No backwards compatibility for PS3 Slim

By Oli Welsh Published 19 August, 2009

People want PS3s for PS3 games - Sony.

It was a forlorn hope, really, but some were clinging on to the idea that Sony might be able to reinstate PS2 backwards compatibility in the new PS3 Slim, after removing it from the original machine. It won't.

"Backwards compatibility is off the table," Sony America marketing man John Koller told Kotaku.

People buy PS3s to play PS3 games, he went on to argue. "Now that we're at a point where we're three years into the lifecycle of the PS3, there are so many PS3 disc-based games that are available that we think - and noticed this from our research - that most consumers that are purchasing the PS3 cite PS3 games as a primary [reason].

"And it's not just like 50 or 60 percent. It's well into the 80 or 90 percentile range... Most of those are consumers who have not utilized their PS2 for a little while and they're ready to jump into the PlayStation 3."

Koller also told Kotaku that he expects the Slim PS3 to replace the fat one - no longer in production - at retail in fairly short order. 80GB units would disappear next month, he said, although 160GB PS3s might stay on shop shelves a little longer.

He also revealed that the PS3 Slim no longer has a rear power switch, so environmentally-conscious gamers not wanting to leave it on standby all the time - which would pretty much negate its reduced power consumption - will need to turn it off at the mains.

Picture of Oli.

About Oli Welsh

Oli is Eurogamer's acting deputy editor and reviews editor and likes to take things one word at a time. He is among the best dressed people in South London.

Read more articles from Oli by visiting the Oli Welsh archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (102) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Fixxxer #1 3 years ago

    So most people don't cite backwards compatibility as their reason for buying a PS3?

    Of course they bloody don't!
    Edited by 1 at 19/08/09 @ 09:39

  • GreyScale #2 3 years ago

    Is he deliberately missing the point? BC isn't so people can buy a whole new load of PS2 games instead of PS3 games, its so they can play their old catalogue without having 2 machines set up or catch the odd missed PS2 title.

    Sounds like BS, what he actually means to say 'people are still buying the PS2 and we want to milk it as much as possible for as long as possible'.
    Edited by 1 at 19/08/09 @ 09:38

  • Gnort #3 3 years ago

    I'm sad to hear that. Backwards compatability is more of a feel-good factor than a practical issue. I may not actually ever play through one of my PS2 games again, but it would make me happier buying a PS3 knowing that if I did want to, I could do so without having to set up my old PS2, which recently got moved aside for some reason or other and has not yet been reconnected.

  • Toothball #4 3 years ago

    I'm fine without backwards compatibility. I don't really find it that much of a chore to dig out a PS2 to play a game on it, as most of my PS2 games are buried in the same box anyway. Once I'm done with it it goes away again. Easy.

  • stampax #5 3 years ago

    Completely agree with the Sony guy on this occasion. I really dont get why on earth people are bothered about playing ps2 games on their ps3 - and surely the ones that are complaining are likely to be the geeks and hardcore gamers, and not the mass public that make up the majority of Sony's audience.
    I totally understood when people complained about lack of BC when it launched and in the first 6 months or so but now? Really?

    EDIT - omg - minus 18? Wow, people really didnt like my comment!
    Edited by 1 at 19/08/09 @ 13:57

  • Garwoofoo #6 3 years ago

    I'd buy one if it had backward-compatibility, I'm not buying one if it doesn't.

  • Beek4257 #7 3 years ago

    ... we think - and noticed this from our research - that most consumers that are purchasing the PS3 cite PS3 games as a primary [reason].

    Aha, so people don't actually buy a PS3 with playing PS2 games as the primary reason?
    Please tell me you didn't pay for that research.
    Edited by 1 at 19/08/09 @ 09:49

  • IneptPercy #8 3 years ago

    To me its not a big selling point, but Sony did promise none of this half-hearted efforts like the 360 and it would be 100%...

    Earlier on in a consoles life it can be important but as time passes it doesn't make as much difference.

  • stevland #9 3 years ago

    i wanna play my old games properly upscaled. plus i neither have the room nor the inputs on my TV for my PS2. can't be that hard to make it to work. in the end, even for 300€, still no PS3 for me.

  • No1_Dave #10 3 years ago

    also maybe the fact that BC doesn't work well (enough) on a PS3? lots of glitches, bug etc, taking away from full enjoyment of PS2 games.

    but agree about milking the PS2 hardware as long as possible, but if the day comes when PS2 is withdrawn? I suppose by then we can hope Sony can have PS1/2/3 games BC in the PS4? (PS4 should be cheaper to produce than PS3? as by then BluRay drive is much cheaper? may be Sony can have older PS2/PS3 hardware in as well?) lot of questions...

    I was also originally in the "I want BC" camp, not so much anymore now that I've bought nearly 120 games for the PS3, lucky if I have time finishing them all. Already have 4 PS2s, if I do want to get some PS2 games action just need to dig one out. But it would be nice if they have BC in, just for convience more than anything, but if they do have it in they need to do better & iron out the bugs & glitches.
    Edited by 4 at 19/08/09 @ 10:07

  • el_pollo_diablo #11 3 years ago

    My HK ps3 has full backwards compatibility, but I don't have any japanese ps2 games to play on it.

    It's the worst of both worlds.

  • chicknstu #12 3 years ago

    Seriously, I almost entirely use my PS3 to play PS2 / PS1 games, and watch Blu-Rays. And to play PS3 games if I absolutely can't buy them on Xbox.

    Hence... I'm keeping my chunky one. It's silly to suggest that backwards compatability is not a valid selling point.
    Edited by 1 at 19/08/09 @ 09:54

  • Retroid #13 3 years ago

    "and noticed this from our research - that most consumers that are purchasing the PS3 cite PS3 games as a primary [reason]"

    Well, gosh; people not saying they're buying a machine for a feature which isn't there. Staggering statistics, there.

    They must know they cut their nose off to spite their face by removing PS2 BC because it means they can't sell PS2 games over PSN alongside PS1 titles.

  • schnide #14 3 years ago

    Sony in "Still Can't Get It Right" shocker..

  • Eraysor #15 3 years ago

    Shame really, as that would have probably pushed me off the fence towards buying one.
    Edited by 1 at 19/08/09 @ 09:56

  • NotSoSlim #16 3 years ago

    They are going to sell ps2 games on the PSN store sometime next year..simple.

  • GiarcYekrub #17 3 years ago

    Certainly doesn't entice me to buy a huge collection of PS3 games if they'll be useless if Sony stick to that ideology for the PS4

  • Power_n_Glory #18 3 years ago

    BC isn't essential. I've still got a PS2 and if I wanted to play it that badly, I'd take it out of the box and plug it up. Same goes for my old Xbox. PS3 games, Blu Ray and online play are the main perks for a PS3.

  • wittynic #19 3 years ago

    "I totally understood when people complained about lack of BC when it launched and in the first 6 months or so but now? Really? "

    Your right! In that time Ico, Shadow of the Collosus, FFX, FFXII,Timesplitters, Beyond Good and Evil, Dragon Quest VIII, Kingdom Hearts 1&2,Metal Gear Solid 2&3 have all BECOME dreadful games, why would i ever want to play them again!

    /idiot

    Its a matter of convenience. There are literally scores of classic PS2 Games that i will keep and still want to play even probably beyond this generation. Sony could just do everyone a favour and include BC and stop pretending this isnt all because they want to keep milking the PS2 and bring down costs on their ridiculously expensive new machine.

  • rotmm #20 3 years ago

    @chicknstu, "Seriously, I almost entirely use my PS3 to play PS2 / PS1 games, and watch Blu-Rays. And to play PS3 games if I absolutely can't buy them on Xbox.

    Hence... I'm keeping my chunky one. It's silly to suggest that backwards compatability is not a valid selling point."

    Sony want gamers to buy a PS3 to play PS3 titles. That's where the real money for Sony is.... in either their own releases or from fees from companies such as EA and Activision.

    Those users who BC is still a key "selling point" for are also those who are the least likely to bring significant amounts into the Sony coffers.

  • mkreku #21 3 years ago

    Why is he trying to tell me what I want or don't want? I have an old PS2, the fat model, that's just waiting to be replaced by a slicker, Blu-Rayer version.. but this just isn't it. I want BC, simple as that.

  • Xerx3s #22 3 years ago

    While I don't see a point in BC, I think that he is kind of out of touch with his audience, one of the most named demands for the ps3 is BC.

  • siro #23 3 years ago

    So, only 80-90 percent are getting a PS3 for the games? And we are supposed to be surprised by how high a number that is? It's ridiculously low. What else to get it for?

