PS2 vs. Xbox: Now GTA3 for MS?

[Frankychan]

*steers thread slightly back on course*

Well, my friends chipped in and got me a PS2 for Christmas and here's what I think.

Eroberer-If you want online capability RIGHT NOW, pick up an XBox. They have more online games worth playing than PS2. Unfortunately, AFAIK, you have to pay for XBox Live! on an annual basis. PS2-only for some games you have to pay. PS2 has free online gaming but you have to pick up a Network Adaptor.

XBox-Graphically speaking, it wins 9/10. There's hardly any loading time and you don't need a memory card to save games (info coming from my cousin). However, my experience is that XBox doesn't have a wide selection of games to choose from. Additionally, rumors abound say that Microsoft is losing big time $$$ with the XBox and its future is questionable.

PS2-Graphically INFERIOR to XBox for the most part. What makes this system worth getting is the WIDE variety of games to get. Its online gaming is free for some games, and others you need to pay. GTA: Vice City is a good game but it'll take you FOREVER to beat.....I'm still trying to figure out how to buy the Strip Club...

Anyway, Asher knows beaucoup about XBox so you should ask him 'bout it. I got a PS2 and I'm pretty much satisfied...for now.

(I just wanna play Halo and Splinter Cell....dammit! )

Does anyone know if Splinter Cell is gonna port over to PS2?

[SnowFire]

An interactive movie, eh? If you're complaining about the linearity of the game, that's a drawback that most console RPGs pay to actually have characters who make decisions themselves and that you care about. Compare this to BG1, say, which gives you a lot of "freedom" but your characters are pretty much limited to their initial quest (if that) and their battle taunts. A semi-linear plot means a plot that can be planned, and therefore good. This is a reason to dislike console RPGs in general, not FFX.

"Same old game?" FFX is notably different in some spots from previous FFs. The battle system works quite differently, as I'm sure you noticed, with the switching characters in and out, the fact that all the special commands you can learn are actually useful, the lack of an active time system, and being able to completely see the order of battle. It's at least a big a difference as, say, WC2 to WC3, or the original MGS to Splinter Cell. Sure, similar game style, but there are some definite changes.

Can't say I found the CG amount excessive myself. Most of the game is still rendered with the engine or the battle engine. There's what, maybe 20 minutes of movie within a 30 hour game (that can easily be 50-80 hours if you want to go psycho on it)?

DinoDoc: Nope, I don't mind somebody who dislikes RPGs. As I said, there are entire genres I dislike too, but I try and avoid "rating" specific games in them for other people.

[Drake Tungsten]

If you're into console RPGs and (specifically) the GTA series - seek help, then buy a PS2.

I don't know about the "seek help" part, but you are right in saying that the PS2 is definitely the console of choice for console RPG buffs.

[Felch]

Compared to games like Fallout, Neverwinter Nights, and Morrowind, that offer either incredible individual control over the main character, an impressive toolset, or both, console RPGs are hardly RPGs in any real sense, nor are they in the same league as the best in the computer world are. They're more like interactive adventure games, where the player can't role play (determine how the character acts), but instead is an observer that takes over for certain peiods of time. The two are essentially different genres, and Asher was simply expressing a disgust that he has, and that I share, for the heavily scripted and premade adventures that you find in Final Fantasy.

[monkspider]

I'm in full agreement with Snowfire, console RPGs are far superior to that PC-style rubbish IMO as well. As a fair warning, Ashie has a strange habit of thinking his various opinons on games are always the final word for everyone for some odd reason. Queer fellow that Asher.

To use Asher-style logic on the PS2 vs Xbox question
In Xbox's corner, you have a good ammount of FPS games and racing games, unfortunately those types of games are mindless drivel and entirely unenjoyable for any reasonable gamer to play. Also, the XBOX has the worst controller for any system, ever (so you would never want to play any game on it that could also be found on PS2) and a number of the good "exclusives" for XBOX will come out on PC as well. So if you own a PC and PS2, owning an XBOX is almost entirely superfluous.
The PS2 is otherwise superior, it has far more good games in almost all genres, which is what matters, and there is shouldn't be any real question on what console you should get. The graphics aren't quite as good, but in most cases you won't notice any significant differences for games available on both systems, unless you're some weird technophile. So really, it's not even close, honestly, I promise.
The only reason you should get the XBOX is if you like racing or FPS games, and if you do, well, you're just beyond all help.

In short
buy a PS2 if you like to have lots of good games, since PS2 has many times the number of good games XBOX has. In other words, if you like playing videogames whatsoever, the PS2 is the system for you. There's really no competetion at all.
Buy an Xbox only if you like oogling over fancy graphics cards, or if you play games from the worthless genres of FPS or racing or if you don't have a PC. It may also be worth purchasing if money is no object and you already have a Gamecube and PS2. But if you do buy one in such a case, be forewarned, expect it to do a lot of collecting dust, next to your PS2 and GC.
That's just the way it is.