PS3 Poll Police: Is losing backwards compatibility that painful?
We have to take a step back from all the technical information and board the logic train to see things from a little farther away. First off, the PS3 has been out long enough to begin amassing its own game library. Secondly, if you already own a PS3, you're an early adopter and have backwards compatibility ... good for you, this poll doesn't apply. If the PS3 is going to be your first Sony console, why would you care about backwards compatibility? If this is not your first Sony console, you already have something that plays old games -- what's the problem? Shelf space? Fourth, if you don't have an old Sony console but want the PS3 and collect old games, keep in mind this is the cheap version of the PS3. The slim PS2's are practically being given away, so if you really want to go buy old games, the combined price is essentially the same as if you were an early adopter of the PS3. This isn't to say removing backwards compatibility is a good move, it's definitely confusing and pointless, but for a lot of us, there's no real justification to all the hate being poured out on Sony. This is the data the Poll Police compiled from witnesses, so take it as you will. Last week's results are after the jump.
Good to see people are as tired of reading FFXIII and MGS4 rumors as we are of reporting them. Just about nine out of every ten votes went to either the "They're exclusive, give it a rest" or the "I don't care, just make it stop!" columns. Apparently we have a 10% infiltration of anti-Sony fanboys, or at least people who don't trust gaming companies at all. We hope these rumors cease also, but with both games still far from release, we're sure there will be countless more tales to weave about "talks" about "going multiplatform". Thanks for voting!
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Josh @ Oct 7th 2007 6:25PM
I don't think this is a big deal at all. Yes there isn't a lot of games yet for the PS3 but I have never gon back and played any of my old PS2 games. I once put in Socom CA and and quit because it looked awful after playing PS3 games. Yes it might suck, but come its really not a big deal.
PS I have about 15 PS2 games for sale if any body is interested!
Algernon @ Oct 7th 2007 6:35PM
I dont really think its that big of a deal.... but i do wish BC was on the new PS3... not many games that i would go back and play again but there are a select few that i would.
I wouldnt mind as much if because of this, theres another price cut soon
yoface @ Oct 7th 2007 6:42PM
yes. upscale for 360 is awesome. Also makes halo1+2+San Andreas look better. Oh ya, I should only be playing next gen. My Bad. *goes off to delete XBLA downloads*
Egster @ Oct 7th 2007 6:46PM
You know these polls are useless because you can vote more than once.
OTAM @ Oct 7th 2007 6:56PM
I'm amazed at the results considering all the shit talking about the 360 not being fully BC when it came out.
Ed @ Oct 7th 2007 7:00PM
I collect systems, and as such, for each system that I own I always collect a spare when its generation is done and the price is rock bottem. Backwards compattability was never a selling point for me. It's convienant, and it dose save shelfspace. But for me it serves little else.
Haiddasalami @ Oct 7th 2007 7:02PM
i guess if u were an early adopter u didnt get screwed over..u still have a choice and can find a 60gb ps3 but hurry. i got mine and the eb games which no one know about had a lot in stock..
ruibing @ Oct 7th 2007 7:14PM
Though I don't think its the biggest concern, I do believe the major revisions in between each SKU and the criticism that Sony will receive from this decision will not be worth whatever amount they saved. I wished they removed wireless and chrome finish and made the 40GB have the same emulation as the 80GB. I mean right after they finished getting fire from people over the software emulation, they cut it off entirely.
phattie @ Oct 7th 2007 7:15PM
I already got my 60gb suckas!
xion @ Oct 7th 2007 7:25PM
its useless because you cant expect a non-biased answer from "PS3 Fanboy" readers. this would be better in Joystiq.
superaktieboy @ Oct 7th 2007 7:26PM
i actually think its not that a big deal, i know its easier and better to have only a PS3 instead of a PS2 and a PS3, but still:
Those who have PS2 games obviously have also a PS2, otherwise WHY THE F*CK would you buy PS2 games (unless you want to play it on the PS3 coz of its big library) but most games that come on PS2 also come of PS3
so id say if you have a PS2 don't sell it, keep it next to the PS3 if ur gonna buy one!!
Richard Comegys @ Oct 7th 2007 7:34PM
I honestly feel like the reason they're removing the backwards compatibility is so that we early adopters don't feel like we got screwed over in terms of price. They asked a lot of us, to pay $600 for a new system when the competition was a good deal cheaper. So now we all think we're getting something.
As for the implications of losing BC -- pfft. There's a perfectly good, modded slim/compact PS2 sitting atop my entertainment shelf that gets absolutely no use. I'm almost certain that everyone who invests in the PS3 did so because the PS2 was a mainstay in their homes.
Josh @ Oct 7th 2007 7:38PM
Its no big deal. if you want it, get a SKU that has it.
sicklesdawg @ Oct 7th 2007 7:50PM
the 40gb wont have it! If you want it fork over $100 for the 80gb with BC.
TRUTH @ Oct 7th 2007 7:50PM
LOL Fanboys are Funny...
Just curious but what happen to All that talk about being Backword Comp.
I just don't get it... Maybe one of you Blind Fanboys can advise me...
DownwardMonkey @ Oct 7th 2007 8:03PM
Dear gods, all this moaning from people that for the most part already have PS3s. Well for all your information I now know 3 people that are buying PS3s at the end of the month and 2 that are thinking about it for Christmas.
At the end of the day, THAT is all that matters. Anyone with that many PS2 games either has a PS2 or can pick one up DIRT cheap.
Egster @ Oct 7th 2007 8:03PM
@ xion : so you're saying that joystiq is unbiased? It has one of the biggest xbox 360 fanboy following on the web. read any topic regarding the PS3 or Sony in general and you can't deny that fact. Why do you think PS3 Fanboy is being trolled by an awefull lot of guys like TRUTH?
Anyway cutting BC from the 40GB model is no problem at all as long as they keep a version avalable that is BC.
David Tieman @ Oct 7th 2007 8:15PM
I never seen backward compat as a big deal. Even tho i owened a number of games on the orginal xbox i never played them on my 360. I never owned a ps2 so it was never a question with my ps3. If you want back compat just keep your old system. I mean come on how much does a ps2 cost now a days? Beside once you start playing new gen games, its hard to go back to the old stuff.
Edge @ Oct 7th 2007 10:33PM
I really don't see BC as much of a factor after the first year. I voted accordingly, but with the extensive back catalog of the PS2 (and PS1), it could make a difference for some people... well, only those people concerned with splitting hairs over which console is better.
linebeginstoblur @ Oct 7th 2007 11:01PM
Steve, the European 40 GB is not the same as the American 80 GB.
First, there was the American 60 GB. It had both the Emotion Engine (CPU) and the Graphics Synthesizer (GPU). For the American 80 GB, the Emotion Engine was taken out, replaced by emulation, but the Graphics Synthesizer was still included. On this European 40 GB, both the Emotion Engine and Graphics Synthesizer have been removed. I guess it could be possible to do emulation as well eventually, but not anytime soon I think.
linebeginstoblur @ Oct 7th 2007 11:03PM
Also, from what I've heard, the changes may only affect PS2 games. I think PS games should be playable on any PS3 games. Don't quote me on that though. Heh.
yoface @ Oct 7th 2007 11:05PM
OK LISTEN HERE! I HATE WHEN PEOPLE DO ALL CAPS AND I HAVE TO DO IT FOR ONCE.
GRAB A COPY OF Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas FOR THE ORIGINAL XBOX, PLAY IT ON THE WIDESCREEN SETTINGS IN THE ORIGINAL XBOX ON AN HD SET with the Xbox Component Video Cable connected. OBSERVE THE VISUAL QUALITY. NOW POP IT IN THE 360, PLAY IT IN WIDESCREEN, OBSERVE THE QUALITY. NOTICE THE HUGE DIFFERENCE? IF NOT, GET A NEW PAIR OF GLASSES AND CHECK AGAIN.
Also you could check out the visual quality difference for games like halo and halo 2. All these three games are great for a lot of people and I bet they'd love to play them with better quality.
For the ps3, backwards compatibility was a big selling point for me.. gives me less temptation to buy it without it.
Jake @ Oct 7th 2007 11:17PM
With the 100 dollars you save, go buy a ps2 if you really want one. They'll be 99 dollars soon anyways.
Bucket @ Oct 8th 2007 12:13AM
People complained when it was announced that the GBA Micro (or the DS) wouldn't play GameBoy games. People complained about Microsoft's half-assed BC on the 360. Now they're complaining about the PS3. Nothing new.
Do I care that my old games may become obsolete? A little. (Even though it doesn't really apply to me and my 60Gb PS3.) What I don't understand is that companies get rid of BC because it supposedly saves money. However, Sony OBVIOUSLY already has the system in place to install software emulation on the PS3. It doesn't seem like that would be as significant as, say, moving from hardware to software emulation in the first place.
With that in mind, I can only assume that Sony dropped BC because it's cutting into their "PS1 on PSN" sales. Not that I'm surprised that a company only has profit in mind, but it does affect my buying habits.
