Video Games

[Gen. Volkov]

 Actually Xbox came out only slightly after PS2, so they are about equal.

[RazorClaw]

 Best Action Game: Grand Theft Auto 3: San Andreas (origin ps2) [BUT NOW ON GC AND XBOX, YOUR POINT IS NIL]
Best Driving Game: Burnout 3 (xbox)
Best Fighting Game: Mortal Kombat: Deception (ps2 and gc[ON GCN] not sure bout xbox)
Best First Person Action: Halo 2 (Xbox)
Best Game Based on a Movie: Chronicles of Riddick: Escape From Butcher Bay (only ps2 but not sure)[You're kidding, right? I seriously hope you are)
Best Gaming Publication: Game Informer
Best Gaming Website: Gamespot (GameFAQs)
Best Graphics: Half-Life 2 (COMP!!!) (Yeah, right. Compy doesn't have the grpahic power of a Dreamcast, much less a GCN)
Best Handheld Game: Metroid: Zero Mission (How many handheld games have you played? Read: FIRE EMBLEM, POKEMON, FF, MARIO)
Best Massive Multiplayer Online Game: City of Heroes (COMP!) (This doesn't even aplly to gaming concoles being discussed here)
Best Military Game: CoD: Finest Hour (sucks, get CoD for computer)
Best New Technology: Nintendo DS
Best PC Game: Half-Life 2(See Massive Multiplayer)
Best Performance by a Human Female: Brooke Burke in Need For Speed Underground 2
Best Performance by a Human Male: Samuel L. Jackson in Grand Theft Auto 3: San Andreas
Best Role-Playing Game: Fable (Xbox) (LOL! Read: FF, Fire Emblem, Pokemon. PWNED again!)
Best Song in a Game: American Idiot - Green Day, in Madden 2005
Best Soundtrack: Grand Theft Auto 3: San Andreas (PS2 again) (Zelda, Tos pwn this too)
Best Sports Game: Madden 2005 (PS2 Xbox AND GCN)
Best Wireless Game: Might and Magic (What's it for? Anyway, IMO, Pokemon w/ wireless adaptor and SM64DS pwn this too)
Cyber Vixen of the Year: BloodRayne (Unrelated)
Designer of the Year: Jason Jones of Bungie Studios (Shigeru Miyamoto)
Most Addictive Game: Burnout 3 (Kirby Air Ride. I'm still playing that thing. All the addictive challenges, etc... And multiplayer's fun)



Where's the action games? Where's the adventure games? 2 critical GCN categories mysteriously missing! XBox came out slightly after PS2, and still owns it! You can;t judge XBox 2 and PS3 at this point. The controller connection is fine... PS2 has 3 analog sticks. Annoying. ANd they're too small for their design. GCN has all buttons within easy reach. Rough Raiders, start spelling correctly and acting more mature than a six year old and I'll listen to your shife about Pokemon. Retard.  :rolleyes: And the PS2 games have all kinds of many-buttoned combinations that take 15 seconds to pull off. GCN's control system is easy and fun. Kirby Air Ride, one of their most fun games, uses 2 buttons! You keep harping on MOH. Another PS2 game that's better than anything? Other than Rakket and Tang or whatever. Have you played it yet? No. And Have you read anything on Resident Evil 4? It's NEW! NEW plot! NEW baddies! NEW view for easier aiming! w/ Leon S. Kennedy! Remember?  

[Sonoras]

 Train.

[RazorClaw]

 Plane.

[Death Eater]

 Almost forgot about this topic.

Well, first, I really dont feel like quoting and searching through gaming sites and whatnot cuz I'm dam tired, so if you dont believe me, than I'll show you all up with that stuff later.

Before I say ANYTHING, I want to clear up this controller issue.

ALL controllers are irrevelent to the performance of the system. If a gamer spends enough time with it, there should be considerable difficulty in handling it. After an hour of playing with the Xbox controller, it felt like second nature, NO problems. And I'm sure its the same with the other systems.

NEXT, Volkov, I chuckled to myself when I saw you write that PS2's graphics are equal to those of Xbox's. Like I said, I'm not gonna pull out the specs, but I believe the Xbox's power is something like 3 times that of PS2. All the developers LOVE using the Xbox because it does not limit them like the GC or PS2 in terms of techonlogy. DREAMCAST (last generation system) has the SAME processing speed and chip as the PS2. THE SAME, and its a WHOLE generation earlier.

So, its safe to say that, with Xbox's harddrive, extensive Dolby Digital 5.1 Sound (which PS2 deosnt generally support) and exponentially greater power than the rest, it is the greater of them all (in that category).

1. Xbox
2. PS2

Finally, games. Games, games, games, games...and more games. This is the big argument.

Well, if you look on page 1 of this, I list various excellent games on all systems. Notice how the Xbox has more than Halo 2? Remember, those are games SPECIFIC to the SYSTEMS. For example, I didn't include Burnout 3, ESPN NFL 2K5 (best football game this year), or MK: Deception, EVEN THOUGHT these three games and more are substantially better on the Xbox than on the other 2 systems due to GRAPHICS and ONLINE play.

So the next time I see someone write that Xbox only has one decent game, I will completely disregard anything that person says on the account that their an ignorant moron.

