×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

PlayStation 2 Celebrates Seven Years in the US

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the long-live-the-slimline dept.

71

GamesIndustry.biz notes that today marks the seventh anniversary of the PlayStation 2's US launch. Stats for the console's lifetime include more than 120 million hardware units sold, and more than a billion units of software sold, with 30 million of those sold this year alone. The article notes that Sony is committed to keeping the console alive for at least another three years, with another 160 titles due out for the system through March 2008. Here's the console's top sellers list: "Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (13 million), Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (12 million), Grand Theft Auto III (11 million), Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec (11 million), Gran Turismo 4 (8.79 million), Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty (7 million), Kingdom Hearts (5.6 million) Final Fantasy X (5 million), Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater (3.7 million), Final Fantasy XII (3.68 million)."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

71 comments

Top 5 (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21132983)

all start with "Gran"

wtf?

Re:Top 5 (2, Interesting)

ThirdPrize (938147) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133171)

Top ten is (pretty much) made up of four franchises.

Re:Top 5 (1)

bubzor888 (1138953) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133659)

If you look at it from developers, it's exactly four. Final Fantasies and Kingdom Hearts are both from are Square Soft (now Square-Enix). Grand Theft Auto is Rockstar, Metal Gear Solid is Konami, and Gran Turismo is Polyphony Digital.

Speaking of which...I haven't heard much from Square lately...am I just missing what they've been up to (besides pumping out FFs) or have they just been lazy?

Re:Top 5 (2, Informative)

KronusOverlord (814322) | more than 6 years ago | (#21134537)

They're working on a new MMORPG and an action-RPG for the PS3, neither of which are from their established franchises. Also, a few ports for the PSP that aren't FF and a Dragon Quest game.

Re:Top 5 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21133235)

It's an old system, its for who like grans!

(think british slang for you non-brits)

No Guitar Hero? (1)

JeepFanatic (993244) | more than 6 years ago | (#21132991)

I'm a little surprised that the Guitar Hero franchise isn't represented on that list. I haven't (purposefully) owned a console since my classic NES but have played on other people's. I've been seriously considering picking up a PS2 specifically for the purpose of wanting to play the Guitar Hero games. The only other console I'm interested in is the Wii. Any other gaming I want to do I've always been able to do quite well on my PC.

Re:No Guitar Hero? (1)

Fozzyuw (950608) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133035)

I've been seriously considering picking up a PS2 specifically for the purpose of wanting to play the Guitar Hero games.

I specifically picked up a used PS2 for Guitar Hero, about a year ago. It was definitely worth it. I still play it pretty often and always when there's a party.

Re:No Guitar Hero? (1)

mpathetiq (726625) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133375)

I too picked up a PS2 just for Guitar Hero. It's just too damn fun to pass up. I have yet to plug a normal controller into the PS2. I'm totally psyched for GHIII!

Re:No Guitar Hero? (1)

Anti_Climax (447121) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133395)

It's the same for me, though after running into delay issues running the video through my video capture card on my computer, I've been looking into modding my unit for RGB output. On the original firewire equipped machines, you can tap right off the board and run out to a computer monitor.

Re:No Guitar Hero? (1)

David Nabbit (924807) | more than 6 years ago | (#21145465)

I've been seriously considering picking up a PS2 specifically for the purpose of wanting to play the Guitar Hero games. The only other console I'm interested in is the Wii.
Or you could just get the Wii, since Guitar Hero III is on the Wii.

Re:No Guitar Hero? (1)

angle_slam (623817) | more than 6 years ago | (#21174109)

But not Guitar Hero I, Guitar Hero II, or Guitar Hero II: Rocks the 80s. PS2 is the only console with all 4 titles.

Re:No Guitar Hero? (1)

angle_slam (623817) | more than 6 years ago | (#21174157)

To get on the list, you need to sell 3.8M copies. Guitar Hero is popular, but not that popular.

According to wikipedia, Guitar Hero 1 [wikipedia.org] sold about 1.7 million copies. Guitar Hero 2 [wikipedia.org] sold about 3 million, but thats combined for the Xbox 360 and the PS2.

