Curmudgeon Gamer
Curmudgeoning all games equally.
08 October 2007
PS3 faring better than PS2, forget BC
I'm not talking about sales, mind you, just my experience. I spent about the first year of my PS2 ownership playing very few really impressive PS2 games. We had SSX and...right. By the time we got Metal Gear Solid 2 and Grand Theft Auto III in late 2001, many of us had spent a fairly barren year playing DVDs and PS1 games.

Here we are, coming up on 11 months into the PS3 life, and I've finally got a PS3. Despite what is literally a wall of unfinished PS2 games, I'm completely absorbed with PS3-specific games. Super Stardust HD is brilliant. The high score table is huge, but you can filter it to just show your friends. I've just squeaked by a friend's high score by a mere 20,000 points and he's vowed to get past me again. I presume this kind of feature is copied from Xbox Live, but it's just brilliant. Even if I don't get bested, I intend to increase the gap between my friend's score and my own, as soon as I find the time to play again.

On the other hand, flOw continues to engage me. I've discovered the third lifeform and will hopefully get another soon. I believe there are five. My elder son enjoys playing with the little creatures, even if he doesn't entirely understand the controls and lacks the fine motor skills to use the controller effectively sometimes.

I picked up Oblivion for a mere $30 and hope to grab both Warhawk and Resistance: Fall of Man before the end of the year.

And now Everyday Shooter is coming out this week.

So, I understand Josh's complaint about Sony completely dropping backward compatibility with PS2 software. I want it, and I'm glad I picked up a 60Gb model. On the other hand, I've found more than enough to keep me busy with just the PS3 parts of the system that I could have gotten a non-backward compatible model and really not have noticed very much.

That said, Sony really needs to get below $400 with their system. They're going to do ok this holiday, I suppose, but they better hope the 2008 software lineup doesn't get delayed any further and, most of all, delivers a compelling reason for Joe User to drop the money on a PS3.

Labels: , , , , ,

--Matt Matthews at 20:27
Comment [ 8 ]

Comments on this post:

I don't see the big deal. There's an 80GB , or a 60 if you hurry, that both contain BC... (and even the 80GB fares better in BC than the 360...)

Is it perfect? No.. but if there are enough esoteric PS2 titles that one needs complete BC, the only way to do that is to keep the PS2 hooked up. I'm sure most TV's have multiple inputs these days.. if not, buy a switchbox. ;)

The mob clamored for a cheaper PS3... Sony's delivering... and yet it's still not good enough. *shrug* Sony's not the favorite this gen, I guess.

By Blogger JFT, at 08 October, 2007 22:48  

It's really the wall of unfinished titles. Or even the drawer of *unstarted* titles. I would like to compare the PS3 to the PS2 and say that I only spent about the first three months or so worrying about BC when I left my original PS1, and now can barely stand to look at most of those old titles anymore - but it's not my fault the PS2 has such a glut of titles.

And really, not to knock Everyday Shooter or flOw or anything - but they aren't exactly Rogue Galaxy, which is sitting in said drawer. Or God of War II, which I haven't even had time to lay my hands on yet. Or Shadow Of the Colossus - which I swear I will finish one day. Or Katamari, which we still pull out to this day to play. Or any of the three or four coop RPG's we still hit when we're bored.

The PS3's library is mostly promises at this point, and were there no model with BC, I would see no reason to get a PS3 until well into next year when that wasn't the case. It's not that I wouldn't find it entertaining - its that I have a lot invested in my PS2 that will take a long time to shove into a box.

Now provided BC remains on the higher end model, I'm pretty fine with the strategy. But if Sony drops it completely, it would be a deal breaker for a while.

By Blogger Josh, at 09 October, 2007 10:24  

So you and I both have libraries of PS2 games that we haven't finished (or started). Fair enough. If there's nothing on the PS3 you want to play, then you're really not in the market for a PS3 whether it has BC or not, right?

That is, if all you want is a PS3 in order to play PS2 games on it, then it's a terrible premium to pay for that privilege. There is no advantage to buying now. You'd do better to keep using your PS2 and in the future consider whether the PS3 is right for you. And at that point, BC will still not be a [major] consideration, right?