Next, RPG's. This, I can honestly say, is the ONE category that I will admit Xbox isn't QUITE as good as the PS2. HOWEVER, they still have an array of RPG materpieces. KOTOR and KOTOR 2 (xbox exclusive), Fable, Morrowind, and a newer game coming out that looks incredible, Jade Empire. PS2 has some very good RPG's in Final Fantasy and Kingdom Hearts, but I feel the Xbox has made incredible ground on PS2 in the last year with RPG development. So, its close but:
RPG's
1. PS2
2. Xbox (close 2nd tho)

For the rest, I would say Xbox is superior. Xbox has Halo 2, Riddick, Wolfenstein, Counterstrike, Deus Ex, etc., etc. Plus Half-Life 2 and Doom 3 are coming out
PS2's response to those FPS monsters ===> Killzone (received a 6.9 from gamespot) nice Halo killer you got there) and...ummm...

I gotta go, so I'm gonna end off on this. I look at the three systems as the following:

If you like kiddie games and enjoy cartoons and your 8 years old, Gamecube is your choice (except for Resident Evil 4 - finally older GC owners have something to play). For me, the novelty of watching mario jump around for the 5000th time wears thin rather quickly. Ages from 5 - 12

If you like anime, and a variety of kiddie games to teen games, mostly single player. And you are loyal to Sony. Go with PS2. Ages from 10 - 15

If you like to go WOW at your games, play competitive matches around the world with different people via online, and like a good variety of older, a bit more mature games, go with Xbox. Ages from 15 - 40

Btw, I didnt include cpu at all in this post, since I dont know much about cpu and it really varies on how much money you put into it.

[Gen. Volkov]

 Gah. I'm sorry, but I half to laugh. EVERY game you mentioned with the exception of Halo 1 and 2 are for BOTH systems. As to processing power and graphics, I HAVE looked up the specs. PS2 and Xbox ARE about equal. Have you PLAYED both systems Death Eater? I highly doubt it, judging form your single mindedness. I have played all the systems mentioned, and PS2 is far and away the best fo rany number of reasons I've already enumerated. As to mindblowing games.... PS2 rivals Xbox game for game. It is certainly not a kiddie system. There is exactly ONE FPS game that you can't get for both systems that Xbox has, PS2 has many. Finally, Fable SUCKS compared to Final Fantasy. Any of Xbox's rpg's suck compared to the ones PS2 has. Also, the generation gao you speak of between Dreamcast and PS2 is not there, they are contemporary systems, and PS2 most definitely does NOT use the same graphics engine Dreamcast does. So that leaves Xbox stripped of everything you described. Save sound, which I admit is better, but who actually cares about sound, besides explosions it don't matter. It still has Halo, but that's one game against the multitudes that both have or are for PS2 only. It does have some RPG's that are Xbox only but they aren't comparable. As to killzone... Um yeah, suckage there I agree. But hey, PS2 had MOH, Call of Duty, and all the tom clancy games.

Really finally this time, some said that Compy has worse graphics than console, which is just wrong. Compies are the ultimate gaming platforms, best graphics, best sound, and best controls. You can't beat a compy for any game you want to discuss. Mouse+keyboard or joystick stomple any controller yet invented, and there are no consoles with subwoofers. And the graphics.... compy's have about 1000 times the power of the BEST console system, you cannot beat the graphics power of a compy. Plus compy's have far and away the BEST RTS games. There is absolutely no comparison between ANY console RTS and a compy RTS. Goblin Commander, BATTLE FOR MIDDLE EARTH. Need I say more? Ok, I will, Army men, (PS2 RTS) WARCRAFT. STARCRAFT. AGE OF EMPIRES! EMPIRE (FRICKING) EARTH! The list goes on and one. There are FP games, like City of Heroes, the warcraft one, HALO for compy! The compy simply cannot be beat as a gaming platform. AND it has the all time best Flight sims of any system! Ace Combat? BAH! Red Baron 3D! F/A-18 Hornet! Microsoft flight simulator! AND you have yet even more games. Compy has the widest range, most power, best sound, and best graphics of anything the consoles can offer. You cannot beat the sheer number of games for compy! CIV CALL TO POWER! SIM CITY! Consoles have NOTHING like that. Online? COMPY"S ARE THE ORIGINAL ONLINE SYSTEM! Redwall Warlords for crying out loud! You could NEVER do this on Xbox live! So yeah, of the consoles, I say PS2 is best. But for best gaming platform, for the final time, COMPUTER PWNS ALL!

[Death Eater]

 Volkov, you made me do this. Now your toast ;)

EVERY game you mentioned with the exception of Halo 1 and 2 are for BOTH systems.

Ninja Gaiden - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/ninjag...?q=Ninja+Gaiden
Only on Xbox

KOTOR & KOTOR 2 - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/rpg/kotor2/in....html?q=Knights

Thats KOTOR 2, which is currently only out on Xbox. However, KOTOR and KOTOR 2 are or will be released on the PC, but I did not include the PC in my arguements for reasons I will state soon.

Chronicles of Riddick - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/chroni....html?q=Riddick
ONLY on Xbox
(released on the PC later on)

Rallispot Challenge 2 - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/driving/ralli...ml?q=rallisport
ONLY ON XBOX

Fable - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/rpg/fable/ind...ex.html?q=Fable
ONLY ON XBOX

Notice that ALL of these games that I mentioned are ONLY for Xbox or PC - NOT PS2.

As to processing power and graphics, I HAVE looked up the specs. PS2 and Xbox ARE about equal.

XBOX

Processor   1 x Intel Pentium III 733MHz
Processor Clock Speed   733MHz
L1 Cache   Instruction 32KB, Data 32KB
L2 Cache   128KB
External Bus   6.4GB/s
Internal Data Precision   32-bit Integer, 64-bit Floating-Point
Hard Drive   10GB

PS2

Processor   2 x Toshiba & Sony Emotion Engine 294.9MHz
Processor Clock Speed   300MHz
L1 Cache   Instruction 16KB, Data 8KB, 16K SPRAM

you can get FULL specs info here:
http://hardware.gamespot.com/Compare-C-9395-1-4-5

So, as I said before, the thing that catches my eye is Processing Clock Speed. 300 MHz compared to Xbox's 733 MHz. Thats approx. 2.5 times faster than PS2. Hardly the same.

Have you PLAYED both systems Death Eater? I highly doubt it, judging form your single mindednes

I HAVE played all three systems quite extensively, and I did thorough research before I purchased my Xbox on all systems. And I have been quite satisfied.

It is certainly not a kiddie system

I never said it was. I believed the Gamecube was a kiddie system (in general).

There is exactly ONE FPS game that you can't get for both systems that Xbox has, PS2 has many

Return to the Castle of Wolfenstein: Tides of War. You cannot get that game for PS2, however, if your referring to the terribly stripped down version available for PS2 titled: Operation Resurrection, than fine. Keep it. Considering it received a 4.9 compared to Xbox's 8.2. PS2 is that much better!
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/return...l?q=Wolfenstein

Chronicles of Riddick - already gave proof to that. PS2 certainly doesnt have it.

Halo
Halo 2
(you know about these)

And better yet, HAlf-Life 2, Doom 3, and Pariah are all Xbox exclusive and coming soon. They are anticipated to be amazing FPS games on the Xbox.

Now, please identify ANY PS2 FPS that are decent and arent available on the Xbox. And this time, can you at least back it up?

Finally, Fable SUCKS compared to Final Fantasy. Any of Xbox's rpg's suck compared to the ones PS2 has

Final Fantasy XI     PS2     8.0 (score)
Final Fantasy X-2     PS2     8.1
Final Fantasy X     PS2     9.3
Kingdom Hearts     PS2     8.2
   
Fable    XBOX    8.6
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic     XBOX     9.1
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords    XBOX     8.5

This comes from Gamespot, an unbiased, multi-platform site that was given best gaming website for 2004 by Spike TV gaming awards and others.

I certainly see how Final Fantasy on PS2 destroys anything XBOX has  :rolleyes:

Also, the generation gap you speak of between Dreamcast and PS2 is not there, they are contemporary systems, and PS2 most definitely does NOT use the same graphics engine Dreamcast does.

Sega Dreamcast - Release Date     09/09/1999
PS2 - Release Date   10/26/2000
XBOX - Release Date   11/08/2001

Okay, so dreamcast was released only a year before PS2. However, if you look at the specs here: http://hardware.gamespot.com/Compare-C-9395-1-4-5

you will see that in that year, Sony only increased its hardware by 100MHz processing clock speed, whereas in the year separating the Xbox release and the PS2 release, Xbox improved its system by 433Mhz processing clock speed. Not much difference at all between the DC and the PS2. And anyone that looks at the specs on that page will see it.

So that leaves Xbox stripped of everything you described.

Right. Well that comment is now obsolete.

Save sound, which I admit is better, but who actually cares about sound, besides explosions it don't matter.

Really? So playing splinter cell through with the sound turned off doesn't make a difference?

It still has Halo, but that's one game against the multitudes that both have or are for PS2 only

Again, another comment I have already proved to be ignorant.
And I'd like to see a list of these so called games that are so good and are PS2 only. My list on the first page was the best I could do for PS2. However, I did miss SOCOM on that list (silly me), so add it. Though, SOCOM is not match for Halo.

It does have some RPG's that are Xbox only but they aren't comparable

see above

As to killzone... Um yeah, suckage there I agree. But hey, PS2 had MOH, Call of Duty, and all the tom clancy games.

And so does Xbox. Xbox has MOH: frontline, Call of Duty: Finest Hour, and all the tom clancy games. In fact, I want to add that the tom clancy games on Xbox are MUCH bette than those of PS2, due to sound (which they rely heavily on), graphics, and online play.

Really finally this time, some said that Compy has worse graphics than console, which is just wrong. Compies are the ultimate gaming platforms, best graphics, best sound, and best controls. You can't beat a compy for any game you want to discuss. Mouse+keyboard or joystick stomple any controller yet invented, and there are no consoles with subwoofers. And the graphics.... compy's have about 1000 times the power of the BEST console system, you cannot beat the graphics power of a compy. Plus compy's have far and away the BEST RTS games. There is absolutely no comparison between ANY console RTS and a compy RTS. Goblin Commander, BATTLE FOR MIDDLE EARTH. Need I say more? Ok, I will, Army men, (PS2 RTS) WARCRAFT. STARCRAFT. AGE OF EMPIRES! EMPIRE (FRICKING) EARTH! The list goes on and one. There are FP games, like City of Heroes, the warcraft one, HALO for compy! The compy simply cannot be beat as a gaming platform. AND it has the all time best Flight sims of any system! Ace Combat? BAH! Red Baron 3D! F/A-18 Hornet! Microsoft flight simulator! AND you have yet even more games. Compy has the widest range, most power, best sound, and best graphics of anything the consoles can offer. You cannot beat the sheer number of games for compy! CIV CALL TO POWER! SIM CITY! Consoles have NOTHING like that. Online? COMPY"S ARE THE ORIGINAL ONLINE SYSTEM! Redwall Warlords for crying out loud! You could NEVER do this on Xbox live! So yeah, of the consoles, I say PS2 is best. But for best gaming platform, for the final time, COMPUTER PWNS ALL!

