I'm more worried what happens if you ever need to use the warranty and now you have NO backwards compatible option. You don't know how pissed I would be if I didn't get my b/c option.RoganSarine
good point
This topic is locked from further discussion.
How in the world is this a good thing? My brother's been saving up for a PS3 for a while now, and his only hope is to buy the 80GB MGS bundle while it's still available. See, I owned the PS2, and I've moved out. Rather than buy one himself, he wants to get a PS3 (which would be the first PS system he'd actually own), since he'd have backwards compatibility, finally has a DualShock controller, and most importantly, he wouldn't have to deal with memory cards. All of you keep saying that people like him can just go buy a PS2... well, keep this in mind. With the PS2, you could use a DualShock 2 to play PS1 games, even though you needed a PS1 memory card. With the PS3, you can use the SIXAXIS or DualShock 3 to play PS1 and PS2 games, and you have no need for a memory card. In the end, it would be more of an investment for him, since he'd have to look for another PS2 controller and a memory card in order to get a decent PS2 experience. Is that seriously worth it?
Sony's basically telling him that he's an unimportant customer, since he couldn't save up enough money in time. Considering that they're just doing software emulation now, there is absolutely no excuse for them not to have that kind of BC in the PS3. Considering they were at the forefront of backwards compatibility with the PS2 (and people forget that BC was one of the reasons people loved the PS2), it's a slap in the face to customers and fans to do this. Inexcusable and unjustified.
The day the PS3 launched Sony should have put out the backwards compatable PS3, and then a PS3 that only plays PS3 games for a cheaper price.
Instead they basically came up with a different PS3 every six months and they have looked foolish along the way. The only thing they got right so far was having a MGS4 bundle.
Glad I got my 60GB after the price drop, seems like the best deal.
in all honesty my friend, it is the year 2008 going into 09. This is the second year into 3rd year of the PS3 and next generation. It is about time to let go of the PS2. I am a fan of the old as well, but with some of the games coming out between now and 09, why do you still want to play PS2 games? They want to make things cheaper for the consumer because as we all know the ps3 is "expensive", so you have to cut out something. When you buy a next generation system, you should be buying games that are made for that system especially 2nd year into 3rd year. I can see the problem if it was still year 1 because most new systems aren't that great their first year, but we are further than that now. It is funny how people complain that sony still lives in the past but then when they do look toward the future by making their new system cheaper by getting rid of the old stuff, people complain.
It seems to me that the only way people are going to be happy with PS3 is if it is 200 dollars and has every game in the world exclusive to it because everyone needs to justify why they bought one. Everyone who bought a Wii or 360 doesn't have to justify themselves but PS3 owners do. If you want to play PS2 games get a PS2, or you should have bought the PS3 earlier.
[QUOTE="RoganSarine"]I'm more worried what happens if you ever need to use the warranty and now you have NO backwards compatible option. You don't know how pissed I would be if I didn't get my b/c option.PSP107
good point
I'm going to agree with this as well. There are some PS2 and even PS1 games that I still enjoy playing. But when played on a PS2 on my HD tv, they look like garbage compared to how they looked played on an SD set. Fortunately, I can play them on my PS3 on my HD set, and they look great, better than ever. If I ever have to get my PS3 replaced, and have to get a no-BC model, I'm going to be pretty unhappy.
[QUOTE="Kaine666_2"]lucky me i bought a 60gig at launch :)
Myzz617
same here now 250GB...but we screwed when it dies out :(
:lol: dang, I just thought about that... :|
here read this article expesially the "corrections" does this mean they do or don't have BC? to me it sounds like they do.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6194006.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=newstop&tag=newstop;title;15
Wow, that's pretty bad. Who doesn't have a PS3 yet better run to the store and get one fast.
Glad I have a 60GB.
doesn't the article say that its a mistake and does indeed still have BC? like others have said software costs nothing so i find it hard to believe they removed itmachiavell8x8
But even the 80GB is not pure software emulation. They only took out the Emotion Engine (CPU), not the Graphics Synthesizer (GPU). That's why there is indeed a cost to the BC... it comes with still including that latter chip.
here read this article expesially the "corrections" does this mean they do or don't have BC? to me it sounds like they do.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6194006.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=newstop&tag=newstop;title;15
machiavell8x8
Gamespot had mistakenly claimed that it didn't have backwards compatibility period. However the system will still play PS1 games, just not PS2 ones. The reason being that the former do not require any extra hardware (they can be emulated in pure software), whereas again the latter do.
Considering that they're just doing software emulation now, there is absolutely no excuse for them not to have that kind of BC in the PS3.
MAILER_DAEMON
This is the only thing I can outright disagree with you on. As has been stated several times in this thread (including by myself), they are not doing JUST software emulation right now. The BC 80GB model still uses a piece of hardware in assisting with PS2 emulation; that hardware being the Graphics Synthesizer chip, the PS2's GPU. The only thing the software emulation is, well, emulating is the Emotion Engine (PS2's CPU).
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment