OMG!! PS2 Article from 2000, CREEPY.. Must read!!

OMG!! When I was reading this I got wierded out lol, I mean just read this article from the year 2000 about the PS2. The simliraties are so close its scary!!  Very intresting to see how people hated on the PS2 like they are with the PS3. Will history repeat it self..

http://archive.salon.com/tech/log/2000/10/27/playstation_rant/index.html

A Quick story about the PS2, read it and tell me history won't repeat itself...

Don't buy that PlayStation
It's overpriced and has no online access, and hardly any good games are available to play on it.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Jim Lynch

Oct. 27, 2000 | Whether or not Sony was sincere in its claim that a supply crisis led it to cut its initial shipments of the PlayStation2 to just 500,000 units, there's little question that the corporation was successful in the arena of hype marketing. Lines of obsessed PlayStation fans were a news staple Wednesday. But is the so-called superconsole really worth staying up all night for?

No. The PS2 is not the revolutionary device that Sony's marketing department would have you believe. Don't get me wrong; it's definitely the most powerful video-game machine on the planet right now. But that's not enough.

And don't expect a huge number of quality games anytime soon. Sony has reversed positions with Sega and stupidly released a system that is in many ways a game developer's nightmare. Sega, learning from its Saturn debacle, went out of its way to make the Dreamcast easy to develop games for. But Sony, intoxicated with success from the first PlayStation, forgot the first rule of the video-game industry: Software sells systems. If you make it hard for developers to produce good games then there's no reason for people to buy the system. This oversight has already cost Sony some goodwill -- developers are howling about how hard it is to create games for the system. In an interview with Time magazine, John Carmack, one of the developers behind such massively popular games as Doom and Quake, said that the "PS2 is definitely more powerful than Dreamcast. But it's less convenient to extract performance from it."

Sony is also under the mistaken impression that including the ability to play DVD movies is a huge selling point. But true technophiles and hardcore gamers probably already have DVD drives. I'm a good case in point. I already own a Sony DVD player, so I could not care less if the $299 PS2 can play movies. I'd rather pay less and get a machine that just plays games instead.

In comparison, the Sega Dreamcast sells for $149 and has a giant library of games already available. Sega also has an online game network, Seganet. The Dreamcast comes with a built-in 56K modem and Sega will soon release a broadband (cable/DSL) adapter for it. (The PS2 does not ship with a modem.) Sega is banking on the appeal of multiplayer online gaming, even going so far as to rebate the entire cost of a Dreamcast to players who sign up for Seganet. And for the first time ever we actually have cross-platform online gaming -- Seganet lets Dreamcast players compete against PC players in games like Quake 3. Sony, on the other hand, is promising online gaming later on but currently has nothing to offer purchasers of the PS2.

In addition to Sega, Sony also has two 800-pound gaming gorillas breathing down its neck: Nintendo and Microsoft. Nintendo plans to release its powerful GameCube system next year. Don't downplay Nintendo's chances either. Despite having a rocky time with the N64, Nintendo has some of the most lucrative franchises in video-game history on its side (Zelda, Super Mario Brothers, Metroid, etc.) and a superb marketing machine.

The real wild card here, though, is Microsoft, which plans to release its X-Box game system next year. The Xbox will have even more powerful hardware than the PS2, and Microsoft has the marketing muscle and rapport with developers to do the PS2 real damage. Unlike Sony, Microsoft is taking great pains to make sure the X-Box is easy to make games for -- developers will also be able to easily port games from the PC to the X-Box, thus insuring a huge supply of games.

So should you feel bad if you can't get a PS2 right away? No way. If you wait a while you'll avoid all the lines and scuffling in stores and you'll end up with a much better selection of games. And if you wait long enough for the upcoming systems from Microsoft and Nintendo, you'll probably see a cut in the price of the PS2 as Sony tries to ward off both threats.

Hardcore gamers aren't known for their patience, but this is one occasion when playing it smart may mean not playing at all. For now.

I approve of this thread. It's like a modern day article.:oZeldaMaster32

OMG DUDE I know, isnt it crazy!! I mean my god just look at the simliarties between the dreamcast/PS2 war and the 360/ps3 war!! Man I really got creeped out reading that

You should dig up the TIME OCTOBER 2000 article that BLASTED the PS2, and told users Dreamcast was the better decision, or waiting for the Xbox.

That is equally funny....

