Jump to content
LCVG

PS2 has more and better online games?


foogledricks
 Share

Recommended Posts

http://www.gamespy.com/solefood/november03/sf12/

 

Obviously this is fanboy bait on both sides. But really, is this even a fair article? I don't own a PS2 and have not played PS2 online obviously. Everyone's tastes are different as well, which has to be factored in. Does the PS2 have significantly more and better online games?

 

XBOX /PS2

NFL2K/Madden

NBA2K/Live

NHL2k/NHL

Amped /SSX

TopSpin /Nothing

Nothing /Twisted Metal

MM3 /Midnight Club

Project Gotham /NFS

RS3,GR / Socom

RTCW/ Nothing

Tetris/ ?

MotoGP/ ?

Volleyball/ Nothing

Nothing / Tony Hawk

Crimson SKies / Nothing

MechAssault / Nothing

Nothing / Amplitude

Nothing / Risk

Nothing / Everquest

Clone Wars/ Nothing

Capcom vs. SNK/ Nothing

 

What am I missing as far as comparable titles? And how do you think the library compares? Doesn't seem like there is much of an advantage on either side really. At the very least it doesn't seem like one could say that the PS2 clearly has the content advantage, right? Just wondering where Gamespy is coming from? Am I missing something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the article

 

Comparing multiplatform versions of a game is another area where the PS2 comes out smelling like roses. Though the PS2's graphical prowess isn't as robust as the Xbox's, in some cases the online capabilities of the PS2 version make it superior. This is certainly the case in games like The Return of the King and Tony Hawk's Underground, both of which are PS2 online exclusives. The difference in visual quality is minimal when compared to the immense replay value added through Internet play.

 

How about, RTCW, GR, Tetris, Clone Wars (Chris LOVES it), Capcom Vs SNK2? All online exclusive to the Xbox.

 

There are definitely a lot of fine games for Xbox Live, but I don't think it compares to what the PS2 has going on(line).

 

wtf.gif

 

I could go on for hours about what is wrong with the entire article, but it's not worth it. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, and in the authors opinion, the PS2 is the winner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I mean, if Socom and Madden are the writer's two favorite games ever, then you could see how they might be slanted toward the PS2. But I didn't get that from the article. It seemed like writer's assertions might not have been genuine. That is sort of what I am drawing into question. For example, mentioning that 989 Sports titles have a comparable service to XSN is obviously not relevant since nobody likes the 989 sports titles, including the writer (I'm guessing). So it seemed like he was stretching a bit, which implies to me that it was not a genuine article. But I might be wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Topic moved to the General Discussion area. Remember the Live forums are only for use in scheduling or planning a Live session or getting live related technical support.

 

Since this article concerns direct comparisons on two platforms this is best suited as a general discussion. Also please be mindful of the topic and lets keep things civil (as only you guys know how to do ;) ). Thanks guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a horribly-written editorial. If the guy wanted to bump uglies with his PS2, he should have just gone ahead humped that silicon and kept us out of it.

 

989 Sports?! Cmon. This has to be a joke. While I haven't played the latest titles, I don't know a SINGLE person who has. Have any of you? Have you?

 

*crickets*

 

Xbox Live has some annoying issues (limited number of players, inconsistent implementation, etc.), and if he were to stick to those issues, I'd be defending him. His approach, however, was foolish.

 

However, editorials are written to create reader response and he appears to have done so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many online PS2 games support more than a couple of players? How easy is it to find the players I want to play with, recognizing them universally, and know what they are playing (regardless of what I am playing), and easily switch games to join them? How many support voice communication?

 

If I stuck to one or two games, I might have a great time playing online with PS2. If I want to play more than a couple of games, I personally think I'd find it a hassle to coordinate gameplay, and that I'd find the number of players very limiting. Two player snowboarding? Two player golf?

 

That's why I haven't jumped into online PS2, despite having a system.

 

And the guy ignores a TON of XBox games and entire genres.

 

I seriously question the objectivity of the author.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But editorials aren't supposed to be objective. That's the point of editorials.

 

I'll consider it an editorial when they provide a decent, edited letters page that accepts rational criticism. Until then, I'll just consider it a column.

 

I'd also take it more seriously as an 'editorial' if they spoke in fewer absolutes, and couched what they said as opinion.

 

Also, his FPS argument is a joke. He ignores many XBox FPS, and uses SOCOM as the sole released PS2 FPS, and then calls it all equal. News flash: SOCOM is not an FPS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to point out the link at the bottom of the article,...

 

"Next: What the console editors are playing. ?"