  • Widge #24 3 years ago

    Well... if anyone wants to buy a slim and trade it with my 60GB launch model?
    You can have my stack of unplayed PS2 games too as, you know, I'VE MOVED ON.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #25 3 years ago

    "While I don't see a point in BC"

    Really? Seriously? You can't even see a point? You can't grasp that not everybody wants 16 different consoles under their TV at once, or to dick around swapping them over out of boxes in cupboards every time they fancy playing an old game? You fail to understand how anyone could enjoy having old games upscaled and played with a wireless controller? You don't really get why people would rather be able to pick up old PS2 games on disc for £3 rather than pay Sony £10 to download them from the PSN store? None of that makes any sense in your head at all? Wow.

  • TopKatt #26 3 years ago

    Give Sony their due though, they could've kept the carrot of possible future BC dangling indefinitely, at least now everyone knows the score. I was lucky enough to get a launch PS3 and have pretty much finished all the PS2 games I had lying around so if I ever need to replace my PS3 I won't really miss the BC now.

    Just a thought, how much would you guys be willing to pay for a second hand BC PS3 with a 160Gb hard drive fitted?
    *Eyes new PS3 slim greedily*

  • andywilkie35 #27 3 years ago

    lol

  • NorUraeus #28 3 years ago

    To those people still wanting PS2 BC, well I will most likely be putting my PS3 with BC on ebay before Christmas to get a Slim, so you still might get your BC fix :)

  • PlugMonkey #29 3 years ago

    While I don't see a point in BC, I think that he is kind of out of touch with his audience, one of the most named demands for the ps3 is BC.

    Absolutely. It's obviously not the primary reason to buy a PS3. If all you wanted to do was play PS2 games, a PS2 would be a much cheaper way of doing it. It's a secondary convenience not to still have to have a PS2 connected to my telly as well.

    What's funny is that it was only a couple of years ago that Sony were announcing how backwards compatability was a big deal for their consumers and how totally wrong MS were to only include software based BC support. It's funny how they've miraculously changed their minds in the light of a less than stellar PS3 sales performance.

  • Power_n_Glory #30 3 years ago

    If you want BC that badly you can go and get a 80 gig model for the same price as the new slim so there is no excuse. In fact, you can go on Ebay and pick up a 60 gig model if it means that much to you. If you haven't already boughht a PS3, it's because of the price, or lack of PS3 games, not because of BC. I'd rather lose the BC then end up having to pay an extra £50 for PS3 slim on I feature I'll hardly use.

  • Vin #31 3 years ago

    Bloody fools.

  • M_of_the_sys #32 3 years ago

    "Now that we're at a point where we're three years into the lifecycle of the PS3, there are so many PS3 disc-based games that are available that we think - and noticed this from our research - that most consumers that are purchasing the PS3 cite PS3 games as a primary [reason]."

    Of fucking course they cite PS3 games as the reason they're purchasing a PS3. They're not gonna cite PS2 games as the reason because you took away the frickin' B/C!

    You donut! PS2 BC would be an additional feature for the PS3. A-N-other selling point. Look how many people scooped up FFVII in it's first week of release.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #33 3 years ago

    A trip down Memory Lane:

    "Backwards compatibility is a core value of Playstation now."
    [link url=http ://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=55108
    ]http://ww w.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_...[/link]

    "Having multiple SKUs just confuses the customer."
    [link url=http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=11209
    ]    http://ww w.gamesindustry.biz/content_pag...[/link]

    "Rumble is last gen, and can't work with the tilting function."
    [link url=http://ww w.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3157501
    ]http://ww w.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3157...[/link]

    "We're not going to remove backwards compatibility."
    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=74124 ]http://ww w.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...[/link]

    "We removed backwards compatibility to cut the price."
    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=85648 ]http://ww w.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...[/link]

    "We removed backwards compatibility to make people buy PS3 games, NOT to lower the price."
    [link url=http://kotaku.com/gaming/spin/jack-tretton...ures-31 2628.php
    ]http://ko taku.com/gaming/spin/jack-trett...[/link]

    "We removed backwards compatibility as a result of consumer feedback."
    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=84824 ]http://ww w.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...[/link]

    "We removed backwards compatibility to spend the money on developing new games."
    http://ww w.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #34 3 years ago

    "So, you think there will be ps2 software emulation eventually and ps2 titles will be sold through PSN?"

    I'd put money on it.

