# PS3 Slim (299 USD) and PS3 pricedrop (299 USD)



## WolfoxOkamichan (Aug 18, 2009)

Product Code: CECH-2000 (Charcoal Black)
CPU: Cell Broadband Engine
GPU: RSX
Audio output: 7.1CH LPCM, Dolby Digital, Dolby Digital Plus, Dolby TrueHD, DTS, DTS-HD, AAC.
Memory: 256MB XDR Main RAM, 256MB GDDR3 VRAM
Hard Drive: 120GB Serial ATA
Inputs / outputs:
Hi-Speed USB (USB 2.0): 2
Network: Ethernet (10BASE-T, 100BASE-TX, 1000BASE-T) x 1, IEEE 802.11 b / g, Bluetooth 2.0 (EDR)
Controller: Wireless controller (Bluetooth)
AV output HDMI OUT Connection: 1
AV output AV MULTI OUT connector: 1
AV output Digital out (optical) Connection: 1
BD / DVD / CD drive (read only) Maximum read rate: BD Ã— 2 (BD-ROM), DVD Ã— 8 (DVD-ROM), CD Ã— 24 (CD-ROM)
Power Consumption: Approx 250W
Dimensions: approx 290 Ã— 65 Ã— 290 mm (width Ã— height Ã— length)
Weight: approx 3.2kg
No Linux install

Pics and stuff in this link

Changed the logo to look more like the PS2 too.

Blah blah blah furry rage blah blah blah boo sony etc.


----------



## Lukar (Aug 18, 2009)

Alrighty, I _think_ that I now have a chance of getting a PS3 sometime, although if I get the PS3 Slim, it'd better be durable, lol.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Aug 18, 2009)

Sony consoles _generally_ tend to be more durable.


----------



## CaptainCool (Aug 18, 2009)

very nice! maybe ill get one :B
i just have one problem with this...


> for $299 dollars, â‚¬299 euros


*FUCK YOU!!*
god damnit! stop switching the dollar symbol with the euro symbol >_< this way it costs almost 90 bucks more! the regular price would be 212â‚¬ here >_<


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 18, 2009)

Why did you list ALL of the PS3 Slim's hardware specs?  Except for the hard drive size, they're identical to the other PS3's currently on the market.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 18, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Why did you list ALL of the PS3 Slim's hardware specs?  Except for the hard drive size, they're identical to the other PS3's currently on the market.



This is what I was wondering. Still, I don't like the design very much. I prefer my towering behemoth with the piano black/chrome finish. Looks like they got rid of the touch-sensitive power/eject buttons, too, and made them actual buttons. I guess that's not a bad thing, just different; Though they don't blend into the console's style very well.

But then again, the chassis is really the last thing people look at when buying a console, isn't it?

EDIT: 





> Sony consoles generally tend to be more durable.


Heh. Well, the later-model versions of a generation are, but the early model PS2's had incredibly weak construction (one friend of mine put it as "made with balsa wood and glue"), to the point of easily denting and the components inside being very fragile. Other issues included the susceptibility of the laser diodes to failure in early units. In fact, going a little further back, the original model Playstation had similar issues with durability, due to its use of a plastic track for its laser diode and during operation, a combination of heat and general wear would cause the track to warp. Turning the unit on its side or upside down remedied the issue to an extent, but only when Sony used a metal track did the issue truly resolve.

On the contrary, Sony consoles have had a long history of _not_ being durable.


----------



## Lukar (Aug 18, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Sony consoles _generally_ tend to be more durable.



Meh, usually, I expect a loss in performance when they do things like this with gaming systems. Not saying it _will_ happen, I'm just saying I wouldn't be surprised.


----------



## Sparticle (Aug 18, 2009)

Its a bit too late to corner the market now.
Still good value though.


----------



## Kitoth (Aug 18, 2009)

ALL i have to say it a bout F***ing time they dropped the price. Now i can get one next month.


----------



## Kuekuatsheu (Aug 18, 2009)

I still won't get one.
Games and additional gimmicks (controllers, memory cards?) are still too expensive, and I don't want to point out the lack of good games.


----------



## Foxstar (Aug 18, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Why did you list ALL of the PS3 Slim's hardware specs?  Except for the hard drive size, they're identical to the other PS3's currently on the market.



Nope! Slims can not have Linux installed on them. They also can not stand upright without a $30 dollar stand.


----------



## Foxstar (Aug 18, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Sony consoles _generally_ tend to be more durable.



Someone missed out on the PSone, PS2 era and the $160 dollar repair cost for launch PS3's when the Blu-ray drive goes tits up.


----------



## Aurali (Aug 18, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Why did you list ALL of the PS3 Slim's hardware specs?  Except for the hard drive size, they're identical to the other PS3's currently on the market.



Was wondering the same thing



WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Sony consoles _generally_ tend to be more durable.



Than what?


----------



## Runefox (Aug 18, 2009)

Eli said:


> Than what?



Chalk?



> Games and additional gimmicks (controllers, memory cards?) are still too expensive, and I don't want to point out the lack of good games.


...? Controllers and memory cards are gimmicks? When did you start playing games? Besides, you don't need a memory card, and you're paying the same for controllers pretty much everywhere. Don't give me crap about the Wii-mote; You need to buy three separate parts to make a whole on that one ($45 + $25 + $25 = $95+tax CAD per 'Mote, Nunchuk and Motion Plus, respectively).


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Aug 18, 2009)

I like my girthy current-edition PS3.  I named her Barbara.

It's also a great centerpiece when I host an expensive dinner party, and all my equally-wealthy mates want something to do.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 18, 2009)

Foxstar said:


> Nope! Slims can not have Linux installed on them.


 
And yet you omitted that when listing specs!


----------



## Sassy (Aug 18, 2009)

Lukar said:


> Meh, usually, I expect *a loss in performance* when they do things like this with gaming systems. Not saying it _will_ happen, I'm just saying I wouldn't be surprised.


wut. it's a console. it's a SINGLE PLATFORM. Where do you people get this stuff?


----------



## Runefox (Aug 18, 2009)

Sassy said:


> wut. it's a console. it's a SINGLE PLATFORM. Where do you people get this stuff?



Yeah, it's what happens when the idea that electronics manufacturing processes shrink in size over time and become more efficient gets lost on people, even though not very long ago in history, we had building-sized computers that were less capable than some _wristwatches_ we have today.

I guess there are certain situations where smaller units have differences in terms of *feature set*, but almost never a noticeable loss in *performance*. In the PS3 slim's case, there is neither. This is basically a slimmed version of the current 80GB PS3 with a 120GB hard drive.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 18, 2009)

NEEDS MORE USB PORTS.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 18, 2009)

Well...the removal of OtherOS is sort've a reduction in feature set. However as it turns out, the PS3 Slim can take 12.5mm 2.5" HDD's instead of being limited to the 9.5mm variety (which the current "Classic PS3" is); so the 1TB 2.5" drives available at the moment on the market will fit in the Slim :3 Plus support for BriviaLink! *Swoons*




AshleyAshes said:


> NEEDS MORE USB PORTS.



/cl_tissue 1
maybe you could invest in an $8 USB hub to go with your $299 console?


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Aug 18, 2009)

There are 2 usb ports. What's wrong with that?

And yeah, I forgot the Linux thing (though I still wonder why people are wanting that - seriously, do you even INSTALL it?).

And my PSX and PS2 lasted me for many years. Dunno about you guys.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 18, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> There are 2 usb ports. What's wrong with that?



Well... Plug a keyboard+mouse into it, and you've got no room to charge your SIXAXIS/DualShock3 controllers, much less doing things like hanging a USB flash drive/external drive off it, or plugging in non-Bluetooth peripherals. You almost _need_ a USB hub if you're going to be doing anything but gaming on it; Even with the normal XMB, running the web browser without a keyboard/mouse can be tedious. Then again, I guess that's Sony's plan - Focus on the games for now, in spite of grand ambitions for it to become a computer platform.



> And yeah, I forgot the Linux thing (though I still wonder why people are wanting that - seriously, do you even INSTALL it?).



I did. It's incredibly slow, though, even using the video memory as swap. It's mainly due to the complete lockout of any sort of graphics acceleration, so the CPU (the PowerPC, not the Cell) has to do all of the heavy lifting, meaning things like video playback, and even relatively rapid screen refreshes (like smoothly moving/resizing windows, "border" mode or not, which is pretty standard fare for a GUI) are out of the question. Supposedly, console emulation works, but only if you're fine with running it at 320x240 or similar and using an SPE-enhanced magnifier program to zoom into the centre of the screen. PS3 Linux is basically one big hack. Of course, the web browsing experience is much nicer.

For reference, I'm using Xubuntu (XFCE Desktop Environment) and have tweaked the startup/runlevel, permanently enabled the extra 256MB of RAM allocated to the GPU for swap space, and unlocked the SPE's (which need specific software to take advantage). Running the Synaptic Package Manager is a nightmare, so I end up just using apt for pretty much everything.

One other thing that kind of grated on me is that even though the boot loader is totally capable of launching the XMB or Linux, the XMB automatically assumes that you _always_ want to boot into it until you select Other OS again, which is a pain. I suppose that's the only way.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 18, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> There are 2 usb ports. What's wrong with that?


 
Time Crisis 4 for PS3: IR Markers: 1 USB port.  Guncon 3: One USB Port Each  So 3 ports are needed to do two players.

Not to mention all the other stuff.  The controllers are charged over USB.   The PSP links over USB.  The PSEye which will be used for their new motion stuff will be USB.  Keyboard and Mouse if you're using them for the webbroswer or XMB.

There's plenty of USB stuff for the PS3 and 2 USB ports just doesn't cut it.  It's goofy to need to hang a hub off the front of the thing just to charge and interface more stuff.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Aug 18, 2009)

Why would you plug all of those at the same time?

The only argument that you have that is notable is the Time Crisis 4 thing.


----------



## Fuzzle (Aug 18, 2009)

I don't need your cheap new aged anorexic PS3's son. My PS3 is one size healthir, its big and its beautiful.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Aug 18, 2009)

I might think about it at 200$, or in a year or two, but there's still really nothing on the console I wanna play.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Aug 18, 2009)

I'm just gonna come right out and say it... I'm gay no.

I gotta admit, it's pretty nifty. But I don't regret buying that big, bulky, more expensive PS3 one bit. Y'know why? Because at the time, I really, *really* needed to fucking play some of the games that had come out for it thus far.

*It's SONY for God's sake!* We all knew they'd put out a model that is cheaper _and_ more compact. And we didn't care. We wanted to get those games the day they came out. I actually waited _too long_, I feel.


----------



## Liam (Aug 18, 2009)

It still doesn't fit into my $50 dollar budget, so I'll have to pass off on the PS3 this time.

I heard stories that Sony was losing money in the sales of the consoles.  (was)Is that (still) true?


----------



## Sassy (Aug 18, 2009)

gulielmus said:


> It still doesn't fit into my $50 dollar budget, so I'll have to pass off on the PS3 this time.
> 
> I heard stories that Sony was losing money in the sales of the consoles.  (was)Is that (still) true?


Loss Leading is something *all* console's have done; bar the two Gamecube models. Sega even asked retailers to take a FURTHER loss and sell below cost price. The PS3 became profitable a while ago; however ~ the slim will be even more so. The 360 is also now ran at a profit; but with all the expense of the defective history one wonders if it's even the case in the long run.


----------



## Imperial Impact (Aug 18, 2009)

Fuck ps3, I want a psp.