Best gaming value (1)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133003)

It might not have all the bells & whistles of the newer consoles, but the PS2 is still the best bang for your gaming buck. I'm probably going to hold off at least one more year before buying a "next gen" console.

Re:Best gaming value (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133305)

It might not have all the bells & whistles of the newer consoles, but the PS2 is still the best bang for your gaming buck.
*cough*Dreamcast*cough*

Re:Best gaming value (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21133387)

While I love my Dreamcast, I have to side with the GP on this one. Discounting the fantastic selection of home brew games and console emulators for the DC, its library absolutely pales in comparison to the PS2.

Re:Best gaming value (1)

XxtraLarGe (551297) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133551)

While I love my Dreamcast, I have to side with the GP on this one. Discounting the fantastic selection of home brew games and console emulators for the DC, its library absolutely pales in comparison to the PS2.
I also like the Dreamcast and had one for a few years. I felt at the time that the DC had better games than the PS2, but eventually the PS2 overcame them. Besides, I can't walk into a store and buy a new Dreamcast if I wanted to.

Re:Best gaming value (1)

king-manic (409855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133421)

It might not have all the bells & whistles of the newer consoles, but the PS2 is still the best bang for your gaming buck.

*cough*Dreamcast*cough*
DC: library of dozens of quality games, to be had used for ~$100 USD

PS2: A library of hundreds of quality games to had new for ~$130 USD

umm... I don't think the math works out in the DC's favor.

So sad. (2, Insightful)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133085)

So many overlooked games not on that top selling list...

Ever notice how the best games are usually the ones that most people have never heard of?

Re:So sad. (3, Insightful)

XaXXon (202882) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133543)

But, surprisingly because so often it isn't the case, the best-selling games on the platform are all quality titles. I've played and enjoyed all of the titles mentioned. So often 'popular' and 'good' don't line up at all.

Re:So sad. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21134509)

So often 'popular' and 'good' don't line up at all.
Which explains why Metal Gear Solid, Gran Turismo, and Final Fantasy ended up on that list.

Wait, what was your point again?

Re:So sad. (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21138497)

I think it is fairly uncommon for a bad game to end up in the top sellers list. While a bad game can sell a few million (4 in the case of Enter The Matrix but cases like that are rare) on hype alone it's not enough to sustain sales for long. A top seller needs to have everything, marketing, appeal and, yes, gameplay. how many games make it into the top sellers list despite being low quality? Marketing can do a lot but marketing alone fails against the combined force of marketing AND quality. Look at Nintendo, they have loads of bestselling games by maintaining a high standard of quality whereas Sega fell hard as their quality declined. You can use hype to sell one or two games to a customer but after that he'll learn that you make crap and stop buying your products, if you use that marketing to make him buy a good product he'll buy more.

Re:So sad. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21133621)

There are games in that list?

Oh, I missed the GTA and Gran Turismo part, those count as games. But then:

Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty (7 million), Kingdom Hearts (5.6 million) Final Fantasy X (5 million), Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater (3.7 million), Final Fantasy XII (3.68 million).

All of those are cutscenes masquerading as games. Ever since Final Fantasy moved to the PlayStation, it's selling point has been pre-rendered cutscenes that sell despite the fact that the writing is so bad that when they tried to make a theatrical release they created one of the worst movies of all time. Kingdom Hearts is just Final Fantasy with Disney characters, and one of Metal Gear Solid's biggest selling points was the "professional voice-acting."

Grand Theft Auto I can see, that was a good game. Gran Turismo bored me, but I'm not a big racing game fan.

But the rest?

Those aren't games. They're cutscenes with some sequences where you move characters through a 3D environment, and probably the number one reason why the Wii is beating the PS3. The Wii is about games, the PS3 is about providing a high-def cutscene experience.

Re:So sad. (1)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133849)

Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty (7 million), Kingdom Hearts (5.6 million) Final Fantasy X (5 million), Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater (3.7 million), Final Fantasy XII (3.68 million).

All of those are cutscenes masquerading as games. Ever since Final Fantasy moved to the PlayStation, it's selling point has been pre-rendered cutscenes that sell despite the fact that the writing is so bad that when they tried to make a theatrical release they created one of the worst movies of all time. Kingdom Hearts is just Final Fantasy with Disney characters, and one of Metal Gear Solid's biggest selling points was the "professional voice-acting."
I've played and beaten all those games (except Kingdom Hearts where I played about half) and enjoyed them all thoroughly. I'm not exactly sure why you're complaining that the games feature many cutscenes (and by the way, Metal Gear Solid cutscenes are not pre-rendered), that's the style of the game and how Konami and Squaresoft wish to tell their stories. No one is forcing you to play those games. Some people like playing games with dramatic stories and some people like lots of action, I happen to enjoy both. I also happen to think that Metal Gear Solid's storyline (though insane) is some of the best and most well written stuff out there. To each their own, no need to rip on the popular games because you don't like their style of storytelling.

Re:So sad. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21133979)

It's a fucking game. It's not supposed to be high drama.

If you want to tell a story with a game, take a look at Half-Life for how to do it right. Metal Gear Solid would work perfectly with Half-Life's style of story telling, but it doesn't. Instead it relies on excessive cutscenes and, FAR WORSE, the stupid god-damned codec, where you get to watch two heads talking to each other. At least Final Fantasy's cutscenes usually show something interesting and not people talking at each other.

But still: it's supposed to be a GAME. Every second not spent with the player PLAYING THE GAME is a second WASTED. I don't want to subsidize some crappy game designers directorial delusions, I just want to play a game.

Want to know why game prices have skyrocketed? Because of "games" like Metal Gear Solid, where almost all that cost is sunk into worthless cutscenes.

Re:So sad. (1)

sarahbau (692647) | more than 6 years ago | (#21135187)

If you don't want games with cutscenes, don't buy them. You can't say what a game is or isn't supposed to have just because you want it to be that way. To me a good RPG has to have cutscenes, pre-rendered or not. The only way to get a lot of story into a game is either have a narrator, have a lot of stuff to read in the game, or have cutscenes. If you don't want a story in your game, that's fine with me, but don't try to tell me what I should enjoy in a game. I happen to enjoy drama in a game.

In what way have game prices "skyrocketed?" Most games are about $50-60, which accounting for inflation is no more than they've always been. 10 years ago they were $40-50.

Re:So sad. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21135249)

Given that these cutscenes-masquerading-as-games are the BESTSELLERS for the console, obviously my not buying them isn't working. If other assholes continue to buy them, it prevents truly good games from being created.

Instead of getting gems like Portal, we'll continue to get rehashed crap like Final Fantasy XIII: Continuing to Rape the Dead Corpse and Metal Gear Solid 4: More Talking Heads.

And going from $40 to $60 might not sound like much, but that's a 50% increase. It IS a lot.

wait a minute.... (1)

BugAttack (624234) | more than 6 years ago | (#21135507)

ALOT more goes into gameplay and graphics today than 10 years ago. 50% increase in cost, for a game with graphics 500% more evolved and gameplay sometimes 500% more complex? the time consumed programming and designing these things I'm sure is where the extra money is going. Games have almost always had cutscenes. Remember "sorry mario but our princess is in another castle"? Even That's a cutscene, in a sense. Cutscenes are often essential, especially in story driven RPG's. They're fun, they add dimension to the game, and they give the gamer a chance to relax and understand the relevence between level 1 and level 2.

Re:So sad. (1)

sarahbau (692647) | more than 6 years ago | (#21135515)

$40-50 to $50-60 is not $40 to $60. It's more like $45 to $55 - a 22% increase, and that's over 10 years. That's less than inflation. So really, games are getting cheaper.

Portal isn't even the same genre as FFXIII or MGS. It seems more like you just hate certain genres. I don't find most FPS games fun, and I've never liked a sports game, but that doesn't mean they aren't valid as games.

Re:So sad. (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21138545)

In other words, "I know better than those millions of people what games are good!". Yeah, because it's unlikely that these people just prefer different game styles, no they must all be unenlightened heathens that need to be brought to the light...

Re:So sad. (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21138527)

Half-Life's cutscenes were horrible, they were just as static as regular cutscenes but put the player in control of the camera which made it easy to miss half of what's happening, especially dialogue which becomes unintelligible at more than 5m distance. The effect reminds me of those theme park rides with dancing animatronic animals.