As for this last comment, I would like to share my view on the cpu as a system.

I feel that in order for it to be the great system many people describe and love, etc. you need to invest a LOT of time and money into it. A LOT. As the computer is CONSTANTLY upgrading and getting bette,r new parts are constantly in need. I know people that are computer gamers, and the amount of money they invest into their computer is incredible. It dwarfs the amount that I pay for my Xbox or any console gamer pays. For example, over a 10 year period, I may buy 3 systems for $100, $200, and $300 respectively (super nintendo, dreamcast, xbox). Games would come to about $1000 in total. Thats $1600 for gaming for 10 years. However, I sold all of my systems and games when I was done, so I cut the cost down to $1200. It'll be even lower when I sell my Xbox when its time has passed. So, in 10 years, I have spent a total of $1000 (CDN) on gaming.

Now, pretend I was a cpu gamer for the same amount of time. Let's say I start with a base cost of $1000 for the cpu. Than, another $1000 is required to make the cpu what it needs to be good. Than, lets say I spend $500 on games for those 10 years. However, that $2000 grows to almost $6000 within this amount of time. LEt's say I get lucky and sell some games and old equipment (doubtful, but possible). Lets cut the cost to $5000.  Thats 5 times as much money as spent on console gaming. And thats being generous, with a modestly good cpu. The best cpu's, people spend double, even triple that amount.

So, as you can see, you need the dough to be a cpu gamer for any length of time. I have a decent cpu, 2 GB processing speed, 512 DDR ram, a decent video card. But when I try any game on it, I laugh. It doesn't come close to the Xbox. So I guess I need to invest more than $1500 (CDN) jsut to get started in cpu gaming.

And for what? Better graphics and more games? I am perfectly satisfied with the amount of games my Xbox has, thank you very much.

So, anyone else wish to try?

[Peace Alliance]

 PS2, and let my explain why its the best.

To produce a game that plays on the Xbox, you need to buy the rights FROM microsoft. This means, all Xbox games are made through MS, and cost more for the companies to make, thus there are MANY more PS2 games because for PS2, you don't have to have the rights bought.

Also, all the good games come out for PS2. Some of them EVENTUALLY come out for Xbox and gamecube, but a lot of the good ones go right for PS2. GTA, for example, being one of the best games out there. Its PS2 only, at the moment, it MIGHT come out for Xbox later on, but i doubt it.  

[Gen. Volkov]

Volkov, you made me do this. Now your toast ;)



Ninja Gaiden - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/ninjag...?q=Ninja+Gaiden
Only on Xbox

KOTOR & KOTOR 2 - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/rpg/kotor2/in....html?q=Knights

Thats KOTOR 2, which is currently only out on Xbox. However, KOTOR and KOTOR 2 are or will be released on the PC, but I did not include the PC in my arguements for reasons I will state soon.

Chronicles of Riddick - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/chroni....html?q=Riddick
ONLY on Xbox
(released on the PC later on)

Rallispot Challenge 2 - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/driving/ralli...ml?q=rallisport
ONLY ON XBOX

Fable - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/rpg/fable/ind...ex.html?q=Fable
ONLY ON XBOX

Notice that ALL of these games that I mentioned are ONLY for Xbox or PC - NOT PS2.


XBOX

Processor   1 x Intel Pentium III 733MHz
Processor Clock Speed   733MHz
L1 Cache   Instruction 32KB, Data 32KB
L2 Cache   128KB
External Bus   6.4GB/s
Internal Data Precision   32-bit Integer, 64-bit Floating-Point
Hard Drive   10GB

PS2

Processor   2 x Toshiba & Sony Emotion Engine 294.9MHz
Processor Clock Speed   300MHz
L1 Cache   Instruction 16KB, Data 8KB, 16K SPRAM

you can get FULL specs info here:
http://hardware.gamespot.com/Compare-C-9395-1-4-5

So, as I said before, the thing that catches my eye is Processing Clock Speed. 300 MHz compared to Xbox's 733 MHz. Thats approx. 2.5 times faster than PS2. Hardly the same.



I HAVE played all three systems quite extensively, and I did thorough research before I purchased my Xbox on all systems. And I have been quite satisfied.



I never said it was. I believed the Gamecube was a kiddie system (in general).



Return to the Castle of Wolfenstein: Tides of War. You cannot get that game for PS2, however, if your referring to the terribly stripped down version available for PS2 titled: Operation Resurrection, than fine. Keep it. Considering it received a 4.9 compared to Xbox's 8.2. PS2 is that much better!
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/return...l?q=Wolfenstein

Chronicles of Riddick - already gave proof to that. PS2 certainly doesnt have it.

Halo
Halo 2
(you know about these)

And better yet, HAlf-Life 2, Doom 3, and Pariah are all Xbox exclusive and coming soon. They are anticipated to be amazing FPS games on the Xbox.

Now, please identify ANY PS2 FPS that are decent and arent available on the Xbox. And this time, can you at least back it up?



