two consoles could ever dream of attaining. Granted, it definitely produces the best-looking games 98% of the time, but the graphical differences between the XBox and Gamecube aren't nearly as big as the differences between the GCN and PS2. The XBox also supports full 5.1 sound, so that single advantage of the PS2's is null in this situation.

If you want a good analogy between the three, here it is:

The XBox is like the Hulk. Lots of power, lots of bulk, but very little finesse. It doesn't use the full extent of it's power because it doesn't know how to.

The Gamecube is like Batman. It uses every ounce of what it's given, and even with less power and ammo available to it than that of the XBox, it still nearly matches the console through it's resourcesfulness and craft. Certainly, it doesn't boast the advantages of actual super-powers (i.e. minimized FMV storage and no 5.1 audio), but it's got a brain capable of taking out Superman.

The PS2 is like Spider-Man. Easily accessible to the mainstream and certainly impressive in it's own right. However, beyond it's surface it doesn't really have much going for it in terms of power. Some nifty web-slingers and acrobatic abilities, but underneath the superpowers, it's an insecure and inexperienced teenager. And all the superpowers in the world won't save it's skin when the laser starts malfunctioning and it stops reading discs altogether.

Hey, if I asked for a rundown on the systems I would have called Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo.

And who gives a fuck, PS2 outselles your GC, so in the end the PS2 wins.
I am someone that cares about Good Game play and story over graphics so your rambling on about specs just passes by like the wind.

All I was doing was responding to this claim of yours:


And that's bullshit. It's plainly obvious which consoles are more powerful than which. You claimed that the superiority of the hardware is subjective, while it's blatantly clear that it's anything but subjective.


Gameplay and story have nothing to do with what I was talking about. Those are subjective aspects of a videogame. You were stating that arguing over the superiority of hardware was bullshit, and you were wrong.


I'm not arguing over who has sold more consoles, I'm proving your asinine statements wrong. You said that arguing over the potency of the hardware was entirely a matter of opinion, and it's most certainly not. We're not talking about sales numbers or who has the better games. We're talking about the quality of the hardware. So, unless you've got some actual counter-argument to throw my way, maybe you should just zip your overactive lips, hm?

I think that the only reason why some consoles sell better than others, is the range of games. I don't know what the games are like for the three consoles, so I'm not gonna comment. Battle it out against me if you must, it's just what I think.