ps2 or xbox?

**DankNstickY** · 12-28-2002, 03:33 PM

i'm plannin on getting a new game system. but i dont know which one.

i was leaning towards playstation, but some friends started telling me i should get an xbox.

what do u guys think, and why?

**Tommy Boomfiger** · 12-28-2002, 03:43 PM

Boy, you really do have a problem on your hands, dont you

**Cheesypuff** · 12-28-2002, 05:12 PM

Last year...I would have said ps2...now...I think I'm gonna go with xbox...for multiple reasons...

xbox...has a 8gig hdd which equals faster loading time and virtually unlimited saving.

xbox...has better graphics due to the fatty gf2 card in it.

xbox...has a ethernet hook up already while the ps2 does not...which you have to buy.

xbox...the small controler feels good in the hand...but I don't like the big controler that xbox makes...those are bad...but the small are good.

though

ps2...it has free online gaming...not like xbox live thing....

so seeing all the pros and cons about ps2 and xbox, this is pretty much why I'm leaning on getting a xbox for myself instead of a pse.

**gear02** · 12-28-2002, 06:43 PM

Don't forget the PS2 can play PS1 games...

Also the PS2 has better PS2-exclusive games than the Xbox, though that margin is fading fast.

I say you're good with either one. Or get both.

**DankNstickY** · 12-28-2002, 09:40 PM

Originally posted by gear02
I say you're good with either one. Or get both.

geez i wish.

so how's the online gaming thing work with both systems? what do u need in order to play online (besides the system itself

)

don't you think that it'd be a better deal to buy the ps2 ethernet thing and have free online gaming, rather than gettin a free ethernet connect and having to pay for online games?

**SpeedyVic** · 12-30-2002, 09:11 AM

Here's my plug for the Xbox. Better graphics. Xbox Live is all broadband so better online playing. You have to have cable or DSL though. HDD is a definite plus. I have Xbox Live and I think it's great. Virtually zero lagg. And you can DL new content for your single person games, like Splinter Cell.

You PS2 owners, how many of you that had PS1 actually still play the PS1 games? Not trying to start a flame war, just curious is all.

**Tommy Boomfiger** · 12-30-2002, 09:41 AM

Originally posted by SpeedyVic
You PS2 owners, how many of you that had PS1 actually still play the PS1 games? Not trying to start a flame war, just curious is all.

yes

**Jihforce** · 12-30-2002, 08:36 PM

Xbox...However, I'm concerned about the "quality" of games that's coming out for it. Its been 1 year and its still lacking in that department.

**spigidygak** · 12-31-2002, 12:09 AM

Originally posted by Cheesypuff
Last year...I would have said ps2...now...I think I'm gonna go with xbox...for multiple reasons...

xbox...has a 8gig hdd which equals faster loading time and virtually unlimited saving.

xbox...has better graphics due to the fatty gf2 card in it.

xbox...has a ethernet hook up already while the ps2 does not...which you have to buy.

xbox...the small controler feels good in the hand...but I don't like the big controler that xbox makes...those are bad...but the small are good.

though

ps2...it has free online gaming...not like xbox live thing....

so seeing all the pros and cons about ps2 and xbox, this is pretty much why I'm leaning on getting a xbox for myself instead of a pse.

Personally I think the loading times are negligible. My friend has the xbox and so far the games he has that use the hard drive don't seem anything faster than the ps2 games I use with memory cards.

Graphics are better on xbox. . . most of the time, however pretty marginal. Only real noticeable if you have a nice tv and using component cables.

Yes xbox has ethernet built in. . .however you pay for xbox live set which is the same thing as buying the network adapter for the ps2 which ads (me shudders) a modem jack. . . but hey not all of us can get broadband or afford it.

Yes the small controller feels good, the first one is just utter crap. But, there is just no better controller than the dualshock. Probably reason why sony didn't change the shape of it for the ps2. Just added analog control on all buttons.

Basically for me I'd say sony has the upper hand in better exclusive software. Which is more important than any of the reasons above. I think the only Xbox exclusive game that I'm drooling over is splinter cell, but that will be on pc eventually. Sure halo was cool. . . but wasn't that great imho. I think gran turismo, grand theft auto 3 and vice city are enough reason to go with the ps2.

**x1337xD335C1P13x** · 01-01-2003, 11:12 PM

XBOX comes with four available controller ports, compared to the 2 for PS2.
XBOX loads most games faster than PS2 (GTA vice city takes forever to load, especially the beginning)
XBOX has HALO, and HALO 2 is coming out.
XBOX is selling with 2 ok games, and a controler for $199.99, whereas PS2 is $199.99 by itself (at target)
XBOX has an Intel 733MHz processor, whereas PS2 has a 300 mhz
XBOX doesnt need memory cards, it has an internal hard drive!
And personally, i prefer the green and black to the blue and black.