The games that are being released at the same time as the system don't rise much, if at all, above games available for Sega's rival (and cheaper) Dreamcast video-game system

wow.sounds like the 360

holy crap, hahaha, thats insaneR-Dot-Yung

I know dude!! that matches the PS3/360 war to the wire!! Even how the 360 is white as was the dreamcast and the PS3 is black! I mean everything! Especially the part how the dreamcast at the time had the advantage because of its online capablities and userbase and back when the PS2 was released the dreamcast had the superior online and userbase! Man that is so freakin crazy how similar

A lot of things have changed since then, there are too many varying factors now ranging from Xbox actually having a fanbase to the Wii's suprising success. The 360 also came out earlier which leads one to question how powerful a year head start can be. I dunno, I don't see history repeating itself in the respect on console will sell millions more than the others. I think the field is going to be much more evened out this gen.

*puts crystal ball back in pocket* 

"And don't expect a huge number of quality games anytime soon. Sony has reversed positions with Sega and stupidly released a system that is in many ways a game developer's nightmare. Sega, learning from its Saturn debacle, went out of its way to make the Dreamcast easy to develop games for"

Taken straight from the article, thats just scary!

You should dig up the TIME OCTOBER 2000 article that BLASTED the PS2, and told users Dreamcast was the better decision, or waiting for the Xbox.

That is equally funny....

SolidTy

6 years later, Time bashes the PlayStation 3. :P

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,998343-4,00.html

Here is a time article.  i dont know if it is the one another poster eluded to, as it doesn't lambast the ps2 as much but I like one of the final lines on the 4th page regarding the PS2 and it having DVD.

"PlayStation2 seems to be no more than a DVD player that can play games," grumbles Mike Roberts, an 18-year-old gamer from Missouri who says he won't be buying a PS2. "It should be the other way around."

Sounds very similar to gamers today complaining about blu-ray. 

great thread!

I totally agree 

"Sony is also under the mistaken impression that including the ability to play DVD movies is a huge selling point. But true technophiles and hardcore gamers probably already have DVD drives. I'm a good case in point. I already own a Sony DVD player, so I could not care less if the $299 PS2 can play movies. I'd rather pay less and get a machine that just plays games instead."

Ahammer80

Ha, sounds like a lot of lemmings and sheeps around here.

The games that are being released at the same time as the system don't rise much, if at all, above games available for Sega's rival (and cheaper) Dreamcast video-game system

wow.sounds like the 360

palaric8

It'd be great if the 360 could continue in the DC's tradition of having lots of offbeat games, but I'd prefer if this time, the system didn't quickly get discontinued. ;)

OMG!! When I was reading this I got wierded out lol, I mean just read this article from the year 2000 about the PS2. The simliraties are so close its scary!!  Very intresting to see how people hated on the PS2 like they are with the PS3. Will history repeat it self..

http://archive.salon.com/tech/log/2000/10/27/playstation_rant/index.html

A Quick story about the PS2, read it and tell me history won't repeat itself...

 

:

 

Don't buy that PlayStation
It's overpriced and has no online access, and hardly any good games are available to play on it.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Jim Lynch

Oct. 27, 2000 | Whether or not Sony was sincere in its claim that a supply crisis led it to cut its initial shipments of the PlayStation2 to just 500,000 units, there's little question that the corporation was successful in the arena of hype marketing. Lines of obsessed PlayStation fans were a news staple Wednesday. But is the so-called superconsole really worth staying up all night for?

No. The PS2 is not the revolutionary device that Sony's marketing department would have you believe. Don't get me wrong; it's definitely the most powerful video-game machine on the planet right now. But that's not enough.

---

The PS2's stats are certainly impressive; it's got hardware power to burn. But so what? There's just not much software available that can take advantage of it. The games that are being released at the same time as the system don't rise much, if at all, above games available for Sega's rival (and cheaper) Dreamcast video-game system.

And don't expect a huge number of quality games anytime soon. Sony has reversed positions with Sega and stupidly released a system that is in many ways a game developer's nightmare. Sega, learning from its Saturn debacle, went out of its way to make the Dreamcast easy to develop games for. But Sony, intoxicated with success from the first PlayStation, forgot the first rule of the video-game industry: Software sells systems. If you make it hard for developers to produce good games then there's no reason for people to buy the system. This oversight has already cost Sony some goodwill -- developers are howling about how hard it is to create games for the system. In an interview with Time magazine, John Carmack, one of the developers behind such massively popular games as Doom and Quake, said that the "PS2 is definitely more powerful than Dreamcast. But it's less convenient to extract performance from it."

Sony is also under the mistaken impression that including the ability to play DVD movies is a huge selling point. But true technophiles and hardcore gamers probably already have DVD drives. I'm a good case in point. I already own a Sony DVD player, so I could not care less if the $299 PS2 can play movies. I'd rather pay less and get a machine that just plays games instead.

