The Next Generation Console Thread

[DoomRulz]

Whoa, wait a second, Sony is eliminating BC from the 80 GB consoles?? Sry, I'm in late here.

 

[Havok83]

Whoa, wait a second, Sony is eliminating BC from the 80 GB consoles?? Sry, I'm in late here.

Yes. The MGS4 bundle is the last model that will feature PS2 BC. Come this fall, they will start selling an 80gb PS3 without it for $399. Basically its the same hardware as the current 40gb but with twice the space

 

[DoomRulz]

Oh for...WHAT THE **** SONY!!!!

I'm sorry, but that really makes me angry, why in God's name do they want to alienate their customer base, I have no idea. I better get my hands on a PS3 fast...

 

[Havok83]

Oh for...WHAT THE **** SONY!!!!

I'm sorry, but that really makes me angry, why in God's name do they want to alienate their customer base, I have no idea. I better get my hands on a PS3 fast...

I dont get why people are still so surprised by this. Sony started phasing it out last year when the first announced that the 80gb, which would feature partial BC, would replace the 60gb. Soon after that, they released the 40gb which had no PS2 BC at all. That has been the standard PS3 model across the world since late last year with North America, being the only territory to at least get the 80gb model in limited quantities this year. It was bound to happen eventually. Im surprised they continued to produce the current 80gb ones for as long as they did after the 40gb release.

I also dont get how is this alienating their customer base? Do you want a PS3? If so, why do you want one? If its to play PS2 games, which is what you will be missing out by this announcement, then save the $400 and continue to play your PS2 games on a PS2 or if you dont own one, get a PS2 for $130. You'll have saved $270

 

[KALEL114]

To add to that. Let's not forget that there are already 125 million PS2's in homes right now. I think that was part of Sony's thinking as well when taking away BC.

 

[Superhero 101]

Hasn't Sony also said that they have plans in the future to release a Backward Compatability update?

 

[Havok83]

Hasn't Sony also said that they have plans in the future to release a Backward Compatability update?

Im not sure if there has been any word on them on that. I think maybe Tretton may have said something in passing but I dont think theres any official confirmation that there will be. It may be more fan speculation.

 

[DoomRulz]

I dont get why people are still so surprised by this. Sony started phasing it out last year when the first announced that the 80gb, which would feature partial BC, would replace the 60gb. Soon after that, they released the 40gb which had no PS2 BC at all. That has been the standard PS3 model across the world since late last year with North America, being the only territory to at least get the 80gb model in limited quantities this year. It was bound to happen eventually. Im surprised they continued to produce the current 80gb ones for as long as they did after the 40gb release.

I also dont get how is this alienating their customer base? Do you want a PS3? If so, why do you want one? If its to play PS2 games, which is what you will be missing out by this announcement, then save the $400 and continue to play your PS2 games on a PS2 or if you dont own one, get a PS2 for $130. You'll have saved $270

B/c by including BC, I only have to use one console, not two. On a smaller note as well, it takes up less physical space by only having to use just one console.

I want a PS3 b/c I want to play PS3 games, as well as PS2 games, and have Blu-Ray capabilities. Microsoft sure as hell didn't axe BC from the 360 and their console is way cheaper.

 

[Fading]

Actually the 360 is no longer "way cheaper" than the PS3. The 20GB premium is $299. The 120GB Elite deal is $449.92. I'm getting these prices from Walmart. So we're talking a difference of anywhere from $100, to the 360 being $50 more than the PS3. It's not longer a difference of over $200 or more. Hell, Walmart has a $558 Xbox Live gamers bundle, the 80GB PS3 MGS4 bundle with Dual Shock is only $500. So price inbetween the two is not really an issue anymore.

So for a rough difference of $50 or so (we'll take the avg) you're getting a BR drive, wifi, free online, a built in HDMI port, memory stick ports that mix with your PSP memory stick, and a few other features I'm sure I'm forgetting.

So really, IMO, price inbetween the two is becoming irrelavent. If you REALLY want BC you've had 2 years to get it, and still have time. By removing it they've been able to lower the price within spitting distance of the 360. If it's that big of a deal, it has good games now, get one.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

Playstation 3, I've owned all three consoles and this is my pick. The 360 RR'd on me, although I was given a new console I immediatly traded it in. Apart from the obvious reliability issues, which are unexceptable, I was bored with the only good games being FPS.

Next up was the Wii, it was an ok console which severly lacked good quality games. What good games there were that werent gimmicky or full of mini games were limited by the tech and Nintendos **** online service. I'd had enough when all the games they had in the charts in shops were multiple copies of crap like, Carnival Minigames, Wii Play and Sonic/ Mario at the Olympics. Anyone who is actually into video games cant be happy with a Wii.

 

[Havok83]

B/c by including BC, I only have to use one console, not two. On a smaller note as well, it takes up less physical space by only having to use just one console.

thats all a matter of convenience. As far as gaming goes, the main function of the system is to play PS3 games, which it does. So what if you have 2 systems for gaming? You'll have to press an extra button to switch your tv between systems. Big deal.

For me the only reason why PS2 BC in the PS3 is important is bc it upscales the games. Older games dont look so good on HDTVs. While it doesnt make them look as good as they would have on an SDTV, the upscaling does help improve the look of the PS2 games on HDTVs

I want a PS3 b/c I want to play PS3 games, as well as PS2 games, and have Blu-Ray capabilities. Microsoft sure as hell didn't axe BC from the 360 and their console is way cheaper.

And you can still get it. PS2 BC has been phased out since last year and you now know that it will be completely gone this fall. Either you can get the PS3 that plays the PS3 and PS2 games while its still available or complain about Sony taking it out for the next 3 or so years this console generation lasts.

As far as MS goes, like Sony, they tried to cater to those interested in BC in the beginning of the systems cycle but now its no longer a priority. When was the last time MS even updated their BC list? Last I heard, its been about a year. You cant directly compare them as previously the PS3 BC ran on hardware, since it contained PS2 parts in the system, which it no longer has. The 360's runs on software emulation. There's a possibility that in the future that the PS3 could offer software emulation but there's no guarantee on that.

And as far as the 360 being way cheaper with Xbox game BC, well the PS3 has full PS1 BC with the feature of Blu-ray which is something the 360 does not.

Next up was the Wii, it was an ok console which severly lacked good quality games. What good games there were that werent gimmicky or full of mini games were limited by the tech and Nintendos **** online service. I'd had enough when all the games they had in the charts in shops were multiple copies of crap like, Carnival Minigames, Wii Play and Sonic/ Mario at the Olympics. Anyone who is actually into video games cant be happy with a Wii.

What does the Wii even have on the horizon. It lured gamers in its first year with titles like Zelda, Metroid and after with its big franchises like Mario, Smash Bros, etc... but thats it. It doesnt look like they have much in store in the future and seem to be primarily focused on pleasing the kiddie and mom crowd.

 

[DoomRulz]

What does the Wii even have on the horizon. It lured gamers in its first year with titles like Zelda, Metroid and after with its big franchises like Mario, Smash Bros, etc... but thats it. It doesnt look like they have much in store in the future and seem to be primarily focused on pleasing the kiddie and mom crowd.

Much as it pains me to say this, the Wii isn't targeted at real gamers. Like you said, it's a very kiddie console and it has almost nothing save for Zelda and Metroid when it comes to single player games.

 

[SouLeSS]

I also dont get how is this alienating their customer base? Do you want a PS3? If so, why do you want one? If its to play PS2 games, which is what you will be missing out by this announcement, then save the $400 and continue to play your PS2 games on a PS2 or if you dont own one, get a PS2 for $130. You'll have saved $270

One of the big reasons I bought I PS3 was because I could keep getting PS2 games and playing it on my PS3 as well as PS3 games. It waas that, the Blu Ray, and the PS3 games (which to this day I still only have like 2, and I never use the damn thing unless I'm watching blu-rays or playing old PS1 RPG's).

But, I think the whole "it can play ps2 and ps1 games better than ps2s and ps1s could" think helped people pay the 500$ for it or whatever it was when it was first comming out.

Know what I mean? Though, knowing Sony they're going to try and makeup for their still huge losses on the product and probably start doing the XBL thing of releasing old PS2 games that were popular available for DL or whatever.

 

[Fading]

Since ppl are talking Wii, it does kinda make me sad it turned out this way. Zelda is among my favorite franchises. Hell, I bought a Gamecube just to play it and Metroid Prime (both of which I enjoyed), also have a GB Advance SP so the connectivity helped justify the purchase heh. However the Wii just doesn't tempt me, even the new Zelda doesn't warrant a Wii purchase to me.

After their last press conference it just seemed like they skipped over the core Nintendo players and went straight for main stream. Which is why I can understand the frustration fans had with E3 and the lack of new games.

Both the PS3 and 360 have games coming out that appeal to their core buyers, Wii seems to have struck a nerve with mainstream and is focusing on games that appeal to that demographic. Not that I entirely blame them, Wii's selling like hot cakes, they could make a game where you are a monkey flinging crap and ppl would eat it up, Nintendo has no incentive to do things differently.

 

[Dark Victory]

I own a 360 and PS3 and love them both. I've played a Wii and it was fun but IMO it seems to be aimed towards kids.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

What does the Wii even have on the horizon. It lured gamers in its first year with titles like Zelda, Metroid and after with its big franchises like Mario, Smash Bros, etc... but thats it. It doesnt look like they have much in store in the future and seem to be primarily focused on pleasing the kiddie and mom crowd.

Exactly, I looked ahead at the upcoming slate a few months back and Smash was the only one that interested me for 2008/TBA. A man can't live on Smash alone.

 

[Raiden]

Raiden, don´t get offended by it but...WTF?
You will see if playing single player on the 360 is worthwhile, if not you will get a PS3?
What are you expecting, that bunnies will come out of your screen when you play single player on the PS3, but the world might end in a ball of flames if you play it on the 360?
Dude, choose what you want, but to actually think that playing single player in both consoles will give you diferent experiences, doesn´t make sense.
I can speak only for the 360 (i don´t have a PS3), but all games have a great single player gameplay (at least the ones i have)
Then again, didn´t you said once that you had already made up your mind and were going with the PS3?

Actually, I'm just looking to see if 360 will still be enjoyable without online gaming, since $4 per month is still alot when I'm already paying for a MMO (and there's no way for me to convince my wife that I'll need to play both at the same time). From what I know, PS3 also offer online gaming but without the monthly fee, and that may be something I'm looking for. I know that single player is the same for both, but the difference is their online services.

Frankly, 360 is probably more appealing to me overall (RROD notwithstanding), since they have GOW, DLC for GTA4, and better games in their library than PS3. But the monthly subscription fee is kind of a deal-killer.

 

[Raiden]

Actually the 360 is no longer "way cheaper" than the PS3. The 20GB premium is $299. The 120GB Elite deal is $449.92. I'm getting these prices from Walmart. So we're talking a difference of anywhere from $100, to the 360 being $50 more than the PS3. It's not longer a difference of over $200 or more. Hell, Walmart has a $558 Xbox Live gamers bundle, the 80GB PS3 MGS4 bundle with Dual Shock is only $500. So price inbetween the two is not really an issue anymore.

So for a rough difference of $50 or so (we'll take the avg) you're getting a BR drive, wifi, free online, a built in HDMI port, memory stick ports that mix with your PSP memory stick, and a few other features I'm sure I'm forgetting.

So really, IMO, price inbetween the two is becoming irrelavent. If you REALLY want BC you've had 2 years to get it, and still have time. By removing it they've been able to lower the price within spitting distance of the 360. If it's that big of a deal, it has good games now, get one.