Maybe I'd feel better about this if Sony didn't confuse "nobody cares about BC" with "nobody uses it because we screwed it up". But don't get me wrong: they wouldn't be the first games company that thought that way.
MYPS3KilledMy360 @ Oct 8th 2007 12:20AM
this is either a heads up to buy a 60 gig or just dont throw out your ps2 since your so in love with the games on it.
Keith @ Oct 8th 2007 12:22AM
An already failing system removes a feature from their system. A system that is priced ridiculously. Go ahead, spin it. I love it - no matter how bad things get -- there's always a group saying "it's fine". Just like the war.
Otsego_Undead @ Oct 8th 2007 1:01AM
"if the PS3 is going to be your first Sony console, why would you care about backwards compatibility? "
IT IS my first sony console and BC was a HUGE part of my decision... Katamari anyone? Metal Gear, FF games, Shadow of the Collossus, God of War? I missed out on all of those with my xbox. Also, ever heard of nostalgia? Nintendo is making a killing on VC games... hell i can go out now and pick up any rad game for the original PS.. 3 gens on one system.. TONS of games.. plus upscale... do that PS2.
Justin Meltzer @ Oct 8th 2007 1:10AM
Well there are definitely some very excellent points made about this issue and they are all very valid, but let's look at the big picture again. What happened when Sony first released the two sku PS3s. Everyone bought the high end and the 20GBs went the way of the dodo. I can see how the $399.99 price point is an important issue but are people really going to get the lesser system over the higher end system when it offers so much less, especially now, without backwards compatibility.
It just seems that Sony is repeating the past less than year from it's release, and that seems like a dumb move if you ask me. Come'on Sony, get your stuff together.
lemonastronaut @ Oct 8th 2007 4:43AM
this poll should be different.. shouldn't it be: would you sacrifice bc for a ps3 that was $100 cheaper?
personally, i don't mind as long as a premium version exists that still does have bc. kids only get so much for christmas, and that extra money will mean a lot to people. the more ppl that buy it, the sooner we can get some more decent games, and the sooner microsoft goes down.
sony is basically in the red, and it looks like they're doing everything they can in a rush to make the system cheaper. even when it was released they never made any money on the console. it's not expensive because they're selfish, it's expensive because it's got a lot of tech packed in a small, well ventilated space.
both systems have to race to get these monsters affordable. xbox chose to make shoddy systems that melt in 3 days from overheating to get a system that can even compete with the $5b sony put into research, and ps chose to just sell it at the price it cost them to manufacture it (and probably less). that was too much for people, so now they're sorting out which corners to cut without giving their system a 30% death rate like the xbox - they're sacrificing features.
thorny @ Oct 8th 2007 5:46AM
Loosing the PS2 backward compatibility is not the big deal. Loosing 2 USB-ports and the memory card reader is really annoying.
Edd Mills @ Oct 8th 2007 6:01AM
To be honest, the ps2 emulation on the ps3 is awful anyway so I don't think anybody is missing out.
Genie @ Oct 8th 2007 7:19AM
Anyone who really wanted b/c would just get the 60GB
unit, seriously. As big a deal that some of you are making over this, you SHOULD just get the 60GB unit for b/c and stop bitching. We won't know if Sony has "fucked up" until we see the sales statistics for this new 40gb PS3. We won't know until then, whether or not this was a "bad move". To say the "Fucked up" before it was even released, especially since you probably know little to nothing about what the majority of the average consumers want, is just asinine.
yoface @ Oct 8th 2007 7:37AM
yes. no one quote me and say how I'm wrong. Maybe there's a lot of right to some of the stuff I said.
Galley @ Oct 8th 2007 8:27AM
You know what they say: "Once you go Hi-Def...".
Laurens Holst @ Oct 8th 2007 8:53AM
The error in "If the PS3 is going to be your first Sony console, why would you care about backwards compatibility?" is that there is a huge library of PS2 games, many of them really really great and classic, and cheap too. Why would a kid whose first console is a PS3 not be interested in playing those PS2 games?
For example, I bought several PS1 games even though I never had a PS1, e.g. the Final Fantasy games, so I could experience them on my PS2.
Oh, and shelf space, of course. Although I must admit that my PS3 is Japanese so I can’t play the PS2 games on it anyway (stupid region coding!). And because the backwards compat isn’t 100% on European units, I would probably not have done away with my PS2 anyway. But it would’ve been nice if I had only needed the PS3, then I could have put my PS2 in the attic.
The Clunge @ Oct 8th 2007 9:39AM
By eliminating BC, there are going to be 120 million PS2 owners with absolutely no reason to choose the PS3 as their Next Gen upgrade. I love my PS3, and even though it's a PAL machine with slightly less BC support than NTSC ones, I only have 2 out out of my 75 games that don't work on it.
I still buy PS2 games, and would like to think Sony would continue to improve BC via firmware updates, but this announcement seems like not only mean the end of BC on PS3, but any attempts to complete the support for the PS2/PS1 back catalogue.
It also suggests that the PS4, when we finally see it, will not offer BC at all.
Who'd have thought that Nintendo, masters of charging full price for unoptimised re-releases of NES/SNES games, would become the champions of reverse compatibility this gen? (Of course it's a bit easier for them to offer full support for GC games, what with the duct-tape and all.)
Sony, this is the worst move you have ever made.
h0mi @ Oct 8th 2007 11:14AM
I bought my ps3 primarily so I could ditch my ps2, even though the only ps2 games I have any interest in are kingdom of hearts 1 & 2. It's not as big a deal as people think, including people who really think they want BC.
If the ps3 library were stronger & larger, this would be a good move, but today, this is a head scratcher for me. (does this really save Sony that much money?)
MYPS3KilledMy360 @ Oct 8th 2007 11:43AM
does the ps2 slim take up that much space on your shelves. wow!
ryano @ Oct 8th 2007 11:47AM
i voted "no it's not" but when you consider how much the 40gb model is and how much a new PS2 model is...do the math and...it's a better deal to get a 60 or 80gb PS3 instead.
but if you just want to play warhawk and um, well warhawk i suppose the 40gb model is the way to go. just expect to be deleting a bunch of demos and junk alot on the really "30gb" model.
ryan @ Oct 8th 2007 4:42PM
man the 60 gb will become rare
OTAM @ Oct 8th 2007 6:01PM
"does the ps2 slim take up that much space on your shelves. wow!"
No,it doesnt,because I don't have one. Alot of us arent collectors of consoles and have sold our PS2s to afford a PS3. I never had a PS2,but my friend did and I have a bunch of PS2 games I wanted to play now I got my PS3. I still want a few PS2 games like Okami and God of War 2 so it IS a blow to us. Don't try to spin it for anything else.
Shattercross @ Oct 8th 2007 8:20PM
15. LOL Fanboys are Funny...
Just curious but what happen to All that talk about being Backword Comp.
I just don't get it... Maybe one of you Blind Fanboys can advise me...
------------------------------------------------------
Maybe you can tell me how it feels to spend three months trolling because your console is out for repairs, Truth.
I just don't get it, maybe you giant hypocrites can advise us.
JFA @ Oct 9th 2007 4:18AM
I could care less about BC, but what I don't like is when big companys (Sony/Microsoft) go back on what they say is something that they offer over their competition(Flip Flop a.k.a do a John Kerry). For example with Sony. They said vibrating controllers were so last gen and they are passed that, and that their system (PS3) offers almost full BC "something our competitors don't offer". Refering to Microsoft. And when Microsoft said you don't need HDMI or HD/BR dvd drives to be next gen or have a hard drive(buy the core). Then Sony makes a vibrating controller and says BC is wac, and Microsoft adds HDMI and offers an HD dvd drive add on while claiming that games in the future might need a Hard drive to play because they will not fit on standard dvd's(sorry core owners). That is why I could care less which system has what, as long as it has games that are f*#@&$% fun to play. So let these big companys continue with their lies and ease off the fan boy talk. Just play!
Liam @ Oct 11th 2007 8:26PM
alot of people wont be happy about the PS3 losing backward compatibility with PS2 because I know alot of people who are going to trade in thier PS2 so they get a PS3 and play PS3 and PS2 games on it and in Australia we get only get the 40GB model now and no 60GB or 80GB so it sucks big time for Aussies but anyway I got 1 already so I can play PS2 and PS3 games which is good.
Steve @ Oct 13th 2007 1:51PM
The new 40GB PS3 (we could assert) is the same as the new 80GB PS3 as far as internal components go, it would not be too hard for Sony to rollout the same software emulation of PS2 and PS1 games that the other new PS3s use. If you want a PS3 for $399 I wouldn't sweat it. Now all we need is the $399 to actually come to the States.
Mike W @ Nov 4th 2007 11:15PM
i already have the 60gb ps3, but if you have ps2 games to play, chances are u have a ps2 already.
Mike W @ Nov 6th 2007 6:48PM
...unless you sold it to pay 4 the ps3