Re:So sad. (1)

Gravatron (716477) | more than 6 years ago | (#21170259)

Ever been in an actual conversation before? That's what the cutscenes were modeled after. You ARE Gorden Freeman, the entire naritive was designed with that in mind. So you can't really gripe about that, as well, it's like real life: You have to pay attention, or you'll miss stuff.

Re:So sad. (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21188707)

In a conversation I answer and people react to my answers, they don't act out a script completely ignorant of what I'm doing.

Re:So sad. (1)

cpt.hugenstein (1025183) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133711)

Like BG&E (beond: good and evil) I though that game was relitivly orignal and entertaining, needed some polish but it was a fairly early title too.

Re:So sad. (1)

hidannik (1085061) | more than 6 years ago | (#21135377)

I think one can reasonably disagree about that "best games" assertion.

Best for whom? Best for what purpose?

What's best depends on what's wanted. I think most folks just want a non-intellectual diversion to have fun with after a hard day at work. I'd wager your list of best overlooked games all have some intellectual component to appreciating them.

Hell, I'm a hardcore gamer and even I feel that way sometimes. I own Xenosaga and Okami, but neither is my first choice of what to play after work. More like Ace Combat or Burnout.

Hans

Odd (3, Interesting)

MagusZeal (1156955) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133587)

"PlayStation 2 is a perfect example of our ten year product lifecycle promise and is a testament to the design and technology that continues to be at the core of the product. While today's anniversary celebrates PlayStation 2' past, we're very excited for its future."
So given previous console hardware trends and how hard their pushing the PS3, does anyone else find this odd? It seems normal for the previous gen console to vanish after the new one's been out for a year or year and a half, just go looking for Xbox titles these days. Combine it with the insanity that's been the PS3 launch over the last year and it seems really odd to keep both up, especially when they've just gutted the backwards compatibility from the lower end PS3 models. It's almost like their not sure what they want to do at this point since most companies intentionally discontinue the older system to force an upgrade.

Re:Odd (3, Insightful)

Applekid (993327) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133851)

Personally, I think Sony's stated committment to 3 more years of PS2 is just them protecting their bottom flanks. Wii is the least costly console, but if you include PS2 in the group, now the PS2 is the least costly. DS is a fun system with fun games and backwards compatibility with lots of GBA games but PS2 has it's own set of fun games along with backwards compatibility lots of PSX games.

If you can't afford a PS3 (or don't find it compelling enough), they'd still much rather get your money than you hand it over to Microsoft or Nintendo.

Re:Odd (1)

KyoMamoru (985449) | more than 6 years ago | (#21134103)

It's all about selling the brand. The PS2 is phenomenal machine that has myriad amount of games on it. It was the King of the previous generation, and by continuing to provide it, they are providing customers with the chance to taste what Sony wishes to offer in the future. In other words, the PS2 is a cheap gateway drug to their expensive PS3.

Re:Odd (0)

Akaihiryuu (786040) | more than 6 years ago | (#21134897)

They assumed the PS3 would be the huge instant hit the PS2 was. The PS2 caused them to virtually drop Playstation support very quickly (aside from the whole "Try to sell a small PS1 with an expensive LCD addon as a portable system" thing). Each time they say the same thing: "The PS2 is a supercomputer. It's so powerful it can render Toy Story in real time!!!1111one" The PS2 turned out to be by far the least powerful system of the last generation...but it had DVD support at the right time for it to be a huge hit (when DVD good DVD players were still relatively expensive). The PS2 isn't as good at DVD movie playback as even the bargain bin DVD players in Wal-mart, but it's passable as long as you don't use a progressive display. In a lot of places it even proved to be cheaper than standalone DVD players. VHS was a horrible format for prerecorded movies...the PS2 helped DVD replace it in that fashion. The quality is much better, it enables full dolby digital surround playback, and the disks don't wear out. Sony assumed that the exact same thing would happen with the PS3. "It's a supercomputer! It can render Toy Story in real time!!!!111one" (Hey, didn't you say the PS2 could do that?) It's a Blu-Ray player and cheaper than any standalone Blu-Ray player. Problem...Blu-Ray isn't even remotely necessary like DVD was. DVD is more than good enough for 95% of the population. Heck, I have an HDTV, and DVD is more than good enough for me. Sure, the increased resolution of Blu-Ray does make it look a little better, especially on huge displays...but it's not worth the cost or the DRM headaches. This was all due to Sony's arrogance, assuming that the exact same thing would happen as did with the PS2 even though it was expensive for its time. Charge a lot, people will buy it anyway because it's a PS3, and they will have another huge hit on their hands. Since this didn't happen, and the PS3 is pretty much a flop, they're trying to fall back on the PS2 to save face. They had no intention of supporting it after the PS3 came out...it's just that now they don't really have a choice because barely anyone is buying a PS3.

Re:Odd (1)

tb()ne (625102) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140107)

You make some interesting points but you may be understating the significance of Bluray and overstating the failure of the PS3. PS3 has sold as many units in its first year as the 360 did in its first year. The difference is that the 360 had no "next gen" competition during that period, whereas PS3 was competing with both the 360 and the Wii. Also, the PS3 had a weak game catalog during that period. So how did the PS3 sell as well as the 360? I think Bluray played a large part. I know several people who bought a PS3 as a Bluray player. They claimed they had no interest in playing games (yeah, right), but soon were buying games either for themselves or their kids. Conversely, I would never have coughed up $500 for just a Bluray player but since it came with the PS3, I've started purchasing and renting Bluray titles.

I think next year will probably determine how much of a success/failure PS3 will become. 360 has a lead of about 6 million units sold but I don't think that directly makes much difference, considering the market between the two consoles is somewhere around 150 million units. I think the bigger issues are what alignments game developers make over the next year or so and what difference Bluray makes for the PS3. Price, of course, will also make a difference.

Re:Odd (1)

Doc Lazarus (1081525) | more than 6 years ago | (#21169643)

Agreed. Sony is trying to cover themselves after the PS3 debacle. I thought they were being foolish when they were dropping hardware backwards compatibility. Apparently now they're either waiting to see if they can add it in cheaply or see how everything goes. Right now, I'm guessing that if Blu-Ray doesn't take off, they'll simply go back and bring out a $300 PS2 Upgrade that can keep the backwards compatibility and move forward into Next Gen. I'm glad that the PS2 will be around for about three more years. Maybe now we can get a few more classic PS2 games out of this...a San Andreas Stories release, maybe? Please, Rockstar??

Re:Odd (1)

Taulin (569009) | more than 6 years ago | (#21147747)

You're not joking. I had the same thought looking at the latest issue of Famitsu. There are still a ton of games coming out for the PS2. Even odder, is that they seem to be coming out for the Wii AND the PS2, or the game comes out for the 360. There really isn't that much else of a blend. I still remember when NES games were coming out for a year or so after SNES debuted.

Not that I don't think you can add (or multiply).. (1)

XaXXon (202882) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133607)

but that's 80 million titles sold in just the top titles. Assuming the titles went for an average of $30 (with price drops and such), that's $2.4 billion-with-a-b. Wow.

Re:Not that I don't think you can add (or multiply (1)

jojo1835 (470854) | more than 6 years ago | (#21141611)

You do know that that's not profit margin, or even profit. That's just gross sales. I'm betting they get maybe 10 / title after royalties, distribution, retail, licensing all take their cut.

Tim

GoldenEye? (1)

lbmouse (473316) | more than 6 years ago | (#21133791)

The last I saw, I thought GoldenEye was over the 8 million mark.

Re:GoldenEye? (2, Interesting)

G Fab (1142219) | more than 6 years ago | (#21135355)

That is a Nintendo 64 game.

And note that the N64 had very few games compared with either playstation, driving up sales of the ok games. Goldeneye and the Zeldas were fantastic oasises in the desert. No wonder they sold well.

Re:GoldenEye? (1)

lbmouse (473316) | more than 6 years ago | (#21136279)

You are very correct. I hand my old systems down to my son. As I get older I forget what games went with what.