**xsiled2** · 01-01-2003, 11:32 PM

Originally posted by x1337xD335C1P13x

green and black to the blue and black.

there is no black on the xbox(plastic), minus the black button on the controller.

**DankNstickY** · 01-02-2003, 02:13 AM

well... i havent been on here in a few days.

i got the ps2. best buy raped my parents. $320 for console, additional control, memory card, and a game. geez.

got metal gear solid on monday for $20, and i can't stop playing it.

as far as the 4 controller ports on the xbox vs the 2 on ps2, u can always get the adapter thingy to hook more up. no biggy.
and for the xbox online-gaming-ready, you need cable or dsl, which i dont have neither, so doesnt really matter which one.

oh well... i'm still happy

**ribitch** · 01-02-2003, 09:48 PM

i got the xbox and love it. My brother has a PS2, but i think the xBox looks much better, runs loads faster, and the controlers are better. The only thing i wish i hade was vice city, but he has that, so i can live with playing it on his ps2.

the 300MHz is based on a different architecture than the xBox. you are compareing apples to oranges. or apples to intels

**gear02** · 01-03-2003, 08:00 AM

Originally posted by ribitch
the 300MHz is based on a different architecture than the xBox. you are compareing apples to oranges. or apples to intels

YES! Please please please! At least know that you can't compare an Intel chip, AMD chip, and a PowerPC by just it's clock speed. The architecture is different and so the clock speeds are NOT equal.

This is one of my biggest pet peeves and the reason why AMD decided to use the XP 2200+ moniker, so that people would stop doing direct comparisons.

**i6s1** · 01-03-2003, 10:27 AM

Get xbox if you have cable or dsl. If you don't have broadband, get it. Then get an xbox.

**xsiled2** · 01-03-2003, 04:09 PM

Originally posted by ribitch
the 300MHz is based on a different architecture than the xBox. you are compareing apples to oranges. or apples to intels

um in this case the 733 is a crap load more powerful then the ps2 so ur whole apple to intel comparison is worthless...

the more powerful 733 IS more powerful then the 300 regaurdless its clock.

**apmiller** · 01-06-2003, 09:56 AM

If it's a choice between XB and PS2 then you should just go with the PS2. It's the safe bet! You can't go wrong with the selection of games. X-Box just doesn't have that many hit games.

System performace there's no doubt that x-box beats them all but it means nothing when they don't have the games to back it up.

**xsiled2** · 01-06-2003, 07:34 PM

um HALO HELLO... what ps2 game is better?.. ever played time splitters 2 on a ps2? IT SUCKS, looks great on xbox...

**apmiller** · 01-07-2003, 07:22 AM

Originally posted by xsiled2
um HALO HELLO... what ps2 game is better?.. ever played time splitters 2 on a ps2? IT SUCKS, looks great on xbox...

Actually Time Splitters 2 is better on the Game Cube. No load times and better graphics...

X-Box has no games. They games they do have are on the PS2 as well. Might as well get a PS2 so you can have all the games than be limited. With the addition of being able to play the PS1 games too and having the best controller...X-Box isn't worth it.

**Jihforce** · 01-07-2003, 08:13 PM

XBOX BABY!
I got me one today

My coworker gave it to me. Heehee.
Wedding present. Muhahahaaaa

**Memo** · 01-07-2003, 08:56 PM

Originally posted by apmiller

Actually Time Splitters 2 is better on the Game Cube. No load times and better graphics...

X-Box has no games. They games they do have are on the PS2 as well. Might as well get a PS2 so you can have all the games than be limited. With the addition of being able to play the PS1 games too and having the best controller...X-Box isn't worth it.

That's completely false. Xbox DOES have great games. Splinter Cell for one is a great game. Most of the multi-platform games look WAY better on Xbox (Tony Hawk 4, Madden, all the sports games). Halo is also bad ass! And XBox has XBox live

**xsiled2** · 01-07-2003, 10:38 PM

Originally posted by apmiller
having the best controller...X-Box isn't worth it.

ok first lets look on worth, hrm xbox, 2 games one controller $200, playstation a 3 year old system that is showing its age no game one controller- $200. xbox runs the best games SMOOTHLY with PC like load times, on top of that you dont have to buy a card to save games.

controller, sure the original was crap on the xbox, but since the only way you could have one of those is from getting the original series of xbox or you like it.

the ps2/ ps controller can only be good because it is super generic at this point. its used for everything and unless youve been a box you probly know how to use it.

the xbox S and original for that matter are set up for better gaming, they allow a person to have PC like controll without shoving both of your thumbs side by side.

game cube has less games then xbox and the discs are as toy as the hyandai logo.

