Is PS2 online gaming really so bad?

[Nick Laslett]

From a mainstream perspective online gaming is a very small niche activity for the few. (Just look at the post count for this section of Rllmuk and remember that a lot of these are for gamertags.)

The technical hassles still preclude Mr Average from easily going online.

The out of the box online gaming that the Dreamcast gave you is still the most effective implementation of the concept. (But this was only narrowband)

Despite the built in Network Adaptor on the Xbox, it is still no easier to get online than with Ps2 and both these are behind the simple nature of the Dreamcast configuration.

Now, considering that online gaming on the PS2 is FREE, after the purchase of a Network Adaptor (£29.99, £10 when bought with some games). Is the system really so bad? (The Xbox solution is obviously a lot better, but then you have to pay for it!)

I have recently got broadband at home, and have found the experience of playing PS2 games online quite exhilarating. I was surprised by how many online titles there were available for the system.

In no particular order:

Hardware Online

SSX3

Midnight Club 2

This Is Football 2004

FIFA 2004

Twisted Metal

SOCOM 2

Ghost Recon

Destruction Derby Arena

XIII

Medal of Honor: Rising Sun

Tony Hawks 4

Need For Speed: Underground

Everquest Online

Rainbow Six 3

NHL Hitz Pro

Amplitude

Warhammer 40,000: Fire Warrior

I'm particularly looking forward to playing Champions of Norrath, GT4 and Burnout 3. It is a shame that Resident Evil: Outbreak, Monster Hunter and Armored Core will not be online in Europe.

For such a niche part of our pasttime is seems very well catered for.

[Beertiger]

it's ok as long as you don't play Live.

[Sng]

Trouble is, out of all those games list, only SSX3, SOCOM 2 and Tony Hawk 4 are actually really good games. And even they have problems online.

SSX3 being 1 on 1 for instance. Lack of voice chat in THUG, PS2 controller with SOCOM 2.

It's the whole setup that sucks and Sony know it.

With the Xbox, turning on your console and seeing what everyone is up to and being able to invite/follow friends is brilliant. That has helped online gaming so much.

That's missing from PS2 online gaming, that and so much more.

[Nick Laslett]

it's ok as long as you don't play Live.

Shouldn't that be

it's ok as long as you don't WANT TO PAY for Live.

[kaisu]

I'm addicted to Socom 2, I love it.I used to play everquest as well but there wasn't enough people playing it.

TBH that's the problem with it, It seems only Socom 2 get's a large number of people playing.Everything else is ignored.

[Billy Brown]

Shouldn't that be

it's ok as long as you don't WANT TO PAY for Live.

Only the most rabid PS2 fanboy could claim that all in all Sony's system is better than Xbox Live. It all just seems a bit half-hearted to me. If Sony wanted to shift the online adaptors, they could concentrate on bringing out some truly essential online titles. As it is, they aren't - it doesn't seem like a priority to them. And that's fair enough, but it is a priority to Microsoft, and the service they have provdied so far has been, on the whole, excellent.

[Jonny5]

Shouldn't that be

it's ok as long as you don't WANT TO PAY for Live.

You think the price of one game is too much to pay to play online for 12 months on any game you choose?

I think its quite a bargain.

[xiphoid]

If Sony wanted to shift the online adaptors, they could concentrate on bringing out some truly essential online titles. As it is, they aren't - it doesn't seem like a priority to them.

the launch of FFXi and a preloaded HDD for $99 seems to highlight a step change in Sony's online development - although I don't see a similar scheme to 'Live' coming form Sony.

You think the price of one game is too much to pay to play online for 12 months on any game you choose?

I think its quite a bargain.

I disagree - in fact it seems costly.

[Nick Laslett]

With the Xbox, turning on your console and seeing what everyone is up to and being able to invite/follow friends is brilliant. That has helped online gaming so much.

I don't disagree with you, and this is the reason why you have to pay for the subscription service.

But to dismiss most of the games above in the online context is a bit harsh. It is the player matching, who's online bit that detracts from the PS2 Online experience.

Most of the above games a good fun to play online and no better or worse than most of what available is on XBL.

PS2 online gaming gets a bad rap, when for something that is essentially free it is pretty good.

[Hitcher]

Just look at the post count for this section of Rllmuk and remember that a lot of these are for gamertags.

There are actually no replies to the Gamertag list which, incidentally, has about 180 names on it all for Xbox Live - where's all the PS2 Gamertags?

[Jonny5]

PS2 online gaming gets a bad rap, when for something that is essentially free it is pretty good.

You had to pay for the BB adaptor though, didn't you?

[xiphoid]

PS2 online gaming gets a bad rap, when for something that is essentially free it is pretty good.

That's what makes it distinctive and inclusive of course. If you have BB already - which a few people do, but not for gaming, you may well pick up an online game and have a bash with the PS2 system, where you may not with Live. Sony I think are looking to develop a decent sized online community - not try and tap the existing one. Maybe?

[Hitcher]

If you have BB already - which a few people do, but not for gaming, you may well pick up an online game and have a bash with the PS2 system, where you may not with Live.

How are you going to do that without the BB adapter then?

[Nick Laslett]

Only the most rabid PS2 fanboy could claim that all in all Sony's system is better than Xbox Live.

Billy Brown,

Please take note that in my opening post I say the following:

"The Xbox solution is obviously a lot better"

Perhaps I should have worded it even more strongly? But hopefully you get the gist that I think that XBL is the best pay subscription based online gaming option out there.

(No offense was meant by this post.)

