Wow, I tried to play FFXI on my PS2 and went into abys.
The lag now since the last update is horrendous.
I had to leave that area because I would almost lock up for 30 seconds and I wouldn't be near the people fighting Mikey.
I have notice this before in Besiege, guess the PS2 is just getting too old for the game now.
But what do you expect from a system that is a 300mhz 64-bit system?
Just bummed now because if I want to play this game, I'll have to update my Xbox 360 version, but I think I'll need to get a bigger HDD due to the having the original 20 GB one.
this is a gross analyzing of the systems capabilities...
(interestingly I got this when trying to fight a better comparison:
http://www.google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?site=http://forums.ngemu.com/showthread.php%3Ft%3D75345&hl=en)
You could calculate how many calculations per second the ps2 can do vs a PC, and that would be a good comparison.
You have to recall though: the PS2 is a dedicated gaming machine, not a multifunction applications processor, it can do more with less.
In regards to it handling the game well (that was designed to run on it) spaghetti code.
I wish it would force them to clean up more, than to keep patching and patching. But alas they don't.
I'm hoping they do a lot of cleaning up when Seekers is released.
(thing about cleaning the code is it would help the game run on all 3 platforms).
Granted: the concept of the code being in a mess I got from a few other people that know a lot more about the software than I do, I know personally I wouldn't want to sit around writing for the PS2's instruction set, or having to patch their IDE.
I know a good bit about hardware though, and it's not accurate to compare the processors like that in the PS2 to that of a PC.
(If it were using an intel (or in this case an AMD, since 64bit) based CPU, then yes, they'd be comparable.)
It'd be like comparing an ARM cpu to a "desktop"* cpu.
*see the bit about intel and amd.