Which is the better console, the PS2 or PS3?

[Shawn]

I've had to fix more ps2 than ps3 systems. Both suffer from QC issues but thank God nowhere near as bad as ol' Mirco$oft's offerings like the 360 or the Xbone. The first Xbox didn't seem to have many issues though. Wonder why it all went to shit for them?

Edited August 15, 2016 by Shawn

[SwampFox56]

This depends entirely on what you're looking for people to answer. Are we talking about the PS2 and PS3 from a technical standpoint? Marketing standpoint? Game library standpoint? Etc.

If we talk about the PS2 vs PS3 from a technical standpoint - obviously the PS3 is better. If we talk about the PS2 and PS3 from a marketing standpoint - obviously the PS2 is better. This question has a lot of variables, so I'll just rate the systems on the amount of time I spent playing that particular system.

In my opinion, the PlayStation 2 is far better than the PlayStation 3. Simply because I enjoyed playing the system more.

It's as simple as that.

[Unbeliever]

I can't say I've had a lot of "hands on" with the PS3, but for my vote, I would go with the PS2. The vast library of games, and as was said above, play time, moves me in that direction for a choice between the two.

[Ninjabba]

PS2 and its full backwards compatibility with the PS1 library make it for me the best system console ever created. Lots of affordable games + couch co-op games, being able to play all the PS1 classics.. gaming also felt less complicated and time-consuming, but that's probably me growing older.

 

While I enjoy the PS4 with its horsepower and online features, I do feel I lost something precious along the way. Probably my PS1 collection glaring at me from the shelves because I cannot play them on the PS4...

[RARusk]

I've had to fix more ps2 than ps3 systems. Both suffer from QC issues but thank God nowhere near as bad as ol' Mirco$oft's offerings like the 360 or the Xbone. The first Xbox didn't seem to have many issues though. Wonder why it all went to shit for them?

Because MS cut corners to beat the PS3 to the marketplace. The first generation of X360 units had thin motherboards and an improper heatsink mounting unit. Part of the mount had a thin rod at the bottom of the board that the board would flex around when the chip got hot. Think "finger through Saran Wrap" and you get the general idea. Over time this would cause some of the contacts to pull away from the board and RROD. Bit MS in the ass big time.

[Flojomojo]

I wish my launch PS3 still worked ...it played PS2 games, making this question moot.

[Video]

Sorry glitched out there.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Video

[Video]

I base my decisions on the games. Id say ps2. Same with xbox vs 360. Yes the newer console is more powerful and capable. But the games were simply better on the previous gen. As for Qc id say the ps3 was better built than the 2 and xbox was hella better than 360.

 

Also last gen really saw a HUGE upswing in halfassing games with the mindset of fix it later. And tons of games that simply released incomplete. Last gen has some of the most expensive games ever (excluding a few exceptions like neogeo) really? Upwards of $120 for a complete game? And mass amounts of 5ing and 10ing people for really dumb shit.

 

Granted that's still here this generation but still. The gen before last was the better generation over all and unless something changes next gen I imagine that will continue to hold true for generations to come.

[Video]

Stupid multipost.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Video

[toiletunes]

I loved PS1 for Silent Hill and Twisted Metal. PS2, with the sequels, was a must-buy. I have no reason to get a PS3. I did a 360 for Homecoming, and TM went online, so I skipped it. Black went online for PS2, but it was discontinued. When I buy a game, I want to be able to use it whenever, not just for a little while.

[Mord]

Last gen has some of the most expensive games ever (excluding a few exceptions like neogeo) really? Upwards of $120 for a complete game? And mass amounts of 5ing and 10ing people for really dumb shit.

 

You seem to be fairly conservative to assume 120 was the cap on how expensive games got, when there are some games so laden with DLC that to buy them all would literally cost you anywhere from 300-500 dollars. And that's not including the base game itself.

 

It's probably more due to this half-assed approach to releasing overly expensive game betas that made me wait close to 4-5 years before even picking up a PS3 (and didn't pick up a 360 until at least a year after that.) and it's pretty much doing the same thing this gen. Absolutely no game in the current console gen interests me enough to warrant a purchase of a new console, even if I lump a bunch of them together. That -might- change when we see the VR models start rolling out, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

[spacecadet]

I wish my launch PS3 still worked ...it played PS2 games, making this question moot.

 

Exactly... but mine broke too. They ended up being notoriously unreliable. Something about the solder joints to the CPU. I did the temporary trick that I read about online (using a heat gun to melt it just enough to make contact again) but just as I read would happen, it died again after about a week and I just sold it for parts at that point. The extra week did let me get all my save games off, which is all I really cared about at that point.

 

That system was a keeper, though, if it kept working. That's a system people like us keep in their setups for decades, because it was a 3-in-1 system that would probably play more games than any other console system, forever. Don't forget that PS3 games aren't even region coded, so there's a whole world of games out there for it in addition to all those PS2 and PS1 games.

 

Now I miss my launch PS3...

[Flojomojo]

Time marches on, though. PS1 is playable on any old thing, I can largely live without PS2 games (many of my faves have resurfaced on PSN for cheap, others have been remade on mobile, which is neat) and my slim PS3 seems likely to outlive my interest in it. I'm less bummed about it now than the version of me in 2006 who just spent $500 would have been.

[Video]

Well I'm just counting levels and such. Not things like different skins or very minor mode to weapons or whatever. That was the 5ing and 10ing comment.

 

But yeah if you tried to get everything many games could be astronomical prices and I cant justify that or support it for that matter.