Which makes me think it's not the backward compatibility that's really your beef with the PS3. It's that the PS3 has nothing enticing for you that's PS3-specific. When it does have something, then you'll pick up the PS3 not for BC ability but for whatever that new thing is.

By Blogger jvm, at 09 October, 2007 13:13  

Well it's all about the shelf space. If the PS3 was compatible with the PS2 games on my ToDo list, I could swap it out and make it part of our eventual HD revolution, decent game library or not. Then it's all plus plus.

But if it can't play the PS2 games and the only decent PS3 games are ones I can download on my laptop anyway, then Blu-Ray isn't enough of a enticement to make the leap. Especially considering the extra cost of a set, new tuner, etc.

But I'm a married guy now - if one thinks I can stack a PS2 and a PS3 while still being able to angle for a Wii - one would be mistaken. So unless I can consolidate, whatever is in that cabinet will need to play it some PS2.

By Blogger Josh, at 09 October, 2007 13:23  

Warhawk and ES: Oblivion are brilliant games. Both are addictive and fun from my point of view. Yet, I was also satisfied with my PS2 early on. I suppose it just came down to the games I found a few that I liked early on with PS2. This time around I was somewhat under whelmed by Resistance: FoM and MotorStorm, so PS3 was a slow starter for me. Both of those games were solid if somewhat pedestrian from my point of view.

Overall, I have found my PS3 an excellent purchase, but I had to warm up to it. The way XBL does online really does provide a boosted experience to all the games, but there are some brilliant flourishes to what PSN with XMB does. It may sound silly but the fact that my downloaded videos have "movie clip" icons just makes me smile. I also find the XMB superior when looking at my downloaded games, music, and friends list on PSN. If Sony can add a just a few more features to ‘using’ that friend list or using the XMB in the games I’ll be very satisfied.

The loss of BC for the 40GB system I think is disappointing, but if you wanted that you would have bought a PS3 already, or you fall into the category of people who might not buy a system for another two years. I have to say I have fallen out of the habit of playing my PS2 games on my PS3, and that happen soon after I started Oblivion. Warhawk was a sure cure for playing Battlefield 2: Modern Combat which was showing its age.

By Blogger MonkeyKing1969, at 09 October, 2007 14:17  

Well we don't have a PS3 yet not because I hadn't eyed one, but because we don't want to the pull the trigger on an HDTV yet. I had essentially tacked a PS3 onto the purchase price.

If they drop BC from the 80GB model, I'll stop doing the math that way and wait for the PS2 to run its course.

By Blogger Josh, at 09 October, 2007 20:25  

Gotta admit the comments are Ruffin-boggling. Having seen playrooms with at least two consoles become horribly common since the Genny (whether Genny + NES or Genny + PS1), what's the problem with having more than one now?

What niche must the PSn (as in n=2 or 3) fill here for you guys? Are you single console folk? Is there no room for multiples? If there's room for any other console, what's with the single-Sony spot?

I've always thought BC was an attempt to lure people *away* from another dominant console. I have a PS2 but no Xbox or GC, so the Wii is particularly attractive, and with Xbox 360 at least I don't miss the previous gen's dealmakers. You guys here already have the previous gen to the point that BC only allows you to potentially more easily access a backlog o' titles. Bizarre.

Is this "BC is make or break b/c one console worth of space on my entertainment system is worth about fifty bucks a year" really representative of the market? Do wives really have so much control over the household that not only must the main TV be single-console, but there's no way of playing somewhere else? I can't imagine it is or that they do; the "she won't give me space" seems a pretty blatant self-justification/self-delusion that enables blowing irresponsible amounts of cash for what's obviously a luxury item here.

(So yeah, agreeing with jft here.)

By Blogger rufbo, at 09 October, 2007 20:57  

I never said I was against having multiple consoles, I just find the idea of resting a PS3 ontop of my PS2 ridiculous, especially if it's just Sony trying to cut off hardware and reversing their stated position. I've got more then enough issues with hardware on hardware action around the condo as it is.

And with the void of PS3 games as it is right now - its not like this is some trivial feature, especially at Sony's price point.

By Blogger Josh, at 09 October, 2007 23:16  

Contact Us

Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]



Warm bile sold separately:

Browse Curmudgeon Gamer Memorial Library


Internet game search:

Classic: 02/2002 to 10/2005

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?