I'm so frustrated by this power thing. The PS2 came out more than 18 months before the Xbox. The console gen was decided before the Xbox was released; it could have been weaker than the PS2 and
it would not have mattered. The whole conversation is meaningless; it does not reveal anything about consumer choices or consumer tastes.
However, if you examine the PS2 in the context in which it was released, you would surely realize that power was a key component of how the system was marketed to consumers. You would know:
- That the hardware components were given humanizing marketing names like "Emotion Engine" and "Graphics Synthesizer"
- That the PS2 was reported on in the media as being a supercomputer ("Sadaam Hussein is importing them TO LAUNCH MISSILES!")
- That the famous "PS9" ad linked the PS2 to a chain of consoles so powerful it became part of your mind
- That Kutaragi spoke about the PS2 as having "Toy Story like graphics" and that players would "jack into the matrix"
Stop being so intellectually dishonest. The PS2 was a monster when it came out. That power mattered.
Yes, it's true that, "The most powerful console has never won the generation!!!!111" But such an observation is facile and meaningless. The SNES and Genesis went head to head on power. The early days of the PS1 vs. Saturn was nothing but a 3d pissing match. The N64 was all about power and it debuted with a paradigm-shifting 3D title. The Dreamcast was a powerful machine ("it's thinking") and the PS2 came out and blew it away.
Am I saying the most powerful machine wins? No. Am I saying power is very important? Absolutely. Even this generation more consumers chose HD gaming machines than non-HD gaming machines and there is the possibility that the PS3 will close out the gen in first place.
So stahp.