Badly.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 19, 2009)

Sassy said:


> /cl_tissue 1
> maybe you could invest in an $8 USB hub to go with your $299 console?


I don't think it's the idea of spending $8 on a USB hub that's the problem; It's the idea that in order to make use of all these functions, you probably do need more than 2 USB ports. In other words, you're more or less forced to have a USB hub hanging off the front of the console, which can get to be messy.

I guess it wouldn't be a big problem if there were a single USB port on the rear so that the cables go "out of sight, out of mind" like the power and A/V / HDMI hookups, buuut... Well, like AshleyAshes said, it looks goofy. Trivial, yes, but still. I suppose this would be one opportunity for a company to release a solid bar USB hub that plugs directly into both USB ports and give you eight across the front. I wonder if you'd need a powered hub for something like a Guncon? You'd almost certainly need one for properly charging the controllers.

Now, I can certainly appreciate why they were removed, as with the card reader; Even low-cost items can add up when you're mass-producing things. The shortage of USB ports on the latest models is one reason why I'm looking into purchasing a Bluetooth keyboard/mouse combo for the unit (the other reason being wireless is advantageous in the living room), since it actually does get some mileage out of its browser during normal usage.



> Fuck ps3, I want a psp.
> 
> 
> 
> Badly.


Then... Um... Buy one? Hell, there's plenty of used ones out there that you can homebrew to get even more awesomeness out of it. The PSP-2000 / Slim series is great for that thanks to the extra memory. Run IRShell and you can actually multitask between two programs at once (so long as they only use regular memory) and the IRShell menu itself. So I can run a PSP game either from the UMD port or the memory stick and an emulator at the same time, or play MP3's while browsing, or use all the available memory to increase browsing performance with a special variant of the browser. It's really awesome.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 19, 2009)

Runefox said:


> I don't think it's the idea of spending $8 on a USB hub that's the problem; It's the idea that in order to make use of all these functions, you probably do need more than 2 USB ports. In other words, you're more or less forced to have a USB hub hanging off the front of the console, which can get to be messy.
> 
> I guess it wouldn't be a big problem if there were a single USB port on the rear so that the cables go "out of sight, out of mind" like the power and A/V / HDMI hookups, buuut... Well, like AshleyAshes said, it looks goofy. Trivial, yes, but still. I suppose this would be one opportunity for a company to release a solid bar USB hub that plugs directly into both USB ports and give you eight across the front. I wonder if you'd need a powered hub for something like a Guncon? You'd almost certainly need one for properly charging the controllers.
> 
> ...


Well that's right. Nobody complains about the Xbox 360 having only two usable USB ports (let's be fair here and assume the wireless adapter is plugged in so it's Apples:Apples comparison in terms of other features). The PS3 gives you Bluetooth built in anyway; so your keyboard and mouse can be wireless without need for a receiver; and so can any periphirals if the developer chooses to not be a lazy ass.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 19, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Well that's right. Nobody complains about the Xbox 360 having only two usable USB ports (let's be fair here and assume the wireless adapter is plugged in so it's Apples:Apples comparison in terms of other features). The PS3 gives you Bluetooth built in anyway; so your keyboard and mouse can be wireless without need for a receiver; and so can any periphirals if the developer chooses to not be a lazy ass.



Yeah, the thing is, though, there's seldom any reason to use a keyboard/mouse on the 360, since it's not marketed that way; It has no browser, and text entry/chat is done with either a controller adapter, the controller itself, or bypassed altogether with voice. There's no provisions to install another OS, and there probably never will be. There's no Microsoft equivalent to the PSP to connect to (yet). Also, wireless gaming = !#%!!$. WiFi on the PS3 is a nicety for using the browser and picking through PSN, but the gigabit ethernet adapter is more important for me in that gaming almost demands a hard wire, and for streaming media, running a gigabit network is all but required for HD streams of any quality.

But anyway, let's assume the 360 has the WiFi adapter plugged; What other devices do you really want to add? Natal? A Play&Charge kit or an external drive with some videos on it? That's really about it unless you count rarities like the Ace-Edge. In addition, my 360 Elite has a rear USB port in addition to the two up front, so I'm good. I've never used anything but an Elite, but according to Wikipedia, so does every 360.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 19, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Yeah, the thing is, though, there's seldom any reason to use a keyboard/mouse on the 360, since it's not marketed that way; It has no browser, and text entry/chat is done with either a controller adapter, the controller itself, or bypassed altogether with voice. There's no provisions to install another OS, and there probably never will be. Also, wireless gaming = !#%!!$. WiFi on the PS3 is a nicety for using the browser and picking through PSN, but the gigabit ethernet adapter is more important for me in that gaming almost demands a hard wire, and for streaming media, running a gigabit network is all but required for HD streams of any quality.
> 
> But anyway, let's assume the 360 has the WiFi adapter plugged; What other devices do you really want to add? Natal? A Play&Charge kit or an external drive with some videos on it? In addition, my 360 Elite has a rear USB port in addition to the two up front, so I'm good. I've never used anything but an Elite, but according to Wikipedia, so does every 360.


Like I said; the rear port is assumed to be used for the wifi adapter; that's why it's there. If we're making a fair comparison of the two consoles both have to have wifi as the PS3's wifi comes as standard. Let's go down the list for 360...
Rock Band 1 Guitar
Rock Band 1 Drums
GH2 Guitar
Any RB/GH Mic
360 Camera
Natal, when it's available
Play n Charge Kit
Keyboard (for PSU; I use one)
etc
There's plenty of uses for USB on both consoles; but two ports is fine for either scenario. Like I said; get a USB hub.


----------



## Nikolai (Aug 19, 2009)

Mmm. Sexy.

I'm a playstation fan, but not a too hardcore one. 2 USB fit me fine, and I use the 80 GB 500$ US version. I use one for keyboard, and one for charging controllers. Screw mice, I LIKE using my controller to browse the net.

Then again, I just hook up my dell netbook up to my Sony HD-TV screen and use it's 3 USB's to their full capacity (Personal hard drive, eBoostr Flashdrive, and Wireless mouse) which is about the best web surfing experience I think I could get.

But with wireless internet, I could use both my PS3's browser AND my netbook at the same time.

...I don't know why I'd ever _want_ to, but I could. 

When it comes to conventional, everyday use, (not when it comes to SUPER HARDCORE PLAYSTATION FANBOI) this PS3 looks, as I said, sexy. Too bad I bought mine a while back and have no intention of upgrading.

So yeah, I say:

If you want a well-priced, great video game system that's pretty durable, yet still makes you feel awesome every time you see it on your shelf, go with this.

If you shove HDMI cables up your butt and regularly jerk it to pictures of the Sony Logo, maybe not.


----------



## Imperial Impact (Aug 19, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Then... Um... Buy one? Hell, there's plenty of used ones out there that you can homebrew to get even more awesomeness out of it. The PSP-2000 / Slim series is great for that thanks to the extra memory. Run IRShell and you can actually multitask between two programs at once (so long as they only use regular memory) and the IRShell menu itself. So I can run a PSP game either from the UMD port or the memory stick and an emulator at the same time, or play MP3's while browsing, or use all the available memory to increase browsing performance with a special variant of the browser. It's really awesome.


 I don't think I've got enough money. :X


----------



## Lazydabear (Aug 19, 2009)

Well, I hope the new PS3 have Backward compatibility with old PS one and two games since people bitching about that the old PS3 didn't have it.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 19, 2009)

Lazydabear said:


> Well, I hope the new PS3 have Backward compatibility with old PS one and two games since people bitching about that the old PS3 didn't have it.


 
While no PS2 support is present on the PS3 Slim, -all- models of PS3 support PS1 games.  This is because PS1 support is achived by software emulation.  Even the 'non-backwards compatable' PS3's still run PS1 games.


----------



## Nikolai (Aug 19, 2009)

Lazydabear said:


> Well, I hope the new PS3 have Backward compatibility with old PS one and two games since people bitching about that the old PS3 didn't have it.



I just switch output cables or TVs with my old systems I still keep around. I never saw the issue for backwards compatibility, if you already OWN the games (and thus the system that is appropriate to play them) and sony uses the same basic output cables for PS1, 2, and 3. The only exception is with HD cables, but since PS2 and 1 aren't HD-compatible, (to my knowledge...) it's not a huge issue.

I've been through PS1, PS1 Slim, PS2, PS2 Slim, and PS3... and personally the PS2, non-slim, seemed to be the most ideal gaming system possible to me. This PS3 seems to feel a lot like that one, so Sony might be making a really smart move here.


----------



## Lazydabear (Aug 19, 2009)

Well right now, the rumor mill on Xbox 360 have to have some defective problems with the Red Light issue poping up that I guess Sony trying to take advantage of the situation releasing PS3 Slim as a way to make a buck.


----------



## Nikolai (Aug 19, 2009)

Lazydabear said:


> Well right now, the rumor mill on Xbox 360 have to have some defective problems with the Red Light issue poping up that I guess Sony trying to take advantage of the situation releasing PS3 Slim as a way to make a buck.



This is a Sony thread. Don't dare mention SeXbox 360, we like our Peen-S 3.

But yes, Xbox has had considerable problems, or at least considerable enough for PS3 to keep it's foot WELL in the door. I once rudely laughed when I was playing a friend's Xbox 360 and it inexplicably froze up due to heating issues, and had to be cooled down for hours before it was ready to play again. Meanwhile my PS3 is nice and ice-cool. Part of it was environment, but even then, when he had it out in the middle of the floor he'd have to attach this USB cooling fan device he bought, and hope it didn't run out of batteries.

...*just realized that he might have turned this thread into an Xbox-vs-PS3 battle, and quickly shuts up*

Sony is a monster of an electronics corporation, they'll use their tried-and-true business tactics to squeeze money out of the system. Although I've found that I've spent very little in accessories since I've had to purchase my PS3. A second controller was more expensive than a keyboard and HDMI cable put together, and I haven't needed anything else.


----------



## Lazydabear (Aug 19, 2009)

Nikolai said:


> This is a Sony thread. Don't dare mention SeXbox 360, we like our Peen-S 3.
> 
> But yes, Xbox has had considerable problems, or at least considerable enough for PS3 to keep it's foot WELL in the door. I once rudely laughed when I was playing a friend's Xbox 360 and it inexplicably froze up due to heating issues, and had to be cooled down for hours before it was ready to play again. Meanwhile my PS3 is nice and ice-cool. Part of it was environment, but even then, when he had it out in the middle of the floor he'd have to attach this USB cooling fan device he bought, and hope it didn't run out of batteries.
> 
> ...


 
Its a Sony.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 19, 2009)

Nikolai said:


> I never saw the issue for backwards compatibility, if you already OWN the games (and thus the system that is appropriate to play them) and sony uses the same basic output cables for PS1, 2, and 3. The only exception is with HD cables, but since PS2 and 1 aren't HD-compatible, (to my knowledge...) it's not a huge issue.


 
The component cables work on the PS2, I've used them.  While only two PS2 games ever featured upscaled 1080i output, many supported EDTV resolutions, that would be 480p over the interlaced 480i.  The component cables are necessary to get this output out of a PS2.  Also, the 'HD cables' can be used for standard definition 480i singals as well.  By seperating the signal into three lines, one black and white, and two carrying color data, a much cleaner and higher quality 480i signal gets to the TV.  Of course this would require the TV to support those cables.  You'd only see that on TVs build since 2000 or so.