Final Fantasy XI     PS2     8.0 (score)
Final Fantasy X-2     PS2     8.1
Final Fantasy X     PS2     9.3
Kingdom Hearts     PS2     8.2
   
Fable    XBOX    8.6
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic     XBOX     9.1
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords    XBOX     8.5

This comes from Gamespot, an unbiased, multi-platform site that was given best gaming website for 2004 by Spike TV gaming awards and others.

I certainly see how Final Fantasy on PS2 destroys anything XBOX has  :rolleyes:



Sega Dreamcast - Release Date     09/09/1999
PS2 - Release Date   10/26/2000
XBOX - Release Date   11/08/2001

Okay, so dreamcast was released only a year before PS2. However, if you look at the specs here: http://hardware.gamespot.com/Compare-C-9395-1-4-5

you will see that in that year, Sony only increased its hardware by 100MHz processing clock speed, whereas in the year separating the Xbox release and the PS2 release, Xbox improved its system by 433Mhz processing clock speed. Not much difference at all between the DC and the PS2. And anyone that looks at the specs on that page will see it.



Right. Well that comment is now obsolete.



Really? So playing splinter cell through with the sound turned off doesn't make a difference?



Again, another comment I have already proved to be ignorant.
And I'd like to see a list of these so called games that are so good and are PS2 only. My list on the first page was the best I could do for PS2. However, I did miss SOCOM on that list (silly me), so add it. Though, SOCOM is not match for Halo.



see above



And so does Xbox. Xbox has MOH: frontline, Call of Duty: Finest Hour, and all the tom clancy games. In fact, I want to add that the tom clancy games on Xbox are MUCH bette than those of PS2, due to sound (which they rely heavily on), graphics, and online play.



As for this last comment, I would like to share my view on the cpu as a system.

I feel that in order for it to be the great system many people describe and love, etc. you need to invest a LOT of time and money into it. A LOT. As the computer is CONSTANTLY upgrading and getting bette,r new parts are constantly in need. I know people that are computer gamers, and the amount of money they invest into their computer is incredible. It dwarfs the amount that I pay for my Xbox or any console gamer pays. For example, over a 10 year period, I may buy 3 systems for $100, $200, and $300 respectively (super nintendo, dreamcast, xbox). Games would come to about $1000 in total. Thats $1600 for gaming for 10 years. However, I sold all of my systems and games when I was done, so I cut the cost down to $1200. It'll be even lower when I sell my Xbox when its time has passed. So, in 10 years, I have spent a total of $1000 (CDN) on gaming.

Now, pretend I was a cpu gamer for the same amount of time. Let's say I start with a base cost of $1000 for the cpu. Than, another $1000 is required to make the cpu what it needs to be good. Than, lets say I spend $500 on games for those 10 years. However, that $2000 grows to almost $6000 within this amount of time. LEt's say I get lucky and sell some games and old equipment (doubtful, but possible). Lets cut the cost to $5000.  Thats 5 times as much money as spent on console gaming. And thats being generous, with a modestly good cpu. The best cpu's, people spend double, even triple that amount.

So, as you can see, you need the dough to be a cpu gamer for any length of time. I have a decent cpu, 2 GB processing speed, 512 DDR ram, a decent video card. But when I try any game on it, I laugh. It doesn't come close to the Xbox. So I guess I need to invest more than $1500 (CDN) jsut to get started in cpu gaming.

And for what? Better graphics and more games? I am perfectly satisfied with the amount of games my Xbox has, thank you very much.

So, anyone else wish to try?

Volkov, you made me do this. Now your toast ;)
BAh. We'll see about that.



Ninja Gaiden - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/ninjag...?q=Ninja+Gaiden
Only on Xbox

KOTOR & KOTOR 2 - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/rpg/kotor2/in....html?q=Knights

Thats KOTOR 2, which is currently only out on Xbox. However, KOTOR and KOTOR 2 are or will be released on the PC, but I did not include the PC in my arguements for reasons I will state soon.

Chronicles of Riddick - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/chroni....html?q=Riddick
ONLY on Xbox
(released on the PC later on)

Rallispot Challenge 2 - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/driving/ralli...ml?q=rallisport
ONLY ON XBOX

Fable - http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/rpg/fable/ind...ex.html?q=Fable
ONLY ON XBOX

Notice that ALL of these games that I mentioned are ONLY for Xbox or PC - NOT PS2.

You will notice later in my post I refined that initial statement. Not all, but most of the games are available for both. THere is a chronicles of Riddick available for PS2, possible not the same game, but there is one. All the ones that are Xbox only have an equivalent PS2 game.

I HAVE played all three systems quite extensively, and I did thorough research before I purchased my Xbox on all systems. And I have been quite satisfied

So have I, and I came to a different conclusion.

So, as I said before, the thing that catches my eye is Processing Clock Speed. 300 MHz compared to Xbox's 733 MHz. Thats approx. 2.5 times faster than PS2. Hardly the same.
But I wasn't refering to processing. I was refering to graphics. And whats this Processor 1 and two stuff? methinks you are leaving stuff out. Oh and don't fill stuff up with links. I don't use them. Its just an irritation. I trust the info ok? Besides the CPU is used a to load the game, and while it takes processing power to run the graphics, neither system has hit its true limit yet.

I never said it was. I believed the Gamecube was a kiddie system (in general).

