A PS2 article would be nice

[fox099]

Now that we are nearly 2 full years into the latest installment of console wars, I think that we should begin to review the last generation of consoles, specifically the PS2. I consider the PS2 to be the most influential console since the NES, as it introduced gaming to the largest number of people ever, as well as introducing new and existing developers to markets (think Katamari Damacy). Does anyone else share my feelings, or is the PS2 still too recent to properly discuss?

[scottykick]

I agree, the PS2 is on of the best selling and most influential systems ever. It did not reinvent the wheel, but was home to many top franchises and a few under the radar gems.

I would not consider it a retro system by any means, as it is still in production and games are still being made for it.

The Wii will eventually be the best selling system ever, but unless the third party developers pick up their game. The PS2 may be held in higher regard when all is said and done.

Here is how I would rank the systems going by importance to the history of gaming, and innovation to the industry.

1-NES: Resurrected home gaming after the crash
2-PS2: The first truely mainstream game console
3-Genesis: Knocked Nintendo off it's throne, or at least forced them to share.
4-Dreamcast: VMU, Built in Online, HD compatible, Fishing Controler. Innovation thy name is Dreamcast!
5-Wii: Proved graphics are not everything, brought in 1000's of new people to gaming. Great 1st party games and Virtual Console act as a history lesson to newer gamers.
6-Atari 2600: The first king
7-N64: Underappreciated for the innovations it brought.
8-SNES: Improved on the foundation laid by the NES
9-Saturn: Opened up US gamers to the import scene, by mere neccesity!
10-Jaguar: A Lesson on what NOT to do!

[RyaNtheSlayA]

I agree, the PS2 is on of the best selling and most influential systems ever. It did not reinvent the wheel, but was home to many top franchises and a few under the radar gems.

I would not consider it a retro system by any means, as it is still in production and games are still being made for it.

The Wii will eventually be the best selling system ever, but unless the third party developers pick up their game. The PS2 may be held in higher regard when all is said and done.

Here is how I would rank the systems going by importance to the history of gaming, and innovation to the industry.

1-NES: Resurrected home gaming after the crash
2-PS2: The first truely mainstream game console
3-Genesis: Knocked Nintendo off it's throne, or at least forced them to share.
4-Dreamcast: VMU, Built in Online, HD compatible, Fishing Controler. Innovation thy name is Dreamcast!
5-Wii: Proved graphics are not everything, brought in 1000's of new people to gaming. Great 1st party games and Virtual Console act as a history lesson to newer gamers.
6-Atari 2600: The first king
7-N64: Underappreciated for the innovations it brought.
8-SNES: Improved on the foundation laid by the NES
9-Saturn: Opened up US gamers to the import scene, by mere neccesity!
10-Jaguar: A Lesson on what NOT to do!

lol I agree w/ you Jaguar remark, you know just because a console sucks doesnt mean it doesnt have an importance in gaming history!

[Niode]

It's not a retro console though...

Sony are are still making the consoles, games are still coming out for it. It's not even close to being retro system yet.

[fox099]

I disagree with scottykick's Wii comment, but that is for another thread.

My logic for us to begin calling the PS2 a more retro console is that consoles such as the SNES from the 16-bit generation continued selling through the 32/64 bit and into the last generation of consoles, and by the time of the dreamcast or ps2, im sure anyone would have considered it more retro. SNES games and consoles were being produced along side Playstation2s and Dreamcasts, transcending three generations of console gaming. The jump from 16-bit consoles to what we have today certainly pertain to retro-gaming, as sprites to 3d environments is a large jump, but just because something is still being sold doesnt mean it too cant have that classification. I mean, the PS2 has nearly been out 8+ years, the same time when the SNES would have been considered a retro console after its release.

[Niode]

I disagree with scottykick's Wii comment, but that is for another thread.

My logic for us to begin calling the PS2 a more retro console is that consoles such as the SNES from the 16-bit generation continued selling through the 32/64 bit and into the last generation of consoles, and by the time of the dreamcast or ps2, im sure anyone would have considered it more retro. SNES games and consoles were being produced along side Playstation2s and Dreamcasts, transcending three generations of console gaming. The jump from 16-bit consoles to what we have today certainly pertain to retro-gaming, as sprites to 3d environments is a large jump, but just because something is still being sold doesnt mean it too cant have that classification. I mean, the PS2 has nearly been out 8+ years, the same time when the SNES would have been considered a retro console after its release.

Huh? Nintendo ceased production in 1999... I see your point about it being sold despite the newer generation of consoles being released. It was hardly still dominant in the market. The PS2 is not a retro console. In my eyes a console is only retro once the systems are no longer being produced. Regardless of whether that system embraces a classic/retro ethic. It is still a current system as long as it is readily available in shops. You can't go by how long a system has been going. The NeoGeo was available from 1990 to 2004. 14 Years. That is the only exception to my rule with it's grounding in arcades, which see arcade systems supported for decades rather than usual 5-10 year cycle consoles receive.

[nateup2]

What SNES games were released after DC? Just curious

[The Apprentice]

I generally think of the PS2 in a negative light, mostly because of how shadey Sony always seemed throughout the generation. Remember when Sega met all of EA's demands for the Dreamcast and EA still refused to publish on it? And how a HDD was always rumored to be ready to go on the system, but it was never mass destributed or packaged with the system? How is it that memory hardware designed in 1999 could be the same price 9 years later, while computer memory that is many times larger than the Sony hardware can be $15 cheaper?

If not for Sony's practices, I would still frown apon the PS2 for its easily breakable controllers, expensive accessories, and extremely repetitive game library. (There were about a million first-person shooters that were all roughly the same... But that's still better than the Wii's library at this point.)

[Doctor Fugue]

Warning - Extremely biased negative comment ahead - Feel free to call me ignorant and a "fanboi"

The only thing the PS2 did was be a popular console...this is essentially the original poster's argument...that has nothing to do with how great a console is (look at the Wii). By this theory, Hannah Montana produces the greatest music. And how the hell can it be influential? What console is following in its footsteps? The 360? Surely not...it's more an extension of the Xbox and DC.

The PS2 surely has an immense library (what is it, over 3000 games?)...almost all average games with a few great ones, depending on your preferences; the ratio should be MUCH higher to be a highly-regarded console (Cube).

How exactly did the PS2 push the boundaries of gaming? Simply having one in every house means nothing. It just means people got sucked into the advertising and the general "me too" attitude.

It didn't even push any technical specs or change online gaming or re-introduce downloadable games or anything! It is a completely mediocre and uninteresting console. Its saving grace is its huge library; there is bound to be some games people will love. But many of those games were on that system purely because the system was popular and basically money in the pockets for game developers.

So, was it popular? Yes. Did it introduce new people to gaming? Maybe a few more teenage boys were added to the mix of other teenage boys who already played games, but certainly nothing like the grandmothers and yoga instructors that the Wii and DS have introduced. Maybe I'm the wrong age-group, but I never knew anyone who was introduced to gaming by the PS2.

I suppose the people who were younger and started gaming with a PS2 would consider it greater and see it as a world-changer. Just like me with and the influence of growing up with the NES or SMS and Genesis. And perhaps older people who were at the right age to see Pong or later an Atari system be a true innovator would see other systems in a lesser light.

As for retro, I don't know, I hate that word.

Anyway, enough rambling. Yeah, it's just my opinion, get over it...I only see the PS2 as a very popular console, not a great or innovative one. Just like Hannah Montana.

[nateup2]

You are a real hipster, bro.

I agree with everything you said