I'm actually getting a pair of 27" Trinitron tubes just to have high quality standard def visuals for my anime and gaming events that I run.


----------



## TwilightV (Aug 19, 2009)

Perverted Impact said:


> Fuck ps3, I want a psp.



^This. Almost every Sony game i'll ever want is on PSP. Although I really want a DSi. It just got a FREE animation app!


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Aug 19, 2009)

All I can say is... lol DSi.


----------



## Lazydabear (Aug 19, 2009)

Good news


 "Additionally, *new firmware* has been announced for release (to all PS3s) before the year is out, finally offering full PS2 compatibility"


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Aug 19, 2009)

Uh, the new firmware (3.0) fixes the PS3's looks, allows moving themes, adds a "What's New?", and more customization. Keep up with the times, dude.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 19, 2009)

Lazydabear said:


> Good news
> 
> 
> "Additionally, *new firmware* has been announced for release (to all PS3s) before the year is out, finally offering full PS2 compatibility"


>Date: Jul 1, 2009
Nice try; but just because they patent something doesn't mean it's going to happen. More likely it'll be so they can sell you emulated PS2 titles through PSN.


----------



## Azure (Aug 19, 2009)

Go outside. Wait, then you'll just play wirelessly, or on your PSP...

Go to the bar.


----------



## lionalliance (Aug 19, 2009)

Well, at least they finally dropped the price 
The slim looks great.



Kuekuatsheu said:


> I still won't get one.
> Games and additional gimmicks (controllers, memory cards?) are still too expensive, and I don't want to point out the lack of good games.



No good games? Sir, I don't know what you're talking about.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 19, 2009)

Sassy said:


> >Date: Jul 1, 2009
> Nice try; but just because they patent something doesn't mean it's going to happen. More likely it'll be so they can sell you emulated PS2 titles through PSN.



Yeah, this is probably at least part of their motivation behind removing direct backward-compatibility even through software emulation.


----------



## Neybulot (Aug 19, 2009)

Err...Does the PS3 controller use a standard battery or AA batteries/battery pack? That's the one reason I don't need a spare USB port for the Play and Charge Kit on my 360. I've got rechargeable AA batteries.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 19, 2009)

Neybulot said:


> Err...Does the PS3 controller use a standard battery or AA batteries/battery pack? That's the one reason I don't need a spare USB port for the Play and Charge Kit on my 360. I've got rechargeable AA batteries.



The SIXAXIS/DualShock 3 has a built-in, non-removable battery pack, much like the Nintendo DS; So you need to use USB to charge them. However, any USB port will do, including your computer, or wall-plugged USB chargers that use standard USB ports. Technically, the Play and Charge kits can be used the same way.

It's actually a little more convenient than swapping batteries all the time, especially if you don't play for a while. Just plug it and go.


----------



## NerdyMunk (Aug 19, 2009)

No backwards capability as well. If you care.


----------



## Kuzooma1 (Aug 19, 2009)

Meh! I still not going to get it.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Aug 20, 2009)

Why are people obsessing with backwards compatibility? Hell, if you don't have a PS2 by now, you should shoot yourself.


----------



## Imperial Impact (Aug 20, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Why are people obsessing with backwards compatibility? Hell, if you don't have a PS2 by now, you should shoot yourself.


 Because the ps3 doesn't have any games....?


----------



## Krevan (Aug 20, 2009)

Are these backwards compatible? If not screw it just like I said screw all the other PS3s.
*Edit* Sorry just read the other post

PS3 is weaksauce


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Aug 20, 2009)

I still lol @ "it doesn't have any games", yet these are the same people that bought Gamecubes.


----------



## Imperial Impact (Aug 20, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> I still lol @ "it doesn't have any games", yet these are the same people that bought Gamecubes.


 Wtf?

I don't have a Gamecube.


----------



## Carenath (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Well...the removal of OtherOS is sort've a reduction in feature set. However as it turns out, the PS3 Slim can take 12.5mm 2.5" HDD's instead of being limited to the 9.5mm variety (which the current "Classic PS3" is); so the 1TB 2.5" drives available at the moment on the market will fit in the Slim :3 Plus support for BriviaLink! *Swoons*


I'm pretty sure the PS3 takes standard 2.5" 'laptop' SATA hard disk drives.



Sassy said:


> >Date: Jul 1, 2009
> Nice try; but just because they patent something doesn't mean it's going to happen. More likely it'll be so they can sell you emulated PS2 titles through PSN.


Which would also be them shooting themselves in the other foot. I own a bunch of PS2 games that I like to play, I'd rather buy a PS2 (though I own one so I dont have to) than pay again, just to play the same game downloaded from PSN when I already have it on disc. Not stripping out backwards compatibility.. and actually enabling it now, and promoting it, would do more to shift PS3's off the shelves (and encourage PS2 owners to upgrade), and encourage people to buy newer PS3 games on top of the PS2 games they already own.

Microsoft had (albeit limited) compatibility with original Xbox games on the 360 and the Wii is compatible with existing Gamecube games. The Gameboy Advance was still backwards compatible with the older Gameboy games right back to the classic, even the DS could still play Gameboy Advance games.



WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Why are people obsessing with backwards compatibility? Hell, if you don't have a PS2 by now, you should shoot yourself.


See above.


----------



## CaptainCool (Aug 20, 2009)

Carenath said:


> I'm pretty sure the PS3 takes standard 2.5" 'laptop' SATA hard disk drives.



nope, as far as i know its limited to 9.5mm HDDs. that kinda limits everything and you had to watch out what hard drive you get =/ i have no PS3 but ive read that a lot.
good to know that this will be changed! that was one of the problems i had with the console^^


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

Carenath said:


> I'm pretty sure the PS3 takes standard 2.5" 'laptop' SATA hard disk drives.


It helps to research before you dispute the facts of people clearly smarter than you. 9.5mm 2.5" drives are the only ones accepted by the classic PS3. The current 1TB drives are 12.5mm and won't physically fit; but they will in the slim.


Carenath said:


> Which would also be them shooting themselves in the other foot. I own a bunch of PS2 games that I like to play, I'd rather buy a PS2 (though I own one so I dont have to) than pay again, just to play the same game downloaded from PSN when I already have it on disc. Not stripping out backwards compatibility.. and actually enabling it now, and promoting it, would do more to shift PS3's off the shelves (and encourage PS2 owners to upgrade), and encourage people to buy newer PS3 games on top of the PS2 games they already own.


Note: It's not good business practice to sell hardware that people will just use to play games they've already paid for on. If it were; Nintendo would just put a SNES, NES and N64 cartiridge slot in the Wii and wouldn't charge you for "Virtual Console" BS. Backwards compatibility is a phantom benefit, anyway. Go buy a PS2.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Aug 20, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Product Code: CECH-2000 (Charcoal Black)
> CPU: Cell Broadband Engine
> GPU: RSX
> Audio output: 7.1CH LPCM, Dolby Digital, Dolby Digital Plus, Dolby TrueHD, DTS, DTS-HD, AAC.
> ...



It looks bland.  Very smooth and such, but bland.  Hopefully this is what Sony needs.

Also I'm still wondering why the fuck you would need a 1 TB hard drive for a console?  I've yet to fill up my 60 GB hard drive on my PlayStation3.


----------



## CaptainCool (Aug 20, 2009)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> It looks bland.  Very smooth and such, but bland.  Hopefully this is what Sony needs.
> 
> Also I'm still wondering why the fuck you would need a 1 TB hard drive for a console?  I've yet to fill up my 60 GB hard drive on my PlayStation3.



same here with my 60 gig hard drive in my 360. maybe if i install all my games id fill it but right now im at 32.5gb


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Aug 20, 2009)

CaptainCool said:


> same here with my 60 gig hard drive in my 360. maybe if i install all my games id fill it but right now im at 32.5gb



Nice.  It just makes you wonder what the other 900+ GB will be used for.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

Game installs; blu-ray rips, that sorta thing.
But I have a 1TB external HDD connected to my Wii too <3


----------



## CaptainCool (Aug 20, 2009)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> Nice.  It just makes you wonder what the other 900+ GB will be used for.



indeed^^ and thanks to the better installation routines that came with the new dashboard update games need less space now  i think the installation got faster, too. i really dont get for what i should use a 1TB drive in a console =/ even the PS3 doesnt need that because it just installs very basic data for each game and not everything^^



Sassy said:


> Game installs; blu-ray rips, that sorta thing.
> But I have a 1TB external HDD connected to my Wii too <3



i dont know what you need that much space for (especially for the wii^^) but hey, you can, right? ;D
its just pretty bad that nintendo itself cant implement support like that... an external drive for the wii would be pretty nifty =/
how did you pull that off if i might ask? :3


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

CaptainCool said:


> indeed^^ and thanks to the better installation routines that came with the new dashboard update games need less space now  i think the installation got faster, too. i really dont get for what i should use a 1TB drive in a console =/ even the PS3 doesnt need that because it just installs very basic data for each game and not everything^^
> 
> 
> 
> ...


USB CoverFloader allows you to launch Wii ISO's from an external USB drive. Of course, I don't think the total amount of good Wii games even comes close to 100GB let alone 1000GB; but it's good to be prepared, right?


----------



## Aurali (Aug 20, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> I still lol @ "it doesn't have any games", yet these are the same people that bought Gamecubes.



I liked the gamecube :/ and I liked the ps2. though as of now, i'd rather buy an xbox360 than a ps3...


----------



## Aurali (Aug 20, 2009)

I'm a Nintendo girl. Will always be. The gamecube wasn't as great as the previous two nintendo consoles (nothing is as great as the super nintendo) Though I liked the good games it DID have on it, compared to the amount of pure garbage the PS2 had. Though, the PS2 did have a crap load of good games on it as well, in comparison to it's lesser replacement. There is nothing worth buying on the PS3 for me. At least the XB360 has a few good games.


----------



## CaptainCool (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> USB CoverFloader allows you to launch Wii ISO's from an external USB drive. Of course, I don't think the total amount of good Wii games even comes close to 100GB let alone 1000GB; but it's good to be prepared, right?



not bad, not bad at all^^ seems to be pretty nice!

about the gamecube... i loved it^^ i only have 3 games left for it and the most i had was 5 i guess but i really liked them!
i like my wii, too. the games i have are very good imo.
i never had a PS2 though =/
but its true, id recommend the 360, too. its a great system with great exclusive titles! the PS3 has good titles as well (and even more to come) but they arent as appealing for me as the 360 exclusives.


----------



## Imperial Impact (Aug 20, 2009)

Eli said:


> I liked the gamecube :/ and I liked the ps2. though as of now,* i'd rather buy an xbox360 than a ps3*...









Guud post.


----------



## lionalliance (Aug 20, 2009)

*facepalm* I can't still believe people still believe that the Ps3 doens't have good games -_-; 
That's sad.


----------



## CaptainCool (Aug 20, 2009)

true...
i mean, every non-exclusive title is on the PS3 just as good as it is on the 360 and the exclusive titles arent bad either. and there are many many good games on the way for it!
the new price with together with the 120gig HDD is very tempting for me because of that^^ a year ago the library way crap but now and in the near future it looks pretty good for the ps3


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Aug 20, 2009)

But the HDD doesn't really matter.  All you need to do is buy a standard laptop HDD, the PS3's got the option to swap them out.