If you like anime, and a variety of kiddie games to teen games, mostly single player. And you are loyal to Sony. Go with PS2. Ages from 10 - 15

You did say PS2 was kiddie. Or do I misquote you?

And better yet, HAlf-Life 2, Doom 3, and Pariah are all Xbox exclusive and coming soon. They are anticipated to be amazing FPS games on the Xbox.

Lessee. All those have already been out for compy for a long time now. Except for Pariah I think. Not expecting much change, they are already microsoft games, and if I wanted them I would get them for compy.

Now, please identify ANY PS2 FPS that are decent and arent available on the Xbox. And this time, can you at least back it up?
Um Ratchet and Clank? Its not Halo, but's an FPS and fun as (hades). Or if you prefer an FPS that isn't cartoony.... GTA3, and GTA San Andreas.

Final Fantasy XI     PS2     8.0 (score)
Final Fantasy X-2     PS2     8.1
Final Fantasy X     PS2     9.3
Kingdom Hearts     PS2     8.2
   
Fable    XBOX    8.6
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic     XBOX     9.1
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords    XBOX     8.5

This comes from Gamespot, an unbiased, multi-platform site that was given best gaming website for 2004 by Spike TV gaming awards and others.

I certainly see how Final Fantasy on PS2 destroys anything XBOX has  :rolleyes:
Bah. Those same magazines and websites have given horrible ratings to great games and vice versa. I don't trust em. For actual gameplay FF beats the socks off almost all Xbox RPG's.  Oh and Fable.... I really hate that game. It simply is not good in my opinion.

Sega Dreamcast - Release Date     09/09/1999
PS2 - Release Date   10/26/2000
XBOX - Release Date   11/08/2001

Okay, so dreamcast was released only a year before PS2. However, if you look at the specs here: http://hardware.gamespot.com/Compare-C-9395-1-4-5

you will see that in that year, Sony only increased its hardware by 100MHz processing clock speed, whereas in the year separating the Xbox release and the PS2 release, Xbox improved its system by 433Mhz processing clock speed. Not much difference at all between the DC and the PS2. And anyone that looks at the specs on that page will see it.

The increase in clock speed in Xbox was because they stole the processor from a laptop and adpted it to the console. Sony has codeveloped its processor with intel the whole time.

Really? So playing splinter cell through with the sound turned off doesn't make a difference?
Unless you are online... no. So you here voices and gunshots. Big deal.

And so does Xbox. Xbox has MOH: frontline, Call of Duty: Finest Hour, and all the tom clancy games. In fact, I want to add that the tom clancy games on Xbox are MUCH bette than those of PS2, due to sound (which they rely heavily on), graphics, and online play.

I'm ignoring your insults. I gave you a short list. THere are many more. As too MOH, PS2 has them all first, then they are adapted to Xbox. I know Frontline for XBox came out after Frontline for PS2, and I believe the same is true for Rising Sun. Same with Call of Duty I believe, PS2 first, then Xbox.


And for what? Better graphics and more games? I am perfectly satisfied with the amount of games my Xbox has, thank you very much.
This is not an argument DE. If you wanna say that, then I'll say I'm very satisfied with the number and quality of FPS's for PS2, and dismiss any argument you have for them. Same for Graphics quality and games. Same for sound. No, not even an argument. And the price thing.. so? You can't type a term paper on you Xbox DE.

As to all that expense stuff, your wrong, because all the stuff is included in the base price for a compy, which is more than a console, but it does 1000 times the stuff a console can do. As to games, well they do cost a bit more, but they have a higher resale value. And any compy can use any game, you don't need two versions of the same game to play on two different copies. AND you can bootleg a compy game for free, which is flat impossible with an console game. Even accepting that the Xbox is the best system, which I still dispute, the lowest end compy has better grahpics, a faster processor and twoce the sound system of the Xbox.

[Rough Raiders]

Best Graphics: Half-Life 2 (COMP!!!) (Yeah, right. Compy doesn't have the grpahic power of a Dreamcast, much less a GCN)

wow... are you on f'ing drugs?
you just said that a computer doesnt have the graphix power of a dreamcast..... you dont even deserve to be in this conversation gtfo n00b

and when i say gc i mean gamecube

[Death Eater]

 My my my, Volkov, how you are misinformed. For one, PLEASE do not post anything here unless you can actually back it up. I see too many "I think," and "maybe" comments. A quick search shows me that, again, you are wrong.

But I wasn't refering to processing. I was refering to graphics. And whats this Processor 1 and two stuff? methinks you are leaving stuff out. Oh and don't fill stuff up with links. I don't use them. Its just an irritation. I trust the info ok? Besides the CPU is used a to load the game, and while it takes processing power to run the graphics, neither system has hit its true limit yet.

Unfortunately, you didn't use some of the links. I provided a link with FULL specs for all systems, and so if you thought I was leaving stuff out, you could have checked it with relative ease. Graphic power, you ask? Actually, I have no idea what your asking or trying to compare. On the site, you will see that in almost EVERY category, especially the major ones, Xbox outdoes PS2. Thats all I'm concerned with. I know for a FACT that the Xbox is a faster, more powerful machine with better graphics than the PS2. And I would like to see ANY one try and prove me wrong there.

If you like anime, and a variety of kiddie games to teen games, mostly single player. And you are loyal to Sony. Go with PS2. Ages from 10 - 15

You did say PS2 was kiddie. Or do I misquote you?