Since I have a Wii already, I'm looking to get either 360 or PS3 for around $300-400, so I'm looking at the 20GB premium as one of the possible console that I'd get (I'm not gonna spend $500 for 120GB). But is it a bad idea to get a 20GB? I'm not sure how fast the HD will be filled up, and I'd appreciate it if you guys can give me some ideas about the storage space in 360 and PS3.

 

[Fading]

Honestly I couldn't tell you as I don't have a 360. My PS3 alrdy has 50GB of it's 80GB's filled tho, I'm probably going to add another hard drive. However to my understanding (think there's a post in the Xbox section on it) MS has given the thumbs up for developers to use their discretion and add hard drive installs. I'm not sure if it's true or not, but if so and developers start using it I can see a 20GB hard drive filling up fast. Again tho it would probably be better if one of the 360 owners answer this.

 

[imdaly]

Actually, I'm just looking to see if 360 will still be enjoyable without online gaming, since $4 per month is still alot when I'm already paying for a MMO (and there's no way for me to convince my wife that I'll need to play both at the same time). From what I know, PS3 also offer online gaming but without the monthly fee, and that may be something I'm looking for. I know that single player is the same for both, but the difference is their online services.

Frankly, 360 is probably more appealing to me overall (RROD notwithstanding), since they have GOW, DLC for GTA4, and better games in their library than PS3. But the monthly subscription fee is kind of a deal-killer.

So wait, you have no problem spending, what, $15/mo for one MMO, but can't spend less than $4/mo to play ANY XBOX360 game online?


Trust me. It's completely worth it if you play games online.

 

[Raiden]

So wait, you have no problem spending, what, $15/mo for one MMO, but can't spend less than $4/mo to play ANY XBOX360 game online?


Trust me. It's completely worth it if you play games online.

No, I cannot justify to my wife that I need to pay for both subscription, since she knows that I don't have time for both due to my job and family. When I was single, I'd have both, but now it's no longer possible.

 

[KALEL114]

Since I have a Wii already, I'm looking to get either 360 or PS3 for around $300-400, so I'm looking at the 20GB premium as one of the possible console that I'd get (I'm not gonna spend $500 for 120GB). But is it a bad idea to get a 20GB? I'm not sure how fast the HD will be filled up, and I'd appreciate it if you guys can give me some ideas about the storage space in 360 and PS3.

I am in your situation, sort of. I have a 360 and PS3 though. I can't justify to my wife having to pay for Live, when I get PSN for free. That's life I guess. As far as the storage space is concerned, I upgraded my PS3's HD to 320gig. It cost less than $100.00 to upgrade (all it is, is a laptop HD) and is pretty easy to do. It does not void your warranty. Just something to think about when making your decision.

http://boardsus.playstation.com/playstation/board/message?board.id=ps3media&thread.id=32840

 

[Raiden]

I am in your situation, sort of. I have a 360 and PS3 though. I can't justify to my wife having to pay for Live, when I get PSN for free. That's life I guess. As far as the storage space is concerned, I upgraded my PS3's HD to 320gig. It cost less than $100.00 to upgrade (all it is, is a laptop HD) and is pretty easy to do. It does not void your warranty. Just something to think about when making your decision.

http://boardsus.playstation.com/playstation/board/message?board.id=ps3media&thread.id=32840

Thanks for the info. This really helps me to make my decision between 360 and PS3, and if I can get a bigger HD without spending excess amount, then I'd do it. 360's library is quite impressive, but that isn't the only thing under consideration.

 

[StrainedEyes]

What do you people really need all that HD space for?

 

[Havok83]

What do you people really need all that HD space for?

Demos
Video Clips
Music
Downloadable retail games. Im not talking about the small arcade like titles, but the big ones you can find on a BR in the store. This applies to games like Warhawk, Siren, Gran Turismo 5 Prologue, Socom, etc...
Game Installs

All that takes up space and it adds up quickly, especially the last 2