----------



## Corto (Aug 20, 2009)

Holy shit, if I keep saving I may finally be able to buy a current gen console for the first time. Or, alternatively, I could buy something I would actually use. Uh. Seriously, though, I've wanted to get a PSP for a while now (I was never too much into the whole "portable console" thing, I played GameBoy for the original Pokemon games and the GBA I got was mostly wasted money, but I was young and foolish) but the idea of browsing porn in the subway intrigues me. (I just realized how off topic that comment is, but fuck it). 


Runefox said:


> On the contrary, Sony consoles have had a long history of _not_ being durable.


Man, I don't know what you're going on about. The PS2 we have at the living room has been kicked, mauled, thrown and had beer poured into it and still works like a wonder, and don't even get me started about my old ugly gray PSX, that fucker fell from a moving horse and even got shot (granted, with a bb gun, but still) and I still play Ace Combat 2 on it to this day. 



Carenath said:


> The Gameboy Advance was still backwards compatible with the older Gameboy games right back to the classic, even the DS could still play Gameboy Advance games.


One sec, does this mean I can't play pre-GBA games on a DS? Because that would seal the deal of me never getting a DS. 

Anyway, if the PS3 got compatibility with PS2 games I would seriously consider getting one, but otherwise I don't care about current consoles.


----------



## CaptainCool (Aug 20, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> But the HDD doesn't really matter.  All you need to do is buy a standard laptop HDD, the PS3's got the option to swap them out.



true. but the current 80 gig model costs 299 bucks and the new slim version with a 120 gig HDD AND better support for other HDDs costs 299 as well ;D why should i get a model with 40GB less for the same price?


----------



## lionalliance (Aug 20, 2009)

CaptainCool said:


> true...
> i mean, every non-exclusive title is on the PS3 just as good as it is on the 360 and the exclusive titles arent bad either. and there are many many good games on the way for it!
> the new price with together with the 120gig HDD is very tempting for me because of that^^ a year ago the library way crap but now and in the near future it looks pretty good for the ps3



Yah, it looks pretty good.
The pre-orders of it are selling like crazy.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Aug 20, 2009)

CaptainCool said:


> true. but the current 80 gig model costs 299 bucks and the new slim version with a 120 gig HDD AND better support for other HDDs costs 299 as well ;D why should i get a model with 40GB less for the same price?




I got my 80GB then upgraded to 200.  :U


Honestly, I like the way the original ones look more than the slims.  They're kinda awkward and not glossy.


----------



## Foxstar (Aug 20, 2009)

Corto said:


> Man, I don't know what you're going on about. The PS2 we have at the living room has been kicked, mauled, thrown and had beer poured into it and still works like a wonder, and don't even get me started about my old ugly gray PSX, that fucker fell from a moving horse and even got shot (granted, with a bb gun, but still) and I still play Ace Combat 2 on it to this day.



Man, I don't know what rock you've been under. Granted the internet wasn't what it was now back in 2001 but DRE was real. Wanna know why storages were so bad? Because new PS2 shipments had to go to people who bought ESAs and needed a replacement unit after the laser would stop reading DVD's or the unit would start eating disks. You also clearly missed the media storm over it and the class action lawsuits that were being filed..I think at least 50+ or so were circling though the courts before Sony settled by offering to fix any DRE units free. And mind you this was after the pre-Duel Shock mess that the PSone was, with having to be played on it's side or upside down if you were lucky due to the laser being knocked out of alignment or the track getting warped due to heat. Next to this, the controller ports dieing and memory cards getting nuked was minor. And you can google and come back with dozens of results of folks with first gen PS3's who have to shell out $160+ for the drive to be replaced, which isn't as major as it could be because the adoption rate of PS3's was in the crapper.




Corto said:


> One sec, does this mean I can't play pre-GBA games on a DS? Because that would seal the deal of me never getting a DS.



The DS launched in the USA almost SIX YEARS ago. Seriously, you are living under a rock, aren't you? To miss something that's been known for well OVER six years?


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Aug 20, 2009)

DS-i isn't backwards compatible though.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

Foxstar said:


> Man, I don't know what rock you've been under. Granted the internet wasn't what it was now back in 2001 but DRE was real. Wanna know why storages were so bad? Because new PS2 shipments had to go to people who bought ESAs and needed a replacement unit after the laser would stop reading DVD's or the unit would start eating disks. You also clearly missed the media storm over it and the class action lawsuits that were being filed..I think at least 50+ or so were circling though the courts before Sony settled by offering to fix any DRE units free. And mind you this was after the pre-Duel Shock mess that the PSone was, with having to be played on it's side or upside down if you were lucky due to the laser being knocked out of alignment or the track getting warped due to heat. Next to this, the controller ports dieing and memory cards getting nuked was minor. And you can google and come back with dozens of results of folks with first gen PS3's who have to shell out $160+ for the drive to be replaced, which isn't as major as it could be because the adoption rate of PS3's was in the crapper.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


54.2% Failure Rate for Xbox 360's vs 10.6% for PS3
I know which company *I* would claim to have a reputation for reliability.


----------



## Vintage (Aug 20, 2009)

Foxstar said:


> The DS launched in the USA almost SIX YEARS ago. Seriously, you are living under a rock, aren't you? To miss something that's been known for well OVER six years?



god forbid someone miss cursory details about a video game console.

tivo really allows you to rate shows?????? noway


----------



## CaptainCool (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> 54.2% Failure Rate for Xbox 360's vs 10.6% for PS3
> I know which company *I* would claim to have a reputation for reliability.



nintendo with their ~7% failure rate? ;D


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

CaptainCool said:


> nintendo with their ~7% failure rate? ;D


I meant next-gen consoles. It's pretty easy to have a low failure rate on hardware that is eight years old~


----------



## CaptainCool (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> I meant next-gen consoles. It's pretty easy to have a low failure rate on hardware that is eight years old~



thats true and i was thinking the same...
for me the wii IS a current gen console though. i mean, it WAS released during this generation, right?


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

CaptainCool said:


> thats true and i was thinking the same...
> for me the wii IS a current gen console though. i mean, it WAS released during this generation, right?


Doesn't really matter when it was released. Sony released the most recent PStwo revision in only March of 2008. Does that mean it should be considered current-gen? Be fair and group the Wii with the proper generation; it's for it's own good that people recognize that it's a revised Gamecube in the same way the PStwo is a revised PS2.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Aug 20, 2009)

The Wii is a current gen system no matter which way you look at it and yes it does have the lowest rate of all the consoles


----------



## Vintage (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Doesn't really matter when it was released. Sony released the most recent PStwo revision in only March of 2008. Does that mean it should be considered current-gen? Be fair and group the Wii with the proper generation; it's for it's own good that people recognize that it's a revised Gamecube in the same way the PStwo is a revised PS2.



okay


----------



## CaptainCool (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Doesn't really matter when it was released. Sony released the most recent PStwo revision in only March of 2008. Does that mean it should be considered current-gen? Be fair and group the Wii with the proper generation; it's for it's own good that people recognize that it's a revised Gamecube in the same way the PStwo is a revised PS2.



thats not really something i want to argue about^^;; but you are actually right i guess... compared to other systems the wii really is pretty weak. and it doesnt really help that they "repaired" the motion controls 3 years after its release, too >.>


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

CaptainCool said:


> thats true and i was thinking the same...
> for me the wii IS a current gen console though. i mean, it WAS released during this generation, right?


 
Reguardless of it's release, the Wii's technology hasn't really evolved since the GameCube.  The hardware is so similar, you can underclock the Wii and it perfectly operates all GameCube games.  the Wii is nothing more than a GameCube with a faster CPU and a faster GPU with some additional rendering options.  That and it has a fairly standard issue DVD drive.  The Wii's components are long implimented and refined.

You'll notice that for the PS3 it's primary failure point is the optical drive, Blu-Ray which is a far newer technology.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Aug 20, 2009)

The Wii resides in this limbo between the last generation and this one. It's not next gen, it's last gen _revisited with bonus features_ nod-nod.


----------



## Corto (Aug 20, 2009)

Foxstar said:


> Glg glg glg


(That's the sound of you being stupid)

You're fucking right, how dare I relate my opinion to my own experiences instead of to some videogame news that came out 6 years ago when I didn't even have an internet connection? I sure must have been living under a rock not to know these details about the consoles I admitted I don't give a crap about.

Also, fuck you.


----------



## CaptainCool (Aug 20, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Reguardless of it's release, the Wii's technology hasn't really evolved since the GameCube.  The hardware is so similar, you can underclock the Wii and it perfectly operates all GameCube games.  the Wii is nothing more than a GameCube with a faster CPU and a faster GPU with some additional rendering options.  That and it has a fairly standard issue DVD drive.  The Wii's components are long implimented and refined.
> 
> You'll notice that for the PS3 it's primary failure point is the optical drive, Blu-Ray which is a far newer technology.



yeah i know. its basically a redesigned gamecube with higher clocks and gimmicky motion controls^^
and i can totally see why the optical drive is the failure point of most PS3s, its pretty obvious.
but i dont think you can define the generation of a console by its technology.
the wii is no gamecube. a gamecube doesnt play wii games, right? ;D
its the successor of the gamecube, the console that came after it. thats what is defining the term "generation" for me. i dont care whats inside it.
who knows? maybe because of some extremely efficient coding the next consoles will be able to run even better looking games with hardware on the level of a PS2. what would that be? going back one generation? of course not.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

It's also important to note that the optical drive in ANY computer system is the most frequent failure point.

I have three Xbox's in my house and two of them don't even eject properly and one had it's drive replaced by another one already once.  I've had DVD-ROM drives in PCs conk out.  The DVD-CDRW drive for my laptop has gotten more and more finicky untill it became almost useless.

Optical drives die and you'll hear a lot more about the PS2 optical issues than any other console cause Sony sold 4 times as many consoles as anyone else did in the 6th generation.  They just have more machines out there period.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

And at least a dead optical drive in a PS2/3 is user replaceable. A dead 360 optical drive means a dead console (unless you already dumped your unique drive key or are microsoft XD)


----------



## Adrianfolf (Aug 20, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> It's also important to note that the optical drive in ANY computer system is the most frequent failure point.
> 
> I have three Xbox's in my house and two of them don't even eject properly and one had it's drive replaced by another one already once.  I've had DVD-ROM drives in PCs conk out.  The DVD-CDRW drive for my laptop has gotten more and more finicky untill it became almost useless.
> 
> Optical drives die and you'll hear a lot more about the PS2 optical issues than any other console cause Sony sold 4 times as many consoles as anyone else did in the 6th generation.  They just have more machines out there period.



Funny I've never had any problems with any Optical drives


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> Funny I've never had any problems with any Optical drives


Because, of course, _your personal experiences_ over-ride the simple physics of the matter that moving mechanical parts are significantly more likely to fail than solid state circuits.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Aug 20, 2009)

Corto said:


> (That's the sound of you being stupid)
> 
> You're fucking right, how dare I relate my opinion to my own experiences instead of to some videogame news that came out 6 years ago when I didn't even have an internet connection? I sure must have been living under a rock not to know these details about the consoles I admitted I don't give a crap about.
> 
> Also, fuck you.



Inb4 "no my life was way harder than yours back then and I read up on videogames on the internet from the local library in the projects I lived in so fuck _you_"

best fucking post ever


----------



## CaptainCool (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Because, of course, _your personal experiences_ over-ride the simple physics of the matter that moving mechanical parts are significantly more likely to fail than solid state circuits.



you know whats nice, too? an exploding disc inside your drive XD


----------



## Kuekuatsheu (Aug 20, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Reguardless of it's release, the Wii's technology hasn't really evolved since the GameCube.  The hardware is so similar, you can underclock the Wii and it perfectly operates all GameCube games.  the Wii is nothing more than a GameCube with a faster CPU and a faster GPU with some additional rendering options.  That and it has a fairly standard issue DVD drive.  The Wii's components are long implimented and refined.


Are you fucking stupid? Either that or you must hate Nintendo very much and bash it for something very ridiculous (like "OMG I CAN'T PLAY IN BRIGHTER ROOMS"). You cannot compare a Wii to a Gamecube, moron.



CaptainCool said:


> its basically a redesigned gamecube
> 
> the wii is no gamecube.


What now?


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Because, of course, _your personal experiences_ over-ride the simple physics of the matter that moving mechanical parts are significantly more likely to fail than solid state circuits.



That's not what he said, he was just stating that he's never had problems with optical drives.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Kuekuatsheu said:


> Are you fucking stupid? Either that or you must hate Nintendo very much and bash it for something very ridiculous (like "OMG I CAN'T PLAY IN BRIGHTER ROOMS"). You cannot compare a Wii to a Gamecube, moron.


 
Hardware wise, you can.  Excluding the controls, the core hardware if the Wii is nothing more than faster versions of the GameCube.  Agian, this is also exactly why the Wii can run GameCube games without any additional hardware (Such as how the PS2 features a PS1 CPU that it uses as the I/O controller when operating in PS2 mode) or software based emulation.  The GameCube just reduces it's clock speed and can run all the code natively.  Controller asside, there is no technical innovation in the Wii.  It is LITERALLY the same hardware, just faster.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

Kuekuatsheu said:


> Are you fucking stupid? Either that or you must hate Nintendo very much and bash it for something very ridiculous (like "OMG I CAN'T PLAY IN BRIGHTER ROOMS"). You cannot compare a Wii to a Gamecube, moron.


Yes, you can. The CPU architecture is IDENTICAL. The GPU architecture is IDENTICAL (for all intents and purposes; obviously the Wii GPU also handles I/O etc but it's so damn close to the Flipper it's not even worth noting). The clock-speed has seen an increase and a little extra memory; but that hardly constitutes a new console. In-fact, if you put a GCN title in the Wii it underclocks to the GCN speeds and IS a Gamecube.
You must really have a NintenDONG up your ass if you're so in DENIAL of this.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 20, 2009)

@Sassy: Meh, MS may have a far worse reputation, but that doesn't mean Sony has a _good_ reputation. Its consoles have had a relatively high failure rate during the previous generations, and for extremely silly reasons. Microsoft, like any good company, copied Sony's successes in this field and improved upon them. =D


----------



## Neybulot (Aug 20, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Why are people obsessing with backwards compatibility? Hell, if you don't have a PS2 by now, you should shoot yourself.



Because the PS3 used to upscale PS2 games to 1080p. Do not want 480i nastiness on mah 42 inch HDTV.


----------



## Kuekuatsheu (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Yes, you can. The CPU architecture is IDENTICAL. The GPU architecture is IDENTICAL. The clock-speed has seen an increase and a little extra memory; but that hardly constitutes a new console. In-fact, if you put a GCN title in the Wii it underclocks to the GCN speeds and IS a Gamecube.


I just see nothing wrong about that, so why the Nintendo hate?
A Gamecube still don't play Wii games, the Wii has better graphics yadayadablablablablabla



> You must really have a NintenDONG up your ass if you're so in DENIAL of this.


That must be sexy tho.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Kuekuatsheu said:


> I just see nothing wrong about that, so why the Nintendo hate?


 
What hate? We just said that the hardware show's almost no evolution, as such it is refined and far more reliable and easy to manufacture than the hardware in other consoles. By being the same crap, only faster, they only have to build the same crap, only faster.

News flash; New chip designs are often far harder to produce and have lower production yeilds untill they process has been sufficently refined. This is why the older that hardware gets, the cheaper it gets.



Kuekuatsheu said:


> A Gamecube still don't play Wii games, the Wii has better graphics yadayadablablablablabla


 
That's a given as the Wii is 50% faster than the GameCube... Any other obvious observations for us? Like that the PS1 can't run PS2 games?

Wait. Wait. You can't play Atari 7200 games on an Atari 2600!?


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Aug 20, 2009)

Kuekuatsheu said:


> I just see nothing wrong about that, so why the Nintendo hate?
> A Gamecube still don't play Wii games, the Wii has better graphics yadayadablablablablabla



Nintendo have basically released the same games for the past 10-20 years now. The only major difference I'm seeing is the transition from 2D to 3D, other than that. Zelda is essentially the same, Mario is essentially the same, Metroid is essentially the same and they don't ever really try anything different. It's the same thing over and over again, Mario, Metroid, Zelda. When was the last good Fire Emblem game released? When was the last good Kirby game released? Nintendo are sitting on so many good franchises yet only use three of them. 

When it comes to graphics.....honestly I don't see that much of a difference between the two. Well it's there but it's not like the jump the other consoles took.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> Oh and Gamecube graphics are very much comparable to the Wii's, I don't see much difference at least :\


 
Some Wii games look WORSE than GameCube games even though the system is 1.5x as powerful as the GameCube.  I blame this on lazy ass developers.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Because, of course, _your personal experiences_ over-ride the simple physics of the matter that moving mechanical parts are significantly more likely to fail than solid state circuits.



I only had a disk explode in my DVD-ROM drive once and that was due to the huge crack in the disk before I put it in. When it comes to speed it also depends on the integarty of the object you are placing inside of it. If you place a disk inside of a drive that is in perfect condition it will not fall under the speed pressure of the disk drive. However it there is a crack in it and you place it in then there is a very high chance that the speed will stress the disk too far and it will shatter under the mere speed of the drive.

(Also you need to quit being so damn rude. Every one of your posts that I have read always seems to be attacking someone.)


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> I only had a disk explode in my DVD-ROM drive once and that was due to the huge crack in the disk before I put it in. When it comes to speed it also depends on the integarty of the object you are placing inside of it. If you place a disk inside of a drive that is in perfect condition it will not fall under the speed pressure of the disk drive. However it there is a crack in it and you place it in then there is a very high chance that the speed will stress the disk too far and it will shatter under the mere speed of the drive.
> 
> (Also you need to quit being so damn rude. Every one of your posts that I have read always seems to be attacking someone.)


what does disks shattering have to do with optical drives dying?


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> I only had a disk explode in my DVD-ROM drive once and that was due to the huge crack in the disk before I put it in. When it comes to speed it also depends on the integarty of the object you are placing inside of it. If you place a disk inside of a drive that is in perfect condition it will not fall under the speed pressure of the disk drive. However it there is a crack in it and you place it in then there is a very high chance that the speed will stress the disk too far and it will shatter under the mere speed of the drive.


 
Don't put cracked cylindrical disks into a mechanism that spins them at 4000-10000+ RPM. Gotcha.

Ya know, I had known that WITHOUT shattering a disc in any drive. Because, well, that's just OBVIOUSLY a stupid thing to do.

This still doesn't touch on the subject that optical drives frequently fail.  They just sorta 'give up'.  They have a lot of moving parts, it happens, it's natural/


----------



## Carenath (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> It helps to research before you dispute the facts of people clearly smarter than you. 9.5mm 2.5" drives are the only ones accepted by the classic PS3. The current 1TB drives are 12.5mm and won't physically fit; but they will in the slim.
> 
> Note: It's not good business practice to sell hardware that people will just use to play games they've already paid for on. If it were; Nintendo would just put a SNES, NES and N64 cartiridge slot in the Wii and wouldn't charge you for "Virtual Console" BS. Backwards compatibility is a phantom benefit, anyway. Go buy a PS2.


First: I wasnt disputing any facts, I only said that the PS3 takes standard SATA laptop hard drives, which indeed it does, the way you worded your original post implied that the PS3 used special non-standard hard drives.
Second: For someone who claims to be smarter than everyone else, you seem to like insulting users and staff alike, generally not the smartest thing to do on any forum.

And again, you show your lack of understanding. It would cost Nintendo more, to add support for the NES, SNES and 64 carts which had different sizes and voltage requirements and would make the Wii more complicated than it needed to be. Given how successful emulators for those consoles are, it was easier to provide compatibility through emulation. Since the Gamecube used optical discs, it is trivial for them to support backwards compatibility with the gamecube.
It also made more sence for them to provide compatibility with the previous console, because it gave Gamecube owners an incentive to upgrade, they wouldnt have to keep their old console and they could still continue to enjoy their old games as well as buying new ones for the Wii.

Sony's previous consoles are fully backwards compatible, the PS2 continues to play PS1 games and did from the start. Nerfing the PS3 to remove PS2 compatibility made less sence, from a marketing and business sence, than leaving it in.

While it's likely they'll restrict any future emulation capability to PS2 games sold over PSN.. I believe that would be a further shot in the foot. A good number of people have PS2's and wont buy PS3's because they dont see the point in replacing their PS2 with a PS3 that wont play their PS2 games.

And, I dont need to buy a PS2, I own one already :3


----------



## Corto (Aug 20, 2009)

Man if you don't rig your optical drive with semtex then you're simply not gaming.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

Carenath said:


> First: I wasnt disputing any facts, I only said that the PS3 takes standard SATA laptop hard drives, which indeed it does, the way you worded your original post implied that the PS3 used special non-standard hard drives.
> Second: For someone who claims to be smarter than everyone else, you seem to like insulting users and staff alike, generally not the smartest thing to do on any forum.
> 
> And again, you show your lack of understanding. It would cost Nintendo more, to add support for the NES, SNES and 64 carts which had different sizes and voltage requirements and would make the Wii more complicated than it needed to be. Given how successful emulators for those consoles are, it was easier to provide compatibility through emulation. Since the Gamecube used optical discs, it is trivial for them to support backwards compatibility with the gamecube.
> ...


Why *replace* a PS2? Why not own a PS2 and a PS3? Makes more sense to me. Console profit is in game sales; not in hardware sales. No console manufacturer wants to sell their console; they want to sell you GAMES for their console. Providing backwards compatibility (and thus enabling you to NOT buy games for your new console at launch) is a bad business decision. It's similar to Nintendo's move in removing the GBA slot in the DSi; bet dollars to donuts they'll sell the GBA Pokemon Titles for the DSi as "DSiWare" so you get the pleasure of paying aaaaallll over again.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Aug 20, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Don't put cracked cylindrical disks into a mechanism that spins them at 4000-10000+ RPM. Gotcha.
> 
> Ya know, I had known that WITHOUT shattering a disc in any drive. Because, well, that's just OBVIOUSLY a stupid thing to do.
> 
> This still doesn't touch on the subject that optical drives frequently fail.  They just sorta 'give up'.  They have a lot of moving parts, it happens, it's natural/



Well like I said I didn't notice the crack :/


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Carenath said:


> Sony's previous consoles are fully backwards compatible, the PS2 continues to play PS1 games and did from the start. Nerfing the PS3 to remove PS2 compatibility made less sence, from a marketing and business sence, than leaving it in.


 
But there is a key difference.  The PS1 chip built into the PS2 was a core component.  When operating as a PS2, the PS1 chip is the I/O controller.  It actually operates the HDD, the network adaptor, the USB ports and other key components.  It's not even possible to remove that chip without a replacement to do the same task.

On the PS3, the PS2 chip only did suplimentary functions, which few people noticed when the PS2 chips were removed from the PS3.  Keep in mind that the PS2 is now a refined PS2-On-A-Chip design and sold for $99.  That same chip is what was built installed into the original PS3 motherboards, so that's a signifigant additional cost to include hardware backwards compatability.


----------



## Vintage (Aug 20, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> Nintendo have basically released the same games for the past 10-20 years now. The only major difference I'm seeing is the transition from 2D to 3D, other than that. Zelda is essentially the same, Mario is essentially the same, Metroid is essentially the same and they don't ever really try anything different. It's the same thing over and over again, Mario, Metroid, Zelda. When was the last good Fire Emblem game released? When was the last good Kirby game released? Nintendo are sitting on so many good franchises yet only use three of them.



a general refinement of genre technique and standards does not make a game the same as its predecessor. 

that aside, if you're looking for something different, go somewhere else.  don't wait in vain for a train that will never come.   in general i have tried to explain time and time again that it is not in any of these companies' best interest to cater to a minority audience, i.e. the audience that wants kirby or fire emblem back, or the audience that wants more mature games, etc.  it would be nice to see them do more with their franchises but it is a little unrealistic at this point!


----------



## Neybulot (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Why *replace* a PS2? Why not own a PS2 and a PS3? Makes more sense to me. Console profit is in game sales; not in hardware sales. No console manufacturer wants to sell their console; they want to sell you GAMES for their console. Providing backwards compatibility (and thus enabling you to NOT buy games for your new console at launch) is a bad business decision. It's similar to Nintendo's move in removing the GBA slot in the DSi; bet dollars to donuts they'll sell the GBA Pokemon Titles for the DSi as "DSiWare" so you get the pleasure of paying aaaaallll over again.





Neybulot said:


> Because the PS3 used to upscale PS2 games to 1080p. Do not want 480i nastiness on mah 42 inch HDTV.



I personally want to be able to play my PS2 games on an HDTV without them looking really nasty. The difference between a GBA, DS, and DSi? They're all the same small screen. Not a large increase in size and resolution. So it doesn't really matter much if you play on an older console or not since the screen and everything else is built-in.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Aug 20, 2009)

Carenath said:


> First: I wasnt disputing any facts, I only said that the PS3 takes standard SATA laptop hard drives, which indeed it does, the way you worded your original post implied that the PS3 used special non-standard hard drives.
> Second: For someone who claims to be smarter than everyone else, you seem to like insulting users and staff alike, generally not the smartest thing to do on any forum.
> 
> And again, you show your lack of understanding. It would cost Nintendo more, to add support for the NES, SNES and 64 carts which had different sizes and voltage requirements and would make the Wii more complicated than it needed to be. Given how successful emulators for those consoles are, it was easier to provide compatibility through emulation. Since the Gamecube used optical discs, it is trivial for them to support backwards compatibility with the gamecube.
> ...



Also Carenath the PS3 is getting PS2 support back. I think Sony finally managed to break through software emulation just as it does with PS1 games. So support with the disks is coming back in form of an update


----------



## Corto (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Why *replace* a PS2? Why not own a PS2 and a PS3?


Not everyone has the cash to own every new console there is. Maybe these people have an old and battered PS2: Between buying a very expensive console that'll turn all of their already owned games into obsolete shurikens and getting an used PS2 for the price of a handjob, which would you choose?


> Providing backwards compatibility (and thus enabling you to NOT buy games for your new console at launch) is a bad business decision.


Not on my opinion. If you can buy the console, without the need to spend some extra 60 bucks on the only game you'll be able to run on it...I'd rather buy the old console without the need of getting that expensive launching title (that, most probably, will be nothing but a hardware showoff anyway) knowing that a) More (and cheaper!) games will be released later and b) Even if they take some time, I have my old library of games I can still play on my brand new console. 
Of course, it makes even more sense to wait and buy the console that has the best games later on when they drop price and you can already tell which one is gonna flop and which one has the game you want, but for some stupid reason kids like to throw big money away in order to be the first ones to have one of these toys.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

Neybulot said:


> I personally want to be able to play my PS2 games on an HDTV without them looking really nasty.


Well you'll want the "soft" B/C PS3 for that. ie, not the US launch 60GB - it operates as a PS2 when playing PS2 titles; and while it can upscale the *output* image to 1080p it can't do anything beyond that so it looks much the same as letting your amp scale it. The "Soft" B/C units internally render the game at your chosen output resolution and can also apply FSAA so *they* look sexy; but generally only if the game could run at 480p/16:9 to begin with for best results.



Corto said:


> Not everyone has the cash to own every new console there is. Maybe these people have an old and battered PS2: Between buying a very expensive console that'll turn all of their already owned games into obsolete shurikens and getting an used PS2 for the price of a handjob, which would you choose?
> Not on my opinion. If you can buy the console, without the need to spend some extra 60 bucks on the only game you'll be able to run on it...I'd rather buy the old console without the need of getting that expensive launching title (that, most probably, will be nothing but a hardware showoff anyway) knowing that a) More (and cheaper!) games will be released later and b) Even if they take some time, I have my old library of games I can still play on my brand new console.
> Of course, it makes even more sense to wait and buy the console that has the best games later on when they drop price and you can already tell which one is gonna flop and which one has the game you want, but for some stupid reason kids like to throw big money away in order to be the first ones to have one of these toys.


It's not about what *you* would rather do. It's what they NEED you to do to maintain a profitable business model. You need to spend that $60 on a game with your console for the console business model to work. The manufacturer essentially makes a loss on the console at work and even once it becomes profitable for them; the RETAILER still basically gives away the hardware; often BELOW cost; on the reliance that you will buy additional products concurrently. You seem not to grasp the business model at work here.​


----------



## Corto (Aug 20, 2009)

I just realized that if I ever want to buy a console I'll never ask you people for help. It's all AC/DC this and IO that and Floppity Flop and DPI and holy shit, it looks like Bill Cosby is trying to sell me a computer. 
I liked it better when the most clear difference between consoles was "the Playstation plays Playstation games and the Nintendo 64 plays Nintendo 64 games".


----------



## Neybulot (Aug 20, 2009)

Corto said:


> I just realized that if I ever want to buy a console I'll never ask you people for help. It's all AC/DC this and IO that and Floppity Flop and DPI and holy shit, it looks like Bill Cosby is trying to sell me a computer.
> I liked it better when the most clear difference between consoles was "the Playstation plays Playstation games and the Nintendo 64 plays Nintendo 64 games".



To be fair, it was much simpler then too with other electronics. TVs were pretty much the same as each other and you just needed one input or the other for consoles. Nothing involving HD resolutions, 3 different types of cables, etc etc. Plus these consoles were the first of their kind. Nobody cares when you change the name of the console and hardware up though.


----------



## Corto (Aug 20, 2009)

Man I think I'll stick with being outdated. This way I don't need no engineering courses to start up Super Smash Bros.


----------



## Torrijos-sama (Aug 20, 2009)

Neybulot said:


> To be fair, it was much simpler then too with other electronics. TVs were pretty much the same as each other and you just needed one input or the other for consoles. Nothing involving HD resolutions, 3 different types of cables, etc etc. Plus these consoles were the first of their kind. Nobody cares when you change the name of the console and hardware up though.


 
If you cant match shapes and colors with one another, then you should simply give up living.


----------



## Neybulot (Aug 20, 2009)

jesusfish2007 said:


> If you cant match shapes and colors with one another, then you should simply give up living.



It's not that, it's that you have to make sure your TV HAS those shapes and colors.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> *Stop. Making. Shit. Up.
> *I mean it. Just stop it. They DID file a patent for 100% software PS2 emulation; but they never announced ANYTHING beyond that. Likely it'll be for PSN PS2 title downloads. ​




I'm not making it up dip shit​


----------



## Corto (Aug 20, 2009)

Hey how about we all cut the name calling before Warmock gets pissed off and bans us all?


----------



## Runefox (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> It's not about what *you* would rather do. It's what they NEED you to do to maintain a profitable business model. You need to spend that $60 on a game with your console for the console business model to work. The manufacturer essentially makes a loss on the console at work and even once it becomes profitable for them; the RETAILER still basically gives away the hardware; often BELOW cost; on the reliance that you will buy additional products concurrently. You seem not to grasp the business model at work here.



>_> The big problem with that is that what they NEED *you* to do may not always be what you're *willing and/or able* to do. Business models can become obsolete. Look at the music industry's continued bitching and whining about how people have to buy CD's and how it's both a physical product and a license, but only in the ways it benefits them - You can't copy it because it's just licensed to you, but if it breaks, you buy a new one at full price, because it's just a product.

If they NEED you to buy a new PS2 and a new PS3 in order for their business model to work if you're still nursing along a broken up old first-gen PS2, then they might find out relatively quickly that their business model is flawed. Expecting people to give them money all the time for everything, including things which _people already own and which they offered, *chastised the competition over*, and then subsequently *retracted*_ is probably not going to get them very much further.

The idea is for more people to own one of the new consoles so you can continue to sell them things (attachments/peripherals, software, etc) in the near future, at a premium, versus selling them a tired, yet profitable piece of hardware that's on its last ropes and whose new-release games are now bargain bin shovelware that isn't making anyone any money and which will stop trickling down the pipes shortly. They seem to have this concept Bass Ackwards.

But I'm no economics major or anything, so what do I know? Maybe doing things the opposite of what's common sense is the new common sense.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> Also Carenath the PS3 is getting PS2 support back. I think Sony finally managed to break through software emulation just as it does with PS1 games. So support with the disks is coming back in form of an update


 
How about you back that up with some source citation? Sony recently announced along with the PS3 Slim information that there Sony would not be working on PS2 emulation.  Unless you can prove it, you're just making stuff up.

Additionally, PS1 emulation is hardly a 'break though', backward engineered PS1 emulators existed before the PS3 was even announced. It was no feat to build a PS1 emulator when Sony itself had every inch of the design documentation for the hardware.


----------



## Carenath (Aug 20, 2009)

Kuekuatsheu said:


> ...You cannot compare a Wii to a Gamecube, moron...


Yes you can.



AshleyAshes said:


> But there is a key difference.  The PS1 chip built into the PS2 was a core component.  When operating as a PS2, the PS1 chip is the I/O controller.  It actually operates the HDD, the network adaptor, the USB ports and other key components.  It's not even possible to remove that chip without a replacement to do the same task.
> 
> On the PS3, the PS2 chip only did suplimentary functions, which few people noticed when the PS2 chips were removed from the PS3.  Keep in mind that the PS2 is now a refined PS2-On-A-Chip design and sold for $99.  That same chip is what was built installed into the original PS3 motherboards, so that's a signifigant additional cost to include hardware backwards compatability.


Sony didn't need to use the PS1 chip as an I/O controller, they chose to.
Other consoles, specifically Nintendo's Gameboy's and the Gamecube/Wii are backwards compatible, even though Nintendo could have taken away that ability if they wished, they didnt.



Sassy said:


> It's not about what *you* would rather do. It's what they NEED you to do to maintain a profitable business model. You need to spend that $60 on a game with your console for the console business model to work. The manufacturer essentially makes a loss on the console at work and even once it becomes profitable for them; the RETAILER still basically gives away the hardware; often BELOW cost; on the reliance that you will buy additional products concurrently. You seem not to grasp the business model at work here.​


And when a new console comes out, which do you think Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo would rather you do.. a) Stick to your current working old console playing your current liberary of games. b) Buy a shiney new console from them.

Its in their interest to shift as many of the new consoles as they can, and the best way to do that is give people a reason to replace their old one, and having backwards compatibility with your existing liberary of games, is one way to do this, and one of the biggest criticisms people had of Nintendo for clinging to Cartridges instead of using CD's like the PS1 did.

Backwards Compatibility plus the ability to play DVDs was a good selling point for the PS2. Backwards Compatibility is why the Gameboy Colour sold well as did the Advance.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Aug 20, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> How about you back that up with some source citation? Sony recently announced along with the PS3 Slim information that there Sony would not be working on PS2 emulation.  Unless you can prove it, you're just making stuff up.
> 
> Additionally, PS1 emulation is hardly a 'break though', backward engineered PS1 emulators existed before the PS3 was even announced. It was no feat to build a PS1 emulator when Sony itself had every inch of the design documentation for the hardware.



Well I'm not sure if it is true but appearently this guy does I guess. http://www.youtube.com/thegamingfyi


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Carenath said:


> Sony didn't need to use the PS1 chip as an I/O controller, they chose to.
> Other consoles, specifically Nintendo's Gameboy's and the Gamecube/Wii are backwards compatible, even though Nintendo could have taken away that ability if they wished, they didnt.


 
You're missing the point. The PS2 support in the PS3 wasn't hardware critical. They were able to remove it and suffer no serious issues, except the loss of SACD support and the PS2 chip controlled two of the USB ports.

In the GameBoy Advanced series, a Z80 was a co-processor that was used as main CPU when running older Gameboy Games. This was essential to the hardware operation of the GBA. It couldn't be removed if Nintendo wanted it to be. They could remove the slot support but the chip itself was necessary. If it was replaced it'd need to be replaced with a chip that still executed Z80 code. (So basicly, still a Z80.). This is the same with the PS2. They couldn't just REMOVE the PS1 chip, it was essential to the design. The Wii has the same hardware archetecture as the GameCube anyway, GameCube support is functionally nothing but some game ports, memory card slots and a bit of software to make it recognise a GameCube game.

In the PS3, the PS2 support was basicly bolted on and was in addition to the construction of the rest system. It wasn't essential for the PS3 to operate, it added a lot to the constructionc cost. Cost, which even without PS2 support, the PS3 has a huge issue with. It's been the largest issue in it's marketability.

If Sony can roll out a PS2 emulator for the PS3, they will, but it's obviously not a priority. Not only that but ask yourselves, does Sony really need a PS2 emulator to sell PS2 games on the PSN? They could far more easily have the developers PORT their PS2 games to the PS3 from the original source and just make the necessary adaptations. The game is all developed anyway, they'd just have to get it running on a different platform. Plenty of those games were ported across to Xbox or PC or Gamecube ANYWAY. It's obviously not impossible.



Carenath said:


> Backwards Compatibility is why the Gameboy Colour sold well


 
The Gameboy color wasn't 'Backwards compatable' it *was* a GameBoy.  It was a GameBoy with 2X the speed on it's Z80 and a color screen to do the color crap.  Otherwise it's hardware identical to the Gameboy.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> Well I'm not sure if it is true but appearently this guy does I guess. http://www.youtube.com/thegamingfyi


 
Your reliable news source is '*Some guy in his basement with a webcam on youtube*'? |:


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> It's not about what *you* would rather do. It's what they NEED you to do to maintain a profitable business model. You need to spend that $60 on a game with your console for the console business model to work. The manufacturer essentially makes a loss on the console at work and even once it becomes profitable for them; the RETAILER still basically gives away the hardware; often BELOW cost; on the reliance that you will buy additional products concurrently. You seem not to grasp the business model at work here.



Yeah, I hear this crap a lot, and I heard it even more when I actually worked in retail. The business model is apparently "guilt trip your customers into thinking they're your charity case so that you can rationalize making yourself theirs". It used to be convince your customers you're practically giving a product away. Now it's do that and and tell them they have to buy more and more of this thing they're giving away so that they can keep giving it away. Because video game giants are totally the same fucking thing as your local indie band. *Douche*.

BTW OH HAI I FIXED UR BBS CODE TO MAKE UR SHIT ACTSHULLY READABULL


----------



## Runefox (Aug 20, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> If Sony can roll out a PS2 emulator for the PS3, they will, but it's obviously not a priority.  Not only that but ask yourselves, does Sony really need a PS2 emulator to sell PS2 games on the PSN?  They could far more easily have the developers PORT their PS2 games to the PS3 from the original source and just make the necessary adaptations.  The game is all developed anyway, they'd just have to get it running on a different platform.  Plenty of those games were ported across to Xbox or PC or Gamecube ANYWAY.  It's obviously not impossible.



I wonder how easy it would really be to port something from the EE to Cell. It's a vastly different architecture as I understand it, and the Cell is designed heavily for multithreaded applications, which may not translate directly with software not specifically written for the PS3. On the other hand, if one were to use the Cell's SPE's to emulate different portions of the PS2 hardware (sound core, graphics, portions of the CPU), that would in effect be a lot less hassle than recoding/recompiling the games for the new hardware.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Runefox said:


> I wonder how easy it would really be to port something from the EE to Cell. It's a vastly different architecture as I understand it, and the Cell is designed heavily for multithreaded applications, which may not translate directly with software not specifically written for the PS3. On the other hand, if one were to use the Cell's SPE's to emulate different portions of the PS2 hardware, that would in effect be a lot less hassle than recoding/recompiling the games for the new hardware.


 
The real problem would be replicating the PS2 exactly.  It did a lot of crap in parellel and depended on everything to work exactly as defined.  Not only this but various games would make use of lowlevel programming tricks so the emulation would have to be PERFECT.

The real question would be; Is there enough power in the PS3 to replicate the PS2 in software?  Obviously, it's no cake walk or Sony would have done it by now.  Even current PC PS2 emulators are very iffy in what games they support due to not every game operating the same way and the CPU requirements are pretty insane for some games.  Especially those that extruded the most out of the PS2.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Aug 20, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Your reliable news source is '*Some guy in his basement with a webcam on youtube*'? |:



Well he is a noteable member of a gaming community that I happen to be a part of. I'm not 100% sure if the info is right but you know how companies rejects that something is true till they are about done


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Aug 20, 2009)

nice to know 14 year olds are bending over, taking the corporate cock and eating their corporate communion wafers and quoting passages from the bible of corporate ideology, trying to do God's work to convince all us heathens that "the business model" is something we should adapt our lives to, not the other way around


----------



## Corto (Aug 20, 2009)

*JESUS FUCK PEOPLE, SHUT THE HELL UP OR THIS'LL TURN INTO BAN TOWN AND I'LL BE THE DOUCHE MAYOR.
LETS SEE IF WE CAN SOMEHOW HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT FUCKING GAME CONSOLES WITHOUT JUMPING AT EACH OTHER'S THROAT.*


----------



## Runefox (Aug 20, 2009)

> Even current PC PS2 emulators are very iffy in what games they support due to not every game operating the same way and the CPU requirements are pretty insane for some games.  Especially those that extruded the most out of the PS2.



This is true; PCSX2 supposedly works flawlessly with things like God of War 2, but any attempt at an Ace Combat game gets met with massive problems, even Ace Combat 04, which supposedly "Works".

However, if anyone can create a perfect emulator for the hardware, it would be the hardware manufacturer itself. They have all of the detailed specifications, they know exactly how and which chip is supposed to work with another chip, and they know (or can easily find out) which games expect which certain special-case behaviours. Using individual SPE's to process the major chips and the RSX to render the graphics should make it very possible to do, much in the same way having more cores and a powerful GPU makes PS2 emulation on the PC run smoother. It doesn't even really have to be completely foolproof - Look at the 360's backwards-compatibility and the PS2's sometimes-off (but usually great) PSX compatibility.

It's easy to say all that, of course - The problem is doing it. But I've got no doubt that the PS3 could do it if it were coded properly. And doing so would make it a shitton easier and more cost effective than recompiling (or as I said before would be more likely, recoding) the games. After all, everyone else is using emulation right now for most of their backwards-compatibility, and hell, that's how they're doing the PS1 backwards-compatibility in both the PSP and the PS3.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> nice to know 14 year olds are bending over, taking the corporate cock and eating their corporate communion wafers and quoting passages from the bible of corporate ideology, trying to do God's work to convince all us heathens that "the business model" is something we should adapt our lives to, not the other way around


 
You know, he never said you had to BUY a PS3 if you don't like it's features.  You are entirely free to choose that way, just as the company is free to operate as it chooses.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Aug 20, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> You know, he never said you had to BUY a PS3 if you don't like it's features.  You are entirely free to choose that way, just as the company is free to operate as it chooses.



I *did* buy a PS3, dummy! And I actually said, it was one of the more expensive models that isn't backwards compatible and has _less_ HD space than the newer, smaller, cheaper and now supposedly backwards compatible model, and that I don't regret this purchase *one bit*. I'm perfectly happy with what I got because it plays the PS3 games I want to play, the blu-ray movies I want to watch and has more HD space than I'll ever really need. And yeah, the company is free to do whatever the fuck it wants - and no pseudo-moralising about how I _should_ buy another version of the same damn thing even if I don't need/want it just to help fund PS4 or whatever is going to change the fact that I don't need to or have any good reason to.

Corporations are pretty much the law, except that their laws largely depend on our consent and for us to vote with our wallets. I voted yay on a PS3 once, and nay on a second one. But for anyone who wanted a PS3 but was waiting for a price drop, what a way for Sony to reward their patience, eh? PS4 is gonna have to pretty much have holodeck technology on launch for me to not wait at least a few versions in and a massive price drop before I even think about putting my money down on one. Their business model has taught me extreme patience is the best way to get the best console for the best price.

Of course, they're betting I won't, that really none of us will, and time will tell how well they'll fare when they roll the dice on that.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> nice to know 14 year olds are bending over, taking the corporate cock and eating their corporate communion wafers and quoting passages from the bible of corporate ideology, trying to do God's work to convince all us heathens that "the business model" is something we should adapt our lives to, not the other way around


Oh, riiiight. You totally believe that the business model will _adapt *to* you_? Without the business model - which is highly successful - you wouldn't HAVE the privilege of playing console games at all.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> And yeah, the company is free to do whatever the fuck it wants - and no pseudo-moralising about how I _should_ buy another version of the same damn thing even if I don't need/want it just to help fund PS4 or whatever is going to change the fact that I don't need to or have any good reason to.


 
When did anyone in this thread even remotely imply that you should feel compelled to buy a second one?


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> When did anyone in this thread even remotely imply that you should feel compelled to buy a second one?


Clearly he regrets his purchase and is over-compensating inversely to try and hide it. Like..when homophobes turn out to be gay.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Oh, riiiight. You totally believe that the business model will _adapt *to* you_? Without the business model - which is highly successful - you wouldn't HAVE the privilege of playing console games at all.



I'm not really trying to defend anyone here, just don't like this statement; Without *the people targeted by said business model*, there wouldn't *be* a business model to make money from, either. Business models *must* adapt to the needs and demands of the clientele - If people stop buying, there'll be nothing more to buy.

Sony's business model for the PS3 has been fairly controversial (particularly among shareholders), and _arguably_ successful; Hardly highly successful, even if I ended up buying one, too (it's a good system). Of course, no matter what happens, Sony will still be here tomorrow; However, the fact that the PS2 is still selling like hotcakes means that somewhere along the line, the PS3's business model is faulty.

Far more PS3 units would have sold by now along with far fewer PS2's if not for the fact that there isn't any PS2 backwards-compatibility (even as emulation) and that would have meant more new software and accessory sales at premium prices, which means big profits and more bragging rights. Right now, the profit for the PS2 is almost solely at the hardware level - Software sales are saturated with used games and the new game selection is basically bargain-bin shovelware, with very little wheat to distinguish from the chaff. In essence, the PS2 is more an ally of retailers than of Sony right now, and one that's going to lose its market presence in the relatively near future. In addition, the more people who have a brand new PS2 now, the fewer would be willing to buy the same PS2 games on PSN if _that's_ their big plan. If they're trying to keep the PS2 alive to fund the PS3, then they're shooting themselves in the foot with a short-term solution when they should be looking at the long-term. The whole business model is almost psychotic.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

The whole idea is to make you purchase the PS2 games you want to play on your PS3 via PSN. Why should they give it to you for free? Nintendo don't give you Virtual Console for free. Giving away what you can happily charge for sounds like commercial and economic suicide to me.

After all; the point of business is to generate profit. Giving free B/C generates no profit. In-fact, it's a profit sink because the kids who own Buzz or Singstar for PS2 won't buy the PS3 versions (and thusly the DLC) if they could just use their PS2 versions. However; making PS2 titles wrapped up in a nice 1080p bundle for download on PSN for a nominal fee? That generates profit.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> The whole idea is to make you purchase the PS2 games you want to play on your PS3 via PSN. Why should they give it to you for free? Nintendo don't give you Virtual Console for free. Giving away what you can happily charge for sounds like commercial and economic suicide to me.


But they _are_. The fact that the PS2 is still selling so well means that the majority of their install base also has a PS2. Why would anyone buy a PS2 game on PSN if they still have a functioning PS2 and a hard copy of the game, or for that matter, vast repositories of PS2 games sitting on the shelves of used game retailers? Why would they go to the trouble of downloading 4.7GB worth of data onto their hard drive only to find out that once the PS3 goes down the tubes, so do their PSN-purchased games? Sony has been shooting themselves in the foot repeatedly with explosive ammunition.



> After all; the point of business is to generate profit. Giving free B/C generates no profit. In-fact, it's a profit sink because the kids who own Buzz or Singstar for PS2 won't buy the PS3 versions (and thusly the DLC) if they could just use their PS2 versions. However; making PS2 titles wrapped up in a nice 1080p bundle for download on PSN for a nominal fee? That generates profit.


I can't see myself or anyone with half a brain downloading a game they already own (_particularly_ Singstar) just to have it upscaled to 1080p. I mean, yes, I know where you're coming from, but Sony's been hacking away at the potential for that for a while now to such a point where it's almost just as well the PS3 doesn't have BC; They have PS2's, anyway. They made their own prophecy fulfil itself, and in that vein, fewer people have the newer console, and hence they can expect a lower profit margin.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

Runefox said:


> But they _are_. The fact that the PS2 is still selling so well means that the majority of their install base also has a PS2. Why would anyone buy a PS2 game on PSN if they still have a functioning PS2 and a hard copy of the game, or for that matter, vast repositories of PS2 games sitting on the shelves of used game retailers? Sony has been shooting themselves in the foot repeatedly with explosive ammunition.


Sony makes very little on PS2 sales and makes nothing on pre-owned sales. The shelves full of pre-owneds? They're the problem for the retailer. Sony wants to make peoples desire to play upscaled PS2 titles profitable; and they will. Heck, for the experience I have playing Shadow of the Colossus at 1080p, FSAA at a silky smooth 60fps? I'd pay for that game again if I didn't have a PAL Launch unit with Soft B/C. And I'm not the only one who will. FF7 on PSN sold through the roof. Put something like Kingdom Hearts II or FFXII on there with FSAA and 1080p widescreen presentation? People will pay for it, even if they own the game already. People do. Virtual Console is testement, so is the PSX downloads (when the PS3 can actually PLAY PSX games so there is literally ZERO benefit from the PSN version but it STILL sells well)


Runefox said:


> I can't see myself or anyone with half a brain downloading a game they already own (_particularly_ Singstar) just to have it upscaled to 1080p. I mean, yes, I know where you're coming from, but Sony's been hacking away at the potential for that for a while now to such a point where it's almost just as well the PS3 doesn't have BC; They have PS2's, anyway. They made their own prophecy fulfil itself, and in that vein, fewer people have the newer console, and hence they can expect a lower profit margin.


But see; the vast majority of PS2 Singstar songs are on the Singstore now and people purchase from there in DROVES. Why? Because playing the same old songs in a new presentation? It sells. The problem you're having with your thought process is assuming Sony make money of PS2 Preowned Software. They don't. Retailers love it; but it does nothing for Sony so they'll do everything they can to undermine it. And if that means PSN downloads of PS2 titles? They'll do it.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 20, 2009)

Actually, what I was inferring was exactly the fact that Sony makes nothing off pre-owned software, and the fact that they're still selling PS2's by the droves means that retailers are loving it, and Sony's plans for PSN-launched titles might be hampered by that.

But I don't know, if people are so vain and silly as to want to buy something again just for the upscaling, then maybe I don't know people - Actually, I don't want to know them. Besides, unless the games really _are_ recoded, then the upscaling and FSAA and stuff will be limited by the emulation; The frame rate, in particular, would be faithful to the PS2.


----------



## Sassy (Aug 20, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Actually, what I was inferring was exactly the fact that Sony makes nothing off pre-owned software, and the fact that they're still selling PS2's by the droves means that retailers are loving it, and Sony's plans for PSN-launched titles might be hampered by that.
> 
> But I don't know, if people are so vain and silly as to want to buy something again just for the upscaling, then maybe I don't know people - Actually, I don't want to know them. Besides, unless the games really _are_ recoded, then the upscaling and FSAA and stuff will be limited by the emulation; The frame rate, in particular, would be faithful to the PS2.


Actually; the beauty of emulation compared to "turning into that console" is that *you* can do things like improve the frame-rate, anti-alias the graphics; increase the internal rendering resolution, etc. Ever played with Pete's OpenGL2.0 plugins for ePSXe?


----------



## Runefox (Aug 20, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Actually; the beauty of emulation compared to "turning into that console" is that *you* can do things like improve the frame-rate, anti-alias the graphics; increase the internal rendering resolution, etc. Ever played with Pete's OpenGL2.0 plugins for ePSXe?



Yes, but (while Pete's OGL2 plugin is awesome) the internal frame rate can be capped by the software; Even if the 3D renderer is running at 60FPS, that doesn't mean that the game's graphics are actually running at that speed internally. Slowdowns can and will still occur where they did on the original console; I'm not sure I know of any emulator that can smooth that kind of thing out, though it'd be interesting to find one. Of particular note is with N64 emulation. Try playing Goldeneye 007 at any settings and see what happens (graphical FPS capped to 30, slowdowns present no matter what settings are used; See also Perfect Dark). I can also think of another game off-hand with some slowdown present - Delta Force Urban Warfare for the PSX, which had slowdown on the original hardware, on the PS2, and emulated.


----------



## Corto (Aug 20, 2009)

God dammit I dont even know who to get angry at anymore. Where the fuck's Care when you need him.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Aug 20, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> Stargate SG-1's Ben Browder is more my type honestly.



beggars can't be choosers.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> beggars can't be choosers.


 
You're right, Chris Noth from Sex In The City and Law & Order would be good too. 

OR BOTH. >


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Aug 20, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> You're right, Chris Noth from Sex In The City and Law & Order would be good too.
> 
> OR BOTH. >



I think you need to make your expectations a little more realistic, hunny. There's plenty of sad people in Toronto who'd be more than happy to double as your money-getter in exchange for being treated basically like a housepet when they're not "at work". You wouldn't have to do a damn thing, just sit on your ass playing PS3 and posting on FA to your hearts content and watch the rent/food/bills money roll in. You'd better get your ass in gear though because most people I met like yourself, who are, _you know_, tend to be on the giving end of that living arrangement rather than the receiving end.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> I think you need to make your expectations a little more realistic, hunny. There's plenty of sad people in Toronto who'd be more than happy to double as your money-getter in exchange for being treated basically like a housepet when they're not "at work". You wouldn't have to do a damn thing, just sit on your ass playing PS3 and posting on FA to your hearts content and watch the rent/food/bills money roll in. You'd better get your ass in gear though because most people I met like yourself, who are, _you know_, tend to be on the giving end of that living arrangement rather than the receiving end.


 
Actually I was planning to adopt kids and take the 'stay-at-home-mom' role.  I have names picked out even. 

As much fun as it has been to see you throw out homophobic triads in a thread about video games. ^^


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Aug 20, 2009)

Homophobe? No lie, I actually love it when gay guys wanna check me out. I figure, well, they're attracted to guys just as much as straight chicks, so if straight chicks _and_ gay guys thinks I'm good looking, I probably am.

Whatever you are, on the other hand, just confuses the utter shit out of me. And I hate to be the one to have to tell you this, but I am not at all alone in that sentiment, or at having a problem with the way you seem to have to bring the huge chip on your shoulder into every thread you touch.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> Whatever you are, on the other hand, just confuses the utter shit out of me. And I hate to be the one to have to tell you this, but I am not at all alone in that sentiment, or at having a problem with the way you seem to have to bring the huge chip on your shoulder into every thread you touch.


 
I don't think that what 'chip on my shoulder' that I bring, can possibly compare to your own with what you pulled in this thread. XD


----------



## Runefox (Aug 20, 2009)

Yeesh, this is really going nowhere fast, isn't it? Can't tell you what to do, but you guys might wanna take this one to PM.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Yeesh, this is really going nowhere fast, isn't it? Can't tell you what to do, but you guys might wanna take this one to PM.


 
I was expecting the mods to step in sooner than now.  But Carenath appears to be asleep at the switch.


----------



## Corto (Aug 20, 2009)

I infracted Wolf but not only won't he shut up, he also called me a bad mod : (


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Corto said:


> I infracted Wolf but not only won't he shut up, he also called me a bad mod : (


 
I'm kinda marvled at how emotional his reaction up there was honestly. XD  As much fun as they are to debate, they're all just electonic toys afterall.


----------



## Runefox (Aug 20, 2009)

AshleyAshes said:


> I'm kinda marvled at how emotional his reaction up there was honestly. XD  As much fun as they are to debate, they're all just electonic toys afterall.



Indeed.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Aug 20, 2009)

So we got AshleyAshes complaining about me to a mod while she continues to provoke me into doing the thing she's complaining about, and said mod is telling users "fuck you" while giving me an infraction for it.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Aug 20, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> So we got AshleyAshes complaining about me to a mod while she continues to provoke me into doing the thing she's complaining about, and said mod is telling users "fuck you" while giving me an infraction for it.


 
Wolf-Bone, do you see any futility in attempting to immasculine the effeminate gay boy with mesh t-shirts and camisole tank tops, by calling him 'she'? XD


----------



## Xaerun (Aug 20, 2009)

Then I rock up, tell you both to shut up, sit down, be nice and then we lock the thread.

That's a solution we can all be happy about.

Inb4rantingthreadabouthowIamtrippin'onpowah


*EDIT*
I know y'all love getting reasons for locks, so:
*REASON*: Harassment and derailment.


----------



## Carenath (Aug 21, 2009)

Damn it.. beat me to it. Oh well.


----------

