should the ps2 die?
#51
Posted 07 January 2008 - 03:33 PM
fair enough I respect that
@ fallen angel
if its worthless to you without backwards compatability, why even get the 60 gig if your main purpose is to play ps1/ps2 games? just play them on ps2 until better games come for ps3 that you will actually play then get it and have backward compatability as a bonus
#52
Posted 07 January 2008 - 04:06 PM
i mean...there are great classics still out there and guitar hero is big hit on the ps2
and as far as not buying one....maybe some people care about their life(Not saying others with next-gen don't) and may be saving for something a bit better.......like a college education
#53
Posted 07 January 2008 - 04:44 PM
#54
Posted 07 January 2008 - 04:55 PM
Quote
im not talking about buying a ps2 (should've made that clearer)...i already have one and i was given it as a gift from a friend when they first came out....
i would probably buy a next-gen but with work and school and all that, im really not at home long to play it so im gonna stick with the ps2 for now and think that it should not die
#55
Posted 07 January 2008 - 05:08 PM
probly the 5th time Ive stated this but it seems like people think I mean quit selling the console and any games it already has which is NOT what Im saying, so enough with the "ps2 has alot of classics so it shouldnt die" posts okay thats not much related to what Im really asking which is should new games continue to come out for ps2?
#56
Posted 07 January 2008 - 05:17 PM
#57
Posted 07 January 2008 - 05:22 PM
#58
Posted 07 January 2008 - 05:24 PM
#59
Posted 07 January 2008 - 09:52 PM
JB, on Jan 7 2008, 10:53 AM, said:
also I dont care about how the ps1 was out at the same time as ps2, thats history its irrelavent to NOW
also Im sick of people calling it next gen, its CURRENT gen
and about the price: 400 IS a respectable price, maybe not low enough for some but it is respectable due to the tech in it
#60
Posted 07 January 2008 - 10:34 PM
I know PS3s are being used as paper weights thats why Sony needs to focus on PS3 cause the longer PS3 has nothing to offer the harder its gonna be to get people to switch to it
also I say the price is respectable but that doesnt mean I think its reasonable
is reasonable for me? yea
others? Idk its up to them on that but I think everyone should think it is respectable but again not up to me soo.....
#61
Posted 07 January 2008 - 10:44 PM
JB, on Jan 5 2008, 10:33 AM, said:
fair enough I respect that
@ fallen angel
if its worthless to you without backwards compatability, why even get the 60 gig if your main purpose is to play ps1/ps2 games? just play them on ps2 until better games come for ps3 that you will actually play then get it and have backward compatability as a bonus
The reason that I make a big deal about backwards compatability is that I've invested alot into my PS2, I have over 100+ games for it, and if one day my PS2 goes (dies), my PS3 should be able to play the PS2 games.
#62
Posted 07 January 2008 - 10:48 PM
JB, on Jan 7 2008, 08:34 PM, said:
I know PS3s are being used as paper weights thats why Sony needs to focus on PS3 cause the longer PS3 has nothing to offer the harder its gonna be to get people to switch to it
also I say the price is respectable but that doesnt mean I think its reasonable
is reasonable for me? yea
others? Idk its up to them on that but I think everyone should think it is respectable but again not up to me soo.....
Anyway.. It's really a stupid move to quit on the Playstation 2 games just because Playstation 3 is out.. Like I said many times before, Playstation 3 is not doing so good, and it will take some times for them to learn about the Playstation 3 and what it has on the inside and how it works. That's why you see such crappy ports and bad frame rates on some games. So yeah Playstation 2 has to stay for a few years more since it's successful and the money is still flowing.
#63
Posted 07 January 2008 - 11:05 PM
@ Rebecca it made no sense because ps1 history has nothing to do with right now thats all Im sayin about that, if you cant understand thats to bad Im not explaining it again, maybe reread some posts
and thats your opinion that ps2 should keep going, I on the other hand just think they need to focus more on ps3 and maybe not entirely quit making games but atleast not release so many and get more on ps3
a few more years would be ludacris, might as well cancel ps3 then
#64
Posted 07 January 2008 - 11:07 PM
#66
Posted 07 January 2008 - 11:19 PM
JB, on Jan 7 2008, 09:05 PM, said:
@ Rebecca it made no sense because ps1 history has nothing to do with right now thats all Im sayin about that, if you cant understand thats to bad Im not explaining it again, maybe reread some posts
and thats your opinion that ps2 should keep going, I on the other hand just think they need to focus more on ps3 and maybe not entirely quit making games but atleast not release so many and get more on ps3
a few more years would be ludacris, might as well cancel ps3 then
They can't release a lot of Playstation 3 games because it will end up crap just like some of the other games, since they don't know much about the Playstation 3 and how it works. It's that difficult for them. Reminds me of the Sega Saturn. So it will take some time. So a few years more is great for a lot of people. Since a lot more games are going to be released for the Playstation 3 this year, I'll wait and see how those games will turn out.
#67
Posted 07 January 2008 - 11:38 PM
if ps2 stays a few more years then why did they release ps3? (not a real question)
sounds stupid (1 maybe 2 years is fine but after that its kinda dumb)
so is ps2 staying around cause ps3 plain sucks?
I just think Sony is f'd up these days honestly
I say kill ps2 within the next year-year and a half or just cancel ps3 and start on ps4
#68
Posted 07 January 2008 - 11:44 PM
JB, on Jan 7 2008, 09:38 PM, said:
if ps2 stays a few more years then why did they release ps3? (not a real question)
sounds stupid (1 maybe 2 years is fine but after that its kinda dumb)
so is ps2 staying around cause ps3 plain sucks?
I just think Sony is f'd up these days honestly
I say kill ps2 within the next year-year and a half or just cancel ps3 and start on ps4
#69
Posted 07 January 2008 - 11:51 PM
#71
Posted 08 January 2008 - 12:01 AM
#72
Posted 08 January 2008 - 12:31 AM
The PS2 should stay alive until at least the PS3 drops down to 360 prices, considering it was the best console ever. (only from before 360 (yes even better than the original Xbox)) Cause it had no major problems, it was affordable, it has exceptional graphics, and more.
#73
Posted 08 January 2008 - 04:37 AM
Grizz, on Jan 8 2008, 01:31 AM, said:
Sony actually lost money even when it was at $600 they make their profit from the games. Same with the Xbox 360 i think the Wii is the only system that made a profit on the actual system this gen.
Also the Ps2 and no major problems? I went through 6 of them cause of the Disc Read Errors then the slim came out and fixed that.
$400 is not bad for what you are getting a stand aone Blu-Ray player will cost near that. Built in Wi-Fi, 40GB HDD, free online play, Able to install Linux plus...well there is that whole gaming feature.
#74
Posted 08 January 2008 - 12:00 PM
I went through like 3 PS2's as well.
#75
Posted 08 January 2008 - 01:05 PM
Anyway, the reason why the Playstation 2 is still going is because it's still making money and their PS3 sales are still very low in comparison. They need to keep the PS2 alive to keep the cash flow steady. Also, people are still making games for it because they've gotten use to how to develop games for the system. Sony is notorious for creating consoles that are hard to develop for, another reason why the PS3 is having problems and it is also why many multiplatform games aren't on par with their 360 counter parts.
Personally, $400 is still too much for the PS3. There is next to nothing on it that I'm interested in, nothing that's exclusive anyway. Most of the games I can get on the 360 as well, and a lot of them are better on the 360 for the time being. So why should I waste the money on a PS3? The only thing that I can think of that I truly envy PS3 owners for is that they're getting Little Big Planet. Maybe God of War 3 as well. But aside from that a hand full of games does not make the console worth buying and I already have a DVD player in my PS2, XBox 360, and an actual DVD players. So that's another thing that it does that I don't care about, and I couldn't careless about blu-ray. Most developers aren't even taking full advantage of blu-ray format and most of the space used is just because they don't compress files like you would normally in previous games on DVD-rom format. The 360 had games that made me want to get it, the PS3 does not. That is why I haven't bothered with it.