[Billy Brown]

the launch of FFXi and a preloaded HDD for $99 seems to highlight a step change in Sony's online development

Yes, that's a very fair point. And Resident Evil: Outbreak I guess. The unfortunate thing being that the games like this, that people would glady buy into the whole PS2 online thing for, are highly unlikely to see the light of day over here. It's a real shame, because the current line-up of PS2 online games in Europe hardly inspires confidence.

[xiphoid]

How are you going to do that without the BB adapter then?

I don't actually know how much that is - if it is not prohibativly expensive then perhaps it is an impulse buy - rather than the percieved hassle and tie-in of signing up to a service?

Does the new FFXI come with an adapter also?

[Jonny5]

I think the BB adaptor is £29.99, the same as a 12 month Live sub...

[Billy Brown]

Billy Brown,

Please take note that in my opening post I say the following:

"The Xbox solution is obviously a lot better"

You did indeed, before going on to slam it for being "pay-based". Don't get me wrong, I'm as much a fan of the PS2 as the next man, and I'd dearly love to see it play home to a worthy online system here in Europe. In my opinion, however, it just doesn't. Especially when you compare it to a system like Xbox Live, both in terms of compatible games and overall set-up.

[Hitcher]

Let's not forget the Free Trail that came with Live games - surely more impulsive.

[Sng]

If the PS2 forced a gamertag name upon you, with a decent global friends list and voice enabled games with EVERY online game then most of those games above would be great.

DDA, NFSU, THUG and Hardware especially.

They'll nail it with the PS3, I bet. And I can't wait.

[Hitcher]

Aren't some of the PS2 games subscription based?

And wont support be pulled when the next game in the series comes out?

This is mainly EA based.

[Billy Brown]

They'll nail it with the PS3, I bet. And I can't wait.

I don't doubt that they will for a second. I think both Sony and Microsoft have learnt a lot from this generation's online adventures.

[Nick Laslett]

There are actually no replies to the Gamertag list which, incidentally, has about 180 names on it all for Xbox Live - where's all the PS2 Gamertags?

I noticed this fact as well. I went and visted the Official Playstation Network gaming forum just to guage the kind of traffic they get.

Perhaps you should have a seperate sticky for PS2 users. I looked at the sticky and it seemed to be focused on XBL, so I didn't think it was appropriate to list my Central Station "Handle" there. The term gamertags is a bit XBL centric.

You would think that with an installed user base of 6 million PS2 in the UK, that there would be a few more online gamers visible on the Rllmuk site.

[footle]

Shouldn't that be

it's ok as long as you don't WANT TO PAY for Live.

The difference in execution of the two systems is what you're paying for.

Turn on.

See what everyone else is playing.

Invite person X into game from company Y whilst person X is playing game by company Z...

The interoperability and general execution of online features in said titles is what you're paying for with that subscription (> £2.50 a month when you're buying from Amazon - shall we start talking in terms of beer?).

The fact that you can pretty much guarantee that everyone will have voice chat enabled in most games elevates it above PC online gaming.

Costly is... wrong.

[Hitcher]

You would think that with an installed user base of 6 million PS2 in the UK, that there would be a few more online gamers visible on the Rllmuk site.

Well I think the majority of people playing the PS2 online are playing FF and that's not been released in Europe.

[Hitcher]

And I'd like to point out I own all the current generation of consoles but the Xbox is only one that offers online play that appeals to me.

[xiphoid]

How successful and what is the penetration to user base (both actual and %) are the online components of any of the consoles - is it even a significant factor with this generation?

[Billy Brown]

Perhaps you should have a seperate sticky for PS2 users. I looked at the sticky and it seemed to be focused on XBL, so I didn't think it was appropriate to list my Central Station "Handle" there. The term gamertags is a bit XBL centric.

Of course it's Xbox live centric, that's the whole point of the thread. The fact that there isn't one for PS2 handles points to the fact that relatively few people on here use their PS2 for online gaming. If there were more, you'd see a whole load more threads on here. As it is, a "Fancy a game of Destruction Derby Arenas?" threads on here are rare. It's not as if this place is anti-PS2 or anything. It's just that Xbox Live has captured people on here in a way that Sony hasn't managed to date.

[Nick Laslett]

You did indeed, before going on to slam it for being "pay-based".

Full sentence:

(The Xbox solution is obviously a lot better, but then you have to pay for it!)

Is this what you mean by slam?

I don't want to sound hyper sensitive, and a positivily don't want to offend anyone, but you seem to have taken issue with this statement.

Please explain what is wrong with what I have said.

I think that XBL is a superior system and because of the money MS invest in the service to make it so good I can understand why they would want the user to pay a subscritpion for it.

My point is that for something that is free, PS2 online gaming is not that bad.

People seem to be unable to divorce these 2 concepts. XBL is the superior online gaming experience but you have to pay an annual subscription cost to access it. The PS2 offering is inferior but after the one off purchase of a Network adaptor it is free. If buying the Network adaptor with SOCOM, SOCOM II or Twisted Metal it was only £10.

I hope this is clear. I think XBL is much better than Central Station (yuk!), but that Central Station is satisfactory considering there is no cost involved after the purchase of the Network adaptor.

By the way people talk about Central Station you would think that there are no games, no users and that you can't actually play games online. These things are all of course untrue.

[xiphoid]

I think perhaps there is not so much of a PS2 community - it is something to dip into - maybe after the pub, like the PS One was, just this is online gaming for the odd occasion.

Some people do not want to be part of a fixed community (I'd go so far as to say most wouldn't - without figures I can't 'say').

It's nice to simply plug in and play online - not setting upgames via a forum etc... a differnet approach may well be the growth area over the next 5 years. Is live for anything other than a 'hardcore' of gamers and users?