ah screw this...prolly not good news for people still wanting to buy a ps3...



http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2008/07/17/sceas-...c-drm-and-home/

Awww, the owners of the later generation PS3 got screwed over (moi got a good deal though). But by that, does he also mean that they intend to try to keep PS2 alive for quite a while longer, unlike what happened to PS1? A lot of old PS1 titles will have to be released through the store, remakes or something, or a good portion of its lovely game library will be lost.

They've stated they want a full ten years out of the PS2 and I think they're going to get that.

This is unfortunate. I think the backwards compatibility by hardware is awesome. The upscaling and smoothing options are great and I know it may seem like a minor thing, but it's definitely very cool and I'm glad I picked up a 60gb. I'm curious if they at least plan to do software compatibility though.

As for the comment on Home... I don't have a problem with them taking their time with it. I want a perfect product and I've never had an issue with waiting for that before.

well they are coming out with a new ps2 bundle this holiday so i would think they still plan to keep the ps2 alive .

They do . Tretton made it clear that they intend to get a full 10 year life span out of the PS2 at E3.

Hmm... maybe they may consider backward compatibility by software emulation in the future when PS2 is reaching the end of its natural lifespan? Lol. I just feel that it's a huge shame if they lose parts of their game library in the future because of the lack of backward compatibility on the current latest PS3 sets.

My lovely set is a 60 GB Jap set, so the only worries I have is the BC of the NTSC/UC games I own. Ah well. I don't have that many of them that are original anyway.

Oh bugger. Like most others, I'd love the backwards compatibility, but I guess as long as my PS2 hangs in there, I'll be fine. I've got a PS1 (for LoD's special place where it can't be back-read on the PS2) for that exact purpose (despite it not being up to par. My family's original died the day we got our PS2, so I went without one for a while. Bought this new one off eBay and I can't say it's the best. But it works. /ramble)

Eh. Oh well. Maybe they'll implement it sometime down the road when I'm ready to get one (don't expect to for another four/five years. >.o.). But going from the Tretton's statement, I have my doubts...

i would hope then they might change their mind, though i think BC should have been in every SKU as to me and a lot of people that really helps in their decision to upgrade.

but i also have a 60GB so no worries here.

Good thing I got the 80GB MGS4 bundle because all of my PS2 games work on it.

I thought the PS3 was region free?

For PS3 games. Not PS1 and PS2 games.

Anyway, I prefer to have a PS2 for old games anyway. The lens eventually get old the more you use it, but that's why I'll refrain from using it for PS2/PS1 games. PS2's are cheap so I'll use it for PS2/PS1 games and then my PS3 will last longer for PS3 games.

Meh, I still don't get why people are incapable of keeping their PS2 around. I have a ps3, a gamecube, an n64, a megadrive and a ps2 all set up in my room; some might not have quite that space, but if they want to play their old games, just hook it up. Its simply that easy. My PS3 is the 60gb so it has it, but it was not a console seller for me in the least.

because why have 2 systems that each do one thing when i can have one that does both?

Yeah, it's a shame, but it's not the thing which is stopping me from buying a PS3 and it's not making me lean towards a Xbox360 (Afterall that doesn't solve anything, the 360 isn't compatible with PS2 games either and there isn't a single Xbox game that I want so the 360's BC isn't a selling point in the slightest).

I'm with Athrun with this one, using PS2 games will only decrease the life expectancy of a PS3 (Maybe not by much, but it all counts) and not just that there are a few games that I need to use Swap magic to play so I'd still have to keep my PS2 about for them anyway (Unless I'm supposed to just forget about the Xenosaga Series... Pfft).

Well basically, the PS2 is cheaper to replace than a PS3. You can find a new one for about $99 here some times when electronic stores have too many in stock.
When I first got my PS2, back when it cost $500 (at least here it did) I learned this the hard way when it stopped liking CD based discs after a couple of years after I played too many of those on it. And eventually it started to affect the DVD based games as well. If I had used my PS1 for those games instead, then my PS2 would have lasted longer for the PS2 games I wanted to play. One reason PS1 games or CD's wore it down more quickly is because the disc spins a lot faster for CD games than DVD's. And the same is true for DVD's compared to Blu-Ray discs. But at this point I don't know how much better the PS3 lens is compared to the PS2 lens. But basically, I'd just rather not shorten the lifelength of my PS3 for PS2 games I can play on my PS2. Not just to make the PS3 last longer, but because I have multi region games and my PS2 is modded, so without it I can't play most of those games.

Because it makes the system cheaper, and cheaper makes the general population happier. Plus, my answer would be I do have one that does both I just don't think its anywhere near the top priority sony should have in improving the PS3 *shrugs* personal opinion dude.