Titles (2, Interesting)

unablepostAC (1044474) | more than 6 years ago | (#21134017)

the first top 5 sellers titles starts with "grand" or "gran" which means the same

Know i know the secret to create a top seller in playstation realms.

its to be titled

Gran Grand Hupaki

5 years later and I still haven't picked up a game (0)

logicassasin (318009) | more than 6 years ago | (#21134259)

I've had a PS2 since '02 and haven't bought a single game for it. Maybe it was simply the wrong time for me to have bought into yet another console because back then I was in my 6th year of online PC gaming (starting with dwango/doom) and hadn't bought a title for my PSX in years.

So... it's the DVD/CD player in our bedroom. Once in a blue my kids play an old PSX game on it, but that's about it.

Re:5 years later and I still haven't picked up a g (0, Flamebait)

fuocoZERO (1008261) | more than 6 years ago | (#21135653)

Of course you didn't "buy" a game... That's what a MOD chip is for, right? hahahaha err... scratch that... I don't really know what a MODDIE chipie thing is...

Absolute HATE for the controller (1, Insightful)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 6 years ago | (#21134745)

I can't understand how people play with that damn "dualshlock" thing at all.

* Weird shape makes it uncomfortable to hold.
* Analog sticks placed so that you have to stretch your thumbs.
* Split d-pad makes it too hard to hit diagonals.
* Geometric symbols rather than letters for the buttons.
* 2 pairs of trigger buttons... fgsfds.

Other than the Nintendo DS, it is the only controller that ever made my hand cramp! I'm not just saying that other pads are better; as far as I'm concerned, without a third-party controller with a radically different shape (like this one [gearlive.com] ), the PS2 is pretty much unusable.

Re:Absolute HATE for the controller (1)

KrazeeEyezKilla (955150) | more than 6 years ago | (#21134893)

I'm pretty sure most would agree that the dual shock was the gold standard for controllers, with the xbox 360 controller possibly being the first one to improve on it.
I'm not including glorified pointing devices in this comparison

Re:Absolute HATE for the controller (1)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 6 years ago | (#21135121)

I don't mind the dualshock, but I think both the original x-box and the gamecube controllers were better. And a Wii beats everything, because it dispenses with the notion that your hands need to be cramped together on your lap. Even without the pointer/motion sensitive functionality, I would love to see controllers split into detached left hand/right hand components.

Re:Absolute HATE for the controller (1)

G Fab (1142219) | more than 6 years ago | (#21135373)

That's a very unique opinion. Even Microsoft abandoned the original XBOX controller.

The Sony (sorta SNES) model of controller is perfect. It's also a great brand image, now that over half a billion of them have been sold. I would love to see that left stick move to the dpad, but it's still a nice comfy controller.

They best thing about it is how symmetrical it is. Unlike the xbox controllers, it's easy to use for anyone, pretty much immediately. Granted, I prefer the 360 controller, but the dualshock is more obvious.

Re:Absolute HATE for the controller (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21138775)

I disagree, the SNES controller's day came and went with that system. The dualshock was just a haphazardly bolted together mess of features, kinda like the NGage. The d-pad on the dualshock is pure pain and should have been altered long ago, the analog stick placement has no place in the modern world and the analog buttons were a completely useless idea (yeah, cue people listing exammples of games that used the analog sensitivity to assign two functions to one button... If it's analog, why is it used as a switch with 2-3 discrete states?). The Gamecube controller is so much better, doesn't hurt to use, has a good analog stick in just the right place and uses a button arrangement that makes it hard to slip into the wrong button row and allows you to understand immediately which buttons are how important, the analog triggers are more useful than analog buttons because they have a longer range of movement and can actually be used analogly (don't think games made much use of that though). While it does have fewer buttons than a Dual Shock (missing R2/3 and L2/3, I count Z as a better placed select button instead of a trigger button) I don't think it's that big of an issue.

Also, why does the Dualshock have a button to toggle analog mode when every single game just forces it to analog on anyway? I've even seen games force analog on and then ignore all analog input...

Re:Absolute HATE for the controller (1)

G Fab (1142219) | more than 6 years ago | (#21140553)

the analog button was for legacy support, which used to be very important to Sony. It's goen now, but you still can tell the PS3 to switch functions. I doubt anyone really cares. This button is a tiny factor.

The analog buttons are excellent. The Playstation is used often in racing games and flight simulators, making easy throttle buttons crucial. I hate analog triggers. They are clumsy (especially ont he PS3 controller).

The PS2's controller was a highpoint. I don't understand the point that the dualshocks are haphazard. Especially compared with the XBOX's original controller. The PS2's looks natural and obvious and simple. Yes, it has two sticks "bolted on", but it's bolted in a pretty good place. Would it be better if the analog stick moved to the dpad? No. Go look at third party controllers. Obviously no company is going to invest in that idea.

Fact is, symmetry makes the PS2's controller very easy for hundreds of millions of people to use. It's the universal idea of a controller. The twin sticks are mandatory for 3d environments, and the gamecube and xbox's were wise to copy the dualshock.

Again, I like the 360 controller better, but I think your attacks are a bit too harsh. sixaxis is a joke, lack of rumble is a joke... but onthe other hand I've seen many people hace confusion with XBOX controllers, and I have never seen that with a dualshock. And frankly, the dumbest contorller out there is on the wii. Completely unergonomic and clunky. I know my kid loves it, but they could have done a better job.

 

Re:Absolute HATE for the controller (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21146241)

I don't even know how you're supposed to apply different levels of pressure to a button with 1mm traverse and 90% deadzone (or at least the minimum pressure required to move the button at all is like 90% of the pressure needed to move it all the way down). When a game used that I used trial and error until I got the pressure it demanded (took maybe 10 tries sometimes). Using the water pack in Super Mario Sunshine at different pressure levels was trivially easy. Speaking of deadzone, the dualshock's is pretty large. I've tried to do small adjustments with it in games with racing sections and it felt almost digital, the value I wanted was swallowed by the deadzone so I had to alternate between minimal value and zero to get the desired value.

Third parties never stray from the controller design set forth by the console maker, Gamecube and XBox third-party controllers had the analog stick in the primary position. They aren't trying to improve things, they're trying to make a cheap knockoff.

I don't see how a symmetric controller is more intuitive when the game's controls are not symmetric (which is most games). Usually the left analog stick and right buttons are used for controls with the d-pad and right analog stick as secondary inputs (camera controls, weapon switching, etc). Buttons labelled with geometric shapes, two of which are hard to distinguish on crappy TVs, are really confusing as well. For some reason their colors are not primary colors, perhaps Sony was worried about looking too much like the SNES with its red-yellow-green-blue buttons but that doesn't help with distinguishing them.

Re:Absolute HATE for the controller (1)

nuzak (959558) | more than 6 years ago | (#21136287)

You know why other consoles have the left analog stick offset? Because Nintendo did it that way. You know why Nintendo did it that way? Because the d-pad was the primary means of control on the older games, and they originally put that one stick in the MIDDLE.

Of course the controller you link to has just one d-pad for all the controls, so I guess all you prefer to play is 16-bit era games anyway. Those segas had a really nice pad though. And the one on the 360 makes the ps2's d-pad look like perfection.

Anyway, I have both a 360 and a PS2, and neither me with my rather large hands, nor my gf with her very tiny hands have a problem with either controller. Apparently 120 million other people think so too.

Re:Absolute HATE for the controller (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21138737)

I find the handles to be problematic as well, for some reason my little finger cramps when I use a dualshock for an intensive game, perhaps they are too short or something (the Gamecube controller's handles are better). The dpad hurts my thumb but diagonals really aren't the problem. If you want another painful controller try the Classic Controller for the Wii, the lack of handles heally hurts my hands when trying to use the analog sticks.

Re:Absolute HATE for the controller (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 6 years ago | (#21139433)

I often hear this, and it never makes much sense to me.

* I've never found it uncomfortable to hold. My fingers curl around the projections, putting my thumbs on the face buttons and my index fingers on the shoulder buttons. It feels perfectly natural to me.

* Huh? My thumbs move down a bit to rest on the analog sticks. It doesn't feel like they're stretching at all, and I never thought I had particularly limber hands.