In comparison, the Sega Dreamcast sells for $149 and has a giant library of games already available. Sega also has an online game network, Seganet. The Dreamcast comes with a built-in 56K modem and Sega will soon release a broadband (cable/DSL) adapter for it. (The PS2 does not ship with a modem.) Sega is banking on the appeal of multiplayer online gaming, even going so far as to rebate the entire cost of a Dreamcast to players who sign up for Seganet. And for the first time ever we actually have cross-platform online gaming -- Seganet lets Dreamcast players compete against PC players in games like Quake 3. Sony, on the other hand, is promising online gaming later on but currently has nothing to offer purchasers of the PS2.

In addition to Sega, Sony also has two 800-pound gaming gorillas breathing down its neck: Nintendo and Microsoft. Nintendo plans to release its powerful GameCube system next year. Don't downplay Nintendo's chances either. Despite having a rocky time with the N64, Nintendo has some of the most lucrative franchises in video-game history on its side (Zelda, Super Mario Brothers, Metroid, etc.) and a superb marketing machine.

The real wild card here, though, is Microsoft, which plans to release its X-Box game system next year. The Xbox will have even more powerful hardware than the PS2, and Microsoft has the marketing muscle and rapport with developers to do the PS2 real damage. Unlike Sony, Microsoft is taking great pains to make sure the X-Box is easy to make games for -- developers will also be able to easily port games from the PC to the X-Box, thus insuring a huge supply of games.

So should you feel bad if you can't get a PS2 right away? No way. If you wait a while you'll avoid all the lines and scuffling in stores and you'll end up with a much better selection of games. And if you wait long enough for the upcoming systems from Microsoft and Nintendo, you'll probably see a cut in the price of the PS2 as Sony tries to ward off both threats.

Hardcore gamers aren't known for their patience, but this is one occasion when playing it smart may mean not playing at all. For now.

Ahammer80

theres difference th eps3 has online and is not overpriced its just expensive

Poor Dreamcast :cry:Sicknic

:lol:

wait I'm sorry.....

RIP Dreamcast :cry: 

Lol, when I read that he says Sony is mistaken if they think they can push dvd on PS2 was when it really hit me lol.

Not saying that means much since I doubt 360 will die soon, but it's stricking similar.

Ahaha that cracked me up; its like the exact same story as today...maybe all the "negative" things that has happened to the PS3 is just part of Sony's plan.

Welcome to PS2 vs. DC round 2. The only difference is the champ gets fat and the underdog bites back.

Ahaha that cracked me up; its like the exact same story as today...maybe all the "negative" things that has happened to the PS3 is just part of Sony's plan.

 

PS2_ROCKS

Welcome to PS2 vs. DC round 2. The only difference is the champ gets fat and the underdog bites back.

ralphikari

WOW! Lol another favorite part of that article  "Unlike Sony, Microsoft is taking great pains to make sure the X-Box is easy to make games for -- developers will also be able to easily port games from the PC to the X-Box, thus insuring a huge supply of games."

WOW sound familiar much?

WOW paragraph 2 just had me laughing and in the same time being in amazement on how simliar that is with the PS3's current situation...

"No. The PS2 is not the revolutionary device that Sony's marketing department would have you believe. Don't get me wrong; it's definitely the most powerful video-game machine on the planet right now. But that's not enough."

nice find :wink:

its strickingly similar to today PS 3's situation. people who think Blu-ray is useless and high price tag will stop PS 3 should re-think it again.

old.

this is why i laugh at the biased media and sites when they attack the console that cant be beaten. Too bad some of u in here still never learn even thought evidence like this is shown right in ur faces.

LOLZ at playing online with 56K :lol:Solid-CELL

I didnt think anyone bought the PS2 for its DVD player. no one I know did.

But anyway it the article was written before the launch. I'm pretty sure that its press was getting better by this time and i bet it was selling better. and it also had a year to get rid of bad press. (sega was already floundering because of piracy and they were running out of money)

I didnt think anyone bought the PS2 for its DVD player. no one I know did.

But anyway it the article was written before the launch. I'm pretty sure that its press was getting better by this time and i bet it was selling better. and it also had a year to get rid of bad press. (sega was already floundering because of piracy and they were running out of money)

laughingman42

all ps2 and ps1 games in south america are copies ,piracy.

thats way ps2 and ps1 won I think,piracy,it just easy to copy.

Here's the difference: $600. That and Sega had been steadily going downhill, while MS has a silly amount of money and success.pundog

main reason for that is bluray, ps3 will be $499 in Nov07 and $399 in Nov08.

wow, that's horrifyingly similar to the PS3s situation.TrueReligion_

True, but with one major difference. The PS3 doesn't have a winning DVD format built in. The PS2 had the next movie format built-in, with the PS3, it is one of the competing new formats, but Blu-Ray isn't the winner yet. Not for a while, anyway.

That difference alone is a major one which could make or break the PS3; Blu-Ray...