 

Interestingly, the 1st editor listed is also the author of the PS2/Xbox online article, and here are his top 5 games

"Raymond "Psylancer" Padilla - Current Playlist

1. The Return of the King (Xbox)

2. Tony Hawk's Underground (PS2)

3. Top Spin (Xbox)

4. Win Poker (PC) "

5. Britney's Dance Beat (PS2)

 

If PS2 is his favorite online console, too bad it isn't getting it's fair equivalent amount of play time from him!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Beer Monkey@Nov 11 2003, 11:35 PM

I'll consider it an editorial when they provide a decent, edited letters page that accepts rational criticism. Until then, I'll just consider it a column.

As I said, it was a horribly-written editorial, but an editorial nonetheless. Had he actually used some logic in his arguments as well as some plauses premises, it would be interesting and thought-worthy. As it stands, it comes off as a fool trying to cause a ruckus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If PS2 is his favorite online console, too bad it isn't getting it's fair equivalent amount of play time from him!

 

I'm sure the whole point was to stir controversy, which translates into more readers and page views. Kind of like some talk radio hosts - the ones that choose their 'viewpoint' based on what rile up the listeners/callers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I concur with Beer Monkey's comments.

 

I'd also take it more seriously as an 'editorial' if they spoke in fewer absolutes, and couched what they said as opinion.

 

I think that's one of the biggest problems afflicting journalism. Not just Video Game journalism but everything else, too. Writers are too tempted to compare A vs. B and see which one comes out on top. There must always be a winner because the masses want everything spoon-fed to them in easily digestable, bite-sized portions with a clear conclusion. A must be better than B or vice versa. There is no middle ground. What bullshit.

 

In fact, I don't think this comparison even warrants an 'editorial'. They must be running real low on imagination (and talent) down at Gamespy.

 

I'm sure the whole point was to stir controversy, which translates into more readers and page views. Kind of like some talk radio hosts - the ones that choose their 'viewpoint' based on what rile up the listeners/callers.

 

Definitely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still have yet to actually play my PS2 online. I've had one of those network dealies plugged into the back of it for 2 months.

 

The Xbox Live service is just so convenient, the Friends list and voice chat are absolutely essential to the online gaming experience IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure the whole point was to stir controversy, which translates into more readers and page views.

I agree, but I wonder what the real long term effect is. I do not regularly check Gamespy, but I have gone there every once in a while when looking for additional views, reviews and opinions. The two articles that we've discussed in these forums over the last week has certainly caused me to re-evaluate how I take in what I've read on their site.

 

Truely I have not found these two articles to be annoying so much as I found them to be unintelligently written and not very well thought out. If I find their work continues to seem biased or less than thoughtful in the future I would certainly waste little time moving on. I'm sure we can all agree that they weren't aiming for that type of response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, but I wonder what the real long term effect is. I do not regularly check Gamespy, but I have gone there every once in a while when looking for additional views, reviews and opinions. The two articles that we've discussed in these forums over the last week has certainly caused me to re-evaluate how I take in what I've read on their site.

 

Right, but you're a reader of the discerning variety. Which isn't the hordes of drones that are the core readers of Gamespy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Truely I have not found these two articles to be annoying so much as I found them to be unintelligently written and not very well thought out.

 

The Links 'review' was really a Links vs Tiger shootout. If you are going to do a shootout, you should call it as such, and have multiple writers/editors providing viewpoints.

 

We should publish our own Links vs Tiger shootout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comparing multiplatform versions of a game is another area where the PS2 comes out smelling like roses.

 

Why not compare the few games that are online for BOTH systems instead of bringing out the few exclusives the PS2 has saying that the PS2 has more online games. Games like the ESPN sports titles and Midnight Club 2 are online for both systems, and in most case are a much better and more enjoyable experience because of XBox Live.

 

Yes, content is king, but when talking about online gaming, it cannot be everything. I still don't have a PS2, so I really don't know what online PS2 gaming is like, but from what I understand it's pretty much a hit or miss experience. Some games are fine, others are not. You can have 1000s of games online, hundreds of which might even be worth playing online, but if the online experience is not up to par, or is completely frustrating, then the online feature is no longer a factor because you won't be using it.

 

I think Gabe's rant about Tiger Woods online for PS2 sums it all up fairly nicely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actuually, I heard ESPN offered more/better online experiences with the PS2 than XBOX Live because the PS2 one offers leagues or something....I can't remember exactly.

 

I haven't tried XBOX Live though. I'm not really interested in paying for service, although I do understand it's better quality. So far the only game I've played online has been Madden 2004. I must say that I am having a blast with that one. The voice chat is incredible and for the most part the play is lag free. Maybe someday I'll get XBOX Live, but so far there really isn't anything on it that I'm all that interested in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...