**Memo** · 01-07-2003, 11:44 PM

I agree with Xsiled, the Xbox controller S is superior to the Ps2 controller. THe original XBox cnotroller was a piece of crap but the S version makes it EASY to use 2 joysticks with your thumbs at once, which is a MUST for games like Splinter Cell where you move the camera and guy at the same time. It also adds 2 more buttons which are sometimes needed with todays more complicated games.

**apmiller** · 01-08-2003, 07:50 AM

Wow...good stuff here. I like talking to folks that pay attention to the industry and just don't come back with "it's just cool so there!"

I don't really disagree with you folks either.

Like I've said before, the Xbox is a powerhouse and there is no better console as far as specs go. Yes, games do look better on the XBox. Not in every case but most of them. Games not originally made for the XB tend to look better on the GC and that's only because the GC was made to put out color like no ones business so it appears to look better.

What has been a thorn in the XB side has been the fact it has few games...PS2 has more games you can choke a buffalo with. Sales show gamers like to have as many games as they can get their hands on, but thats the adverage gamer...folks like me. All though we want quality we will give it up a bit just to have more games. We want to keep playing non stop. That's why the PS2 out sells all other units, the GBA comes in second and the GC and XB are always fighting for the third spot.

The controllers...here is where you loose me. Even the new XB controller feels strange in my hands. I still don't like it. I rather have the PS2 or GC controllers. They feel more natural to me. But that's just my opinion...

**gear02** · 01-08-2003, 08:46 AM

Originally posted by apmiller
Wow...good stuff here. I like talking to folks that pay attention to the industry and just don't come back with "it's just cool so there!"

The controllers...here is where you loose me. Even the new XB controller feels strange in my hands. I still don't like it. I rather have the PS2 or GC controllers. They feel more natural to me. But that's just my opinion...

Give it more time and you'll find the S controller to be a better fit that PS2. I don't like the GC controller too much since it doesn't have too many buttons, which make sports games hard to play. Also, the three other buttons (B, X, Y) are in strange positions.

Load times and graphics rock on the cube, but I don't like the fact that it uses memory cards. Same for PS2. I love the Xbox hard drive for my sports games since they take up tons of space. Madden for cube took a WHOLE Memory Card 59 and about a quarter of a PS2 card.

But in any case, you really can't go wrong buying either of the three consoles. Just find the better deal and ignore all the fanboys.

**apmiller** · 01-08-2003, 02:38 PM

Originally posted by gear02

Load times and graphics rock on the cube, but I don't like the fact that it uses memory cards. Same for PS2. I love the Xbox hard drive for my sports games since they take up tons of space. Madden for cube took a WHOLE Memory Card 59 and about a quarter of a PS2 card.

But in any case, you really can't go wrong buying either of the three consoles. Just find the better deal and ignore all the fanboys.

Agreed...though I love my Cube, I'm getting a little tired of switching back and forth between the 4 memory cards I have.

**SpeedyVic** · 01-08-2003, 07:42 PM

Why does the Xbox not have as many games as the PS2? Probably because of market saturation. More people have the PS2 due to it being out longer and also because of the initial price of the Xbox. (Way too high!)

I am hoping that lowering the price of the Xbox to a competetive level (coupled with the launch of Xbox Live) will increase the market share for the Xbox. If more people play on the Box, more developers and publishers will invest more of thier assets to making high quality games for the Xbox, instead of just converting a PS2 title.

**apmiller** · 01-09-2003, 11:25 AM

Originally posted by SpeedyVic
Why does the Xbox not have as many games as the PS2? Probably because of market saturation. More people have the PS2 due to it being out longer and also because of the initial price of the Xbox. (Way too high!)

I am hoping that lowering the price of the Xbox to a competetive level (coupled with the launch of Xbox Live) will increase the market share for the Xbox. If more people play on the Box, more developers and publishers will invest more of thier assets to making high quality games for the Xbox, instead of just converting a PS2 title.

I think your right. PS2 had a big advantage to start with. The XB has the ability of being huge and taking over the market but (in my opinion) only if they can start turning a profit. Microsoft is very open about the fact they sell this thing way under the cost of making it and with every unit sold they take a loss. X-Box Live has not pulled in the numbers they thought it would either. Though Microsoft still cliams they still stand behind the XB and have no plans on pulling out. They say that though the losses are high they can make it up in other areas of the company. This makes me wonder how long can they go with taking the loss? Eventually they will ahve to shut it all down (I would think) if they can't make it profitable.

**Mpowered** · 01-09-2003, 05:59 PM

Damn, what difference does it make that one system has better graphics than another? Stop nitpicking.

Figure out which has the games you want more. If the XB has your favorite games get it, if the PS2 has them go for it. All the damn hardware in the world isn’t going to make sucky games any more fun. And yes, sucky is a personal preference!