You misunderstood me. PS2 has games designed generally for preteens and teens, maybe late teens at the most. I should change 10-15 to 10-19. I should not have used the word kiddie, as kiddie would be directed toward the Gamecube. My bad there.

You will notice later in my post I refined that initial statement. Not all, but most of the games are available for both. THere is a chronicles of Riddick available for PS2, possible not the same game, but there is one. All the ones that are Xbox only have an equivalent PS2 game.

Again, before you claim something, be able to back it up with proof. I have searched for any game with the word "Riddick" in it for PS2, and there's nothing. So, does this mysterious game have a different title? And its certainly nothing close to the Xbox one.

And that comment about equivalent games, you can do that for ANY system. However, it doesn't mean the game is NEAR the quality as the one your comparing it to. For example, you could say Killzone is the PS2 equavalent to Halo 2. But that doesn't mean (smelly stuff). So there is no argument there.

Lessee. All those have already been out for compy for a long time now. Except for Pariah I think. Not expecting much change, they are already microsoft games, and if I wanted them I would get them for compy.

I believe this argument is about which system is better: PS2 or Xbox. NOT the computer. So stick to the argument, and assume you have no computer. Thats what I have been assuming when I have stated my points.

Um Ratchet and Clank? Its not Halo, but's an FPS and fun as (hades). Or if you prefer an FPS that isn't cartoony.... GTA3, and GTA San Andreas.

Before I go a step further: do you know what FPS stands for? Allow me to educate you. F - First. P - Person. S - Shooter. Combining to form the phrase First Person Shooter. A little bit a research will show you that Ratchet and Clank is a PLATFORMER game...NOT a FPS. COMPLETELY different games entirely. Thats like comparing Mario to Doom. And GTA:SA isn't a FPS either. It's a Third Person action adventure game. Again, entirely different. Xbox has GTA:VC and GTA 3 to combat GTA:SA for now, until it releases on June 7 of this year. That's a final release date, btw.

Bah. Those same magazines and websites have given horrible ratings to great games and vice versa. I don't trust em. For actual gameplay FF beats the socks off almost all Xbox RPG's. Oh and Fable.... I really hate that game. It simply is not good in my opinion.

To an extent, I agree with you. HOWEVER, that is not a valid argument in any way you look at it. It's a personal opinion, with absolutely no substance behind it. In fact, I find FF games to be overrated, and I REALLY enjoyed KOTOR and KOTOR 2. I didn't even mention Morrowind in that, which is another amazing RPG for the Xbox. Can't believe I forgot. And Fable, in my opinion, was a fun and addicting game. Just because you didn't enjoy it doesn't mean its a bad game.

When your arguing a point, its find to state an opinion. But your opinion has no meaning unless you can back it up with facts. That's crucial to debating. So far, you have just given me unfounded opinions.

The increase in clock speed in Xbox was because they stole the processor from a laptop and adpted it to the console. Sony has codeveloped its processor with intel the whole time.

Okay, I don't know if you get the point there. Let me give you an example. Macintosh computers used to be a powerhouse in computers. However, they made a poor business move and didn't patent/copyright their technology. Bill Gates actually STOLE superior Mac software and used it to his advantage, etc. So his entire company was built on stolen software. However, when I ask you the question, what computer would you buy, most people will respond "Microsoft." Not Macintosh. So, it really doesn't matter how you get there as long as your better.

This applies to your comment. I really don't know nor care how Microsoft got itself substantially better than the PS2. I'm not even sure if what you said is true, but I don't care. Because in the end, Xbox is better. And that's all that matters.

Really? So playing splinter cell through with the sound turned off doesn't make a difference?

Unless you are online... no. So you here voices and gunshots. Big deal.

You really haven't played any stealth games, have you? Splinter Cell, MGS, even FPS like Halo 2 are completely different games when the surround sound is maximized. You hear enemies sneaking up behind you, a Ghost accelerating behind you, or gunshots in the distant. Music is a VERY impotant aspect of video gaming, no matter how much you downplay it. It adds to the immersion if the game quite a bit.

I'm ignoring your insults. I gave you a short list. There are many more. As too MOH, PS2 has them all first, then they are adapted to Xbox. I know Frontline for XBox came out after Frontline for PS2, and I believe the same is true for Rising Sun. Same with Call of Duty I believe, PS2 first, then Xbox.

First, I didn't mean to insult if you took it that way. I honestly can't see where I did. Next, I see those words again. "I believe, I believe, I believe." Please check before you say things. Rising Sun and Call of Duty both came out on the Xboc at the same time as the PS2. Only Frontline came out earlier for the PS2, but the Xbox version had multiplayer modes. And btw, both Rising Sun and Call of Duty were generally agreed to be disappointing games for the consoles, scoring low marks in many reviews.

And for what? Better graphics and more games? I am perfectly satisfied with the amount of games my Xbox has, thank you very much.
This is not an argument DE. If you wanna say that, then I'll say I'm very satisfied with the number and quality of FPS's for PS2, and dismiss any argument you have for them. Same for Graphics quality and games. Same for sound. No, not even an argument. And the price thing.. so? You can't type a term paper on you Xbox DE.

As to all that expense stuff, your wrong, because all the stuff is included in the base price for a compy, which is more than a console, but it does 1000 times the stuff a console can do. As to games, well they do cost a bit more, but they have a higher resale value. And any compy can use any game, you don't need two versions of the same game to play on two different copies. AND you can bootleg a compy game for free, which is flat impossible with an console game. Even accepting that the Xbox is the best system, which I still dispute, the lowest end compy has better grahpics, a faster processor and twoce the sound system of the Xbox.

The base computer package with a sound card, etc., does not get the job as it is suppose to. At least for all the computers I've been on. My 2.4 Ghz, 40GB Hard drive, 512 DDR ram and average graphic card cannot seem to produce results noticeably better than my Xbox's worst game for graphics. I have spent around $1200 (CDN) on it. And I have a friend who is deep into Computer gaming, and you should see the money he spends on it. Wow.

Also, its just unfair to compare a console with a cpu. Of course a computer will have more games, its been out more than 10 years longer.

The only cpu games that have a real advatange over console games are RTS. FPS used to have a huge advatange, but Xbox changed that, showing the world how good FPS can be on consoles.

However, this argument is about Xbox and PS2, so lets stay on topic.

[Death Eater]

 Rough Raiders, your right there. Comp certainly has more power than a Dreamcast, no doubt.

Want to address PA now:

PS2, and let my explain why its the best.

To produce a game that plays on the Xbox, you need to buy the rights FROM microsoft. This means, all Xbox games are made through MS, and cost more for the companies to make, thus there are MANY more PS2 games because for PS2, you don't have to have the rights bought.

Also, all the good games come out for PS2. Some of them EVENTUALLY come out for Xbox and gamecube, but a lot of the good ones go right for PS2. GTA, for example, being one of the best games out there. Its PS2 only, at the moment, it MIGHT come out for Xbox later on, but i doubt it.

I don't think you really understand what your talking about. Frankly, I don't know why it matters. First, PS2 is a year older than Xbox, thus it is bound to have more games. Second, even if there WERE some developers than avoided Microsoft for that reason, they obviously aren't big developers or they haven't made any decent games because there are a select few companies that work only for the PS2 that make great games. However, Microsoft also has a few really good developers working solely for them, including Team Ninja and Bungie.

GTA is not a good example at all. First, PS2 exclusively cut a deal with Rockstar to make it a PS2 exclusive title. But Rockstar finally realized how much money they could make selling it on the Xbox, so they released GTA 3 and GTA:VC on the Xbox. However, PS2 insisted that they would pay more money if GTA games were released on the PS2 before the Xbox. So, that is what Rockstar followed. GTA:SA WILL be coming out for Xbox on June 7th, 2005. Quote me if I'm wrong.

weak argument Peace. ;)  

[Rough Raiders]

 i think death eater is the all knowing and you cant beat him hahahha
but still

PS2 is better than Xbox and i can say that because i own them both ::agrees:: it all depends on what you are looking for like DE said
GC=Kiddie games and should be blown off the face of the earth
PS2=teens and such (my dad is 60 and plays this system :) )
Xbox=for more mature people cause of the blood and guts

[RazorClaw]

 I'd say Gamecube aims for the 8-15 crowd, but has games that range from the 5-20 crowd. Depending on. like I said, whether you play games to have fun or see blood and guts. There's a game called True Crime: Streets of LA on GC fro that, too. And if XBox gets Zelda and Starfox, it's a better system. Rough, I am not on drugs, though I suppose it is odd that I can spell well. It has better graphics than Dreamcast, but I was emphasizing that it does not match these systems. Certainly, it COULD, but only for $5K gaming comps. Like I said, depending on the game, it's either GCN or XBox. PS2 doesn't have anything exclusive that, when I play it, screams out "HOLY (smelly stuff)! THIS GAME PWNS!", or even a "Wow, this game looks great". Name an action-adventure title that even compares to even the N64 Zelda's. I still play Ocarina of Time. And, I love Halo, too, (and Halo 2).
   PS2 has Final Fantasy (so does Gamecube), and no memorable flight sims, or adventure games. Xbox blows away both for graphic and sound power, however, GCN has better games in particular categories. Overall, if you want an average system that has most games, get PS2 (and get a harddrive so it isn't so (sorry, but I can't think of a word to use) choppy). If you're a blow-em-up fan, XBox is your dream. If you're an action/RPG/RTS fan, go with GCN. If you want an idiot that has no idea what he is talking about and sounds like a 2-year-old, go w/ Rough Raiders.  

[Rough Raiders]

 hahaha you say im an idiot that has no idea what im talking about? your the one who said that a computer doesnt compare to a dreamcast when in fact THEY ARE BOTH COMPUTERS... however a PC is the best of all gaming systems but thats not why we are arguing here.

one game that is better than zelda for N64? any game that i can think of basicly... but just to name one, Ratchet and Clank(any of the games in the series)

uber graphix
awesome storyline
fully playable characters
great weapons

I have had arguements similar to this one and we have come to the conclusion that PS2 has way better RPG's than GameCube because like DE said, who wants to see mario jump around for the 5000th time. they keep bringing back games and they dont get any better. RTS shouldnt even be mentioned because they are mainly for the computer due to online capabilities which GameCube DOES NOT HAVE. I have a computer that was appx $1500 and i play video games on it all the time. I have no life and i spend it playing video games on the computer. you dont need a 5k comp to have it be better than dreamcast or gc because it already is and always has been no questions asked.

and if you think im

an idiot that has no idea what he is talking about and sounds like a 2-year-old,

you are clearly the only idiot because you are the only one who thinks so and thats the only thing you can come up with after losing an arguement

you just lost an arguement to a 2year old, congrats at sucking at life