* Takes minimal practice to learn to hit diagonals on the D-pad, and I've always felt I had better control with the separate buttons than with unified d-pads you find on non-Sony controllers. The contacts on the split D-pad seem to last better, too.

* Meh. The symbols are kinda cute, though I will admit it makes it a bit clumsier when describing what buttons you should use when giving instructions. Not a big deal.

* Two pairs of shoulder buttons are really useful sometimes. I know a number of games that make good use of the additional controls, and they aren't hard to use at all.

I've used a PS2 for years with stock DualShock 2 controllers, and played them for hours. Never made me cramp, or even feel particularly uncomfortable.

No, I'm not a Sony fanboy. I don't own a PS3, and don't have immediate plans for buying one. If I buy a new console at all, it'll probably be a Wii.

Chris Mattern

7 years... (1)

7Prime (871679) | more than 6 years ago | (#21135383)

The first 7 years of the PS2. Let's hope the next 7 are just as good!

Re:7 years... (1)

PKFC (580410) | more than 6 years ago | (#21137765)

Yeah it'll take me about that long to sift through all my RPGs... FFXI, FFXII, SO3, Disgaia 1/2, Phantom Brave, La Pucelle, DDS1/2, Radiata Stories... zomgz... Currently stuck on Persona 3..

Re:7 years... (1)

7Prime (871679) | more than 6 years ago | (#21142283)

Meh, you'd be better off with Tales of the Abyss, Okami, ICO, Shadow of the Colosseus FF12, Dragon Quest VIII, and maybe Wild Arms 4 if you have the time. The rest aren't nearly as good, especially Star Ocean 3, which was an utter dissapointment.

Not a fanboy, but... (1)

RobDollar (1137885) | more than 6 years ago | (#21136261)

Interesting to see the GTAs are the top-sellers. It would be interesting to see why Sony couldn't so enough to offer exclusivity to rockstar for GTA 4, expecially as the console has a higher capacity disc-wise, and therefore could offer more content. Intriguing to me, at least.

Re:Not a fanboy, but... (1)

Grave (8234) | more than 6 years ago | (#21137605)

I think it really boils down to how much money Sony was willing to pay for it. Rockstar knew early on that the PS3 alone wouldn't have the kind of install base that the PS2 had when Vice City or San Andreas came out, so they knew they'd need to be dual platform. Extra disc space isn't as important as a bigger install base. 6 or 7 million potential customers vs. 15-20 million at the launch of the game seems like an obvious choice to me (given the delay to spring, those installed numbers are probably not going to be remotely accurate).

Re:Not a fanboy, but... (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21138807)

1. It's expensive. Sony's offer would have to be higher than what Rockstar estimates a 360 version to make AND what Microsoft is willing to bid.
2. The PS3's userbase is smaller than the 360's, it's not a sound business decision to go PS3 exclusive without some MAJOR incentives which reinforces point 1.

I have a feeling Microsoft was willing to pitch a lot of money in to make sure Sony doesn't get exclusivity.

Disc capacity means nothing, hardware means nothing. If Rockstar felt that a cellphone port would be profitable they'd make one and learn to cope with the hardware.

Re:Not a fanboy, but... (1)

HAKdragon (193605) | more than 6 years ago | (#21149545)

It's not like they have exclusivity for GTA3, Vice City, or San Andreas. They all came to the XBox eventually, even if they were only on the PS2 for a limited time.

Note (1)

syylk (538519) | more than 6 years ago | (#21138277)

The games sold data is relative to US only, so figures are lower than worldwide totals, and that's why the list doesn't contain other hit games that sold more copies than those millions (and millions).

Still, I happen to own 9 out of the 10 games mentioned there (Kingdom Hearts isn't my cup of tea), while living around 10'000 Km (10 Mm?) from US soil, and having bought ~20 titles since 2001, when I bought my PS2.

Half truth (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21201877)

I wonder if this includes re-purchases from people who had their first, second, or third PS2 crap out on them. I myself am on my third, yet I still have my original NES, SNES, Genesis, N64, GameCube, PS1, Saturn, Dreamcast, etc, etc..
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...