PS3 slim

[the7k]

I understand the whole "I want 3 systems in 1 deal", but I still don't find it to be that big of a deal to have a PS2 and a PS3 hooked up at the same time. Before I got a component cable hub, I just took the cable out the back of the PS3 and put it into the PS2, or vice versa. That's not even counting the Wii, Xbox, Dreamcast, Saturn and VCR I also had hooked up in that apartment so cramped, I envied the Japanese.

I think, last I checked, a PS2 Slim will get you about $40 trade-in credit. In my opinion, that's a slap in the face. Anybody who takes that just doesn't give a fuck, as far as I'm concerned.

I also like the general attitude people have about Backwards Compatibility. "Yeah, just bring BC back!", as if it was no more than a switch Sony could flip and magic would happen. Remember how long it took for SNES emulation to be able to run games like Tales of Phantasia and Star Ocean? Do you really think Sony would yank BC away if it wasn't bringing production costs down by enough? Yeah, that's a great idea - take away a feature of the console for no apparent reason.

[Mod_Man_Extreme]

I think, last I checked, a PS2 Slim will get you about $40 trade-in credit. In my opinion, that's a slap in the face. Anybody who takes that just doesn't give a fuck, as far as I'm concerned.

Nope, it's been at $25 (slim) and $20 (original) for nearly a year now at GS.

Used systems are like used cars once you drive it off the lot it's worthless. Remember the PS2's nearing 10 years old, so no matter how good the games are or how much a brand new one costs there are 138 million of them currently in circulation making the hardware virtually worthless.

[Incognito D]

Couldn't the Atari 5200 play 2600 games?

[racketboy]

I understand the whole "I want 3 systems in 1 deal", but I still don't find it to be that big of a deal to have a PS2 and a PS3 hooked up at the same time. Before I got a component cable hub, I just took the cable out the back of the PS3 and put it into the PS2, or vice versa. That's not even counting the Wii, Xbox, Dreamcast, Saturn and VCR I also had hooked up in that apartment so cramped, I envied the Japanese.

It wouldn't be as big of a deal if I already had a PS2, but I don't and don't really want to buy one AND a PS3.

BTW, dunno if anyone posted this yet:
http://gizmodo.com/5341207/10-things-yo ... -ps3-slim/

Nice summary of info

[Niode]

I also like the general attitude people have about Backwards Compatibility. "Yeah, just bring BC back!", as if it was no more than a switch Sony could flip and magic would happen. Remember how long it took for SNES emulation to be able to run games like Tales of Phantasia and Star Ocean? Do you really think Sony would yank BC away if it wasn't bringing production costs down by enough? Yeah, that's a great idea - take away a feature of the console for no apparent reason.

The difference here is that emulators are generally worked on by a single person or a small group of people, in their spare time. This is Sony we're talking about, Sony with a massive amount of manpower. Maybe they should get those people working on that useless piece of shit called Home that nobody likes (if you disagree with this statement, fuck you, you're wrong) and get them to work on a software update for backwards compatibility. The 360 can do backwards compatibility via software (and it only shares an x86 cpu), if Sony claims the PS3 as being soo much more powerful than the 360 then why can't it? The PS3 uses similar tech to the PS2 (a broadband engine aka PowerPC), so that's got to count for something right?

Personally I'm sick of people trying to justify Sony's constant removal of features from it's system to reduce costs. How many consoles out there have had hardware revisions that actually remove features? Why are they removing features? That's removing value. We're not saving any money, because we're actually getting less from the deal. It's like if VW made a new Golf and then half way down production runs decide to remove the windscreen wipers as standard, and maybe the front fogs or maybe a door or a couple of cylinders from the engine. The problem that I have is that the PS3 has lost so many features it was supposed to have yet they don't offer you any alternative to get them back, it's either like it or lump it. So in fact you're not gaining anything from the price drop, just more lost features. Next they'll remove the ethernet port to cut costs or remove the power cable because everybody has at least one laying around the house, amiright?

As for the justification of the standard av cable, that's not a justification, the system is a HD system, sold on it's HD capabilities, to not include any kind of HD cable is beyond ridiculous, what stopped them bundling a combo component lead (like the one I bought for my PS2, that I can't fucking use since only 5 games of the several thousand titles for the PS2 have component output in PAL regions). The reasons you gave are bogus, all they had to do was explain how you would only use either the composite cables if you have an SD tv or the component cables and where to plug them if you have a HD TV in the manual. It's not for safety or any bullshit like that, it's pure laziness and the company's attempts to shave as much cost as humanly possible from the machine regardless of the needs of customers.

[MrPopo]

Couldn't the Atari 5200 play 2600 games?

Nope, but the 7800 could play 2600 games. Of course, by that point the 7800 wasn't relevant, since it was trying to compete with the Big N.

Personally I'm sick of people trying to justify Sony's constant removal of features from it's system to reduce costs. How many consoles out there have had hardware revisions that actually remove features? Why are they removing features?

The NES 2 removed the nice video out, the PS2 slim removed the ability to add a hard drive, the various revisions of the PS1 removed the parallel port even before it made it to the slim. That's part of the cost cutting. Several years after release you have cheaper components available, you can make the unit smaller and sleeker, and you can remove features that weren't popular.

And I keep going back to why do you want to buy a PS3? You want to play PS3 games and maybe watch Blu Ray movies, right? It still can do that. And now you can get it at a price that doesn't break the bank.

Racket, I have to ask. You don't have a PS2 currently, so I imagine you don't have any PS2 games as well. Is the lack of BC a deciding factor in you not buying a PS3, or is it simply still more money than you want to lay down on a single console?

[Niode]

Personally I'm sick of people trying to justify Sony's constant removal of features from it's system to reduce costs. How many consoles out there have had hardware revisions that actually remove features? Why are they removing features?

The NES 2 removed the nice video out, the PS2 slim removed the ability to add a hard drive, the various revisions of the PS1 removed the parallel port even before it made it to the slim. That's part of the cost cutting. Several years after release you have cheaper components available, you can make the unit smaller and sleeker, and you can remove features that weren't popular.

What I'm saying is that the features they removed are popular, they obviously are because a lot of people are saying they're waiting for a PS3 to be released with BC. The people who are desperate enough are buying second hand systems, which is even worse for Sony since that removes a potential sale down the road since they already have the best version of the PS3 and they don't receive any money from the second hand transaction. If it was my business I'd make it my utmost priority to make sure all the people who would buy the system will buy it.

I just think it's Sony/Kaz being arrogant, I think they refuse to admit they were wrong to remove the BC and that's why they're holding out on it.

Or worse still, they're refusing to add BC in fear that users will just play PS2 games instead of buying new PS3 games and since there's not many new games released for the PS2 they won't be making any money from the thriving second hand market.

[Mod_Man_Extreme]

Personally I'm sick of people trying to justify Sony's constant removal of features from it's system to reduce costs. How many consoles out there have had hardware revisions that actually remove features? Why are they removing features?

The NES 2 removed the nice video out, the PS2 slim removed the ability to add a hard drive, the various revisions of the PS1 removed the parallel port even before it made it to the slim. That's part of the cost cutting. Several years after release you have cheaper components available, you can make the unit smaller and sleeker, and you can remove features that weren't popular.

I just think it's Sony/Kaz being arrogant, I think they refuse to admit they were wrong to remove the BC and that's why they're holding out on it.

Or worse still, they're refusing to add BC in fear that users will just play PS2 games instead of buying new PS3 games and since there's not many new games released for the PS2 they won't be making any money from the thriving second hand market.

That's exactly why, and Sony while making a lot of great products is still a very traditional Japanese company at heart which means ignoring consumers and mistakes as long as they can still make money. It's sort of like how Nintendo and Sega both for the most part refuse to acknowledge the existence of the Virtual Boy and 32X respectively.

[fast]

So side question, since we are all talking about Backwards Compatibility. Since my PS2 is now dying, friend is borrowing it and has taken it apart twice to get it back up and running. My question for you PS3 gurus is if I put in a PS2 game that needs a multitap for multiplayer, say Gauntlet Dark Legacy or Fire Pro, can I just use 4 dualshock 3's? If so how do I do this?

Most of the games I care to play have no issue with software compatibility as of 2.0 (or so says Sony).

I am quite aware I could just buy another PS2, but I am tempted by the shiny.

[the7k]

Hasn't it been shown time and time again that the best work that people do, is the work they do for free?

If Sony ever does do PS2 emulation on the PS3, I'll bet my bottom dollar that all they'll do is license the PCSX2 emulator, in much the same way that the Princess Crown PSP port was nothing more than the Giri Giri emulator.

You wanna blame someone for Sony taking BC away, you can start with me. I didn't even consider getting a PS3 until they took it out to make the system cheaper. To me, BC was unnecessary. I have a PS2, and even if it does sputter out someday (though I have enough confidence in myself that I'll be able to bring it back to life), I can find a PS2 very easily for $30-40. I didn't see the need to spend $600 on something when I could get the same thing, minus the stuff that I already had, for $400.

This is coming from someone who does still play PS2 games - consider that most people trade in their games as soon as they're done with them. Why should they care about whether a system can play older games?

Anyway, there's always this.
Honestly, these aren't bad prices. I'm sure you could find even better deals if you lurked Craigslist or something.