  • Mr_Dodger #35 3 years ago

    I swear some people are just on this earth to piss everyone else off with there stupid views

    /irony

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #36 3 years ago

    "I'd rather lose the BC then end up having to pay an extra £50 for PS3 slim on I feature I'll hardly use. "

    I'd rather lose BC than have someone break my legs and rape my granny, but there's no connection between those things either. BC in Europe is SOFTWARE EMULATION. It doesn't cost a penny, far less 50 quid.
    Edited by 1 at 19/08/09 @ 10:25

  • Darren #37 3 years ago

    I do think this Sony bod is missing the point entirely. It's common sense that PS2 owners might be more tempted to move up to a PS3 if they know they can still play their favourite old games on the new hardware and sell their old machine and some unwanted games to fund it. No-one wants to have two machines sat under the TV unless they really have to, it's just extra clutter.

  • BritishBlue1 #38 3 years ago

    No backwards compatibility ever?! Big mistake Sony, big...fucking...mistake...

  • Power_n_Glory #39 3 years ago

    Rev Stu, why not just buy a 80 gig PS3 if it means that much to you. It costs the same as a slim one. Plus you get two free games.

  • No1_Dave #40 3 years ago

    waited for PS3 price drop, but by the time it dropped the orignal PAL 60GB BC model was discontinued, even though I imported an 80GB from the US which does have BC but only with NTSC games, but all my PS2 games are PAL, so now ended up with 4 PS2 to cover my self, Phat black (bought near launch), Phat silver (a few year later for collection), Slim black (also near its launch time), Super Slim black without the powerbrick (the most portable one, bought few month ago, and the final one I'm buying).

    so yeah it would be good to have BC in PS3, but not be all & end all.
    Edited by 1 at 19/08/09 @ 10:34

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #41 3 years ago

    I already own a PS3 with (crappy half-arsed software-based) backwards compatibility. I like the idea of a smaller, less ugly, quieter, less power-hungry one, but Sony can fuck off if I have to sacrifice BC for that. Sales -1.

  • TopKatt #42 3 years ago

    Just a thought, how much would you guys be willing to pay for a second hand BC PS3 with a 160Gb hard drive fitted?
    *Eyes new PS3 slim greedily*

    Will anyone give me £500 for it?

    *Eyes new PS3 slim AND PSPGo greedily*

  • kingcrude #43 3 years ago

    can i use the word cunts here?
    Edited by 1 at 19/08/09 @ 10:42

  • NorUraeus #44 3 years ago

    @Rev. Stuart Campbell : your comment claiming that BC in Europe is free since its software based is factually wrong. I don't understand how people still manage to come up with this gazzillion time rebuffed claim. The European BC was a combination of a software emulated CPU and a hardware GPU. (The US had both in hardware). When the original 40GB unit came out they cut cost by removing that hardware GPU also.

    So it does cost money to include the PS2 BC and I think Sony has simply concluded that being able to keep the price down by another 50Euro is a more valuable than having PS2 support on the checklist.

    As for PS2 games being sold on PSN, I agree that will happen, but not through PS2 emulation, rather it will happen with game makers recompiling their PS2 games for the PS3.

  • Power_n_Glory #45 3 years ago

    Rev Stu - You've already got a PS3 so the slim line isn't aimed at you. You think all those people who bought a Wii care that they can't play Gamecube games? You think I care that I can only play certain original xbox games on my 360? The games and price point have helped sell those consoles. If BC was so essential, PS3's would have been flying off the shelf when it launched.

  • playgen #46 3 years ago

    "You think all those people who bought a Wii care that they can't play Gamecube games?"

    Errrr have you ever looked at a wii properly?, you might notice gamecube controller and memory card ports, wonder what they are for...
    Edited by 1 at 19/08/09 @ 10:50

  • Retroid #47 3 years ago

    BC required the GPU (as NorUraeus said) aswell as dedicated RAM, IIRC. Sony just seemed to like everyone thinking it was *entirely* software, hence the disbelief at the initial rumours / news of it being removed.

  • Retroid #48 3 years ago

    Power_n_Glory: "You think all those people who bought a Wii care that they can't play Gamecube games?"

    Fail.

    Power_n_Glory: "If BC was so essential, PS3's would have been flying off the shelf when it launched."

    Why the hell would that happen when the PS2 was much cheaper and selling like hotcakes? O_o
    Edited by 1 at 19/08/09 @ 10:54

  • jack_klugman #49 3 years ago

    @ Stuart Campbell

    BC in Europe is SOFTWARE EMULATION. It doesn't cost a penny, far less 50 quid.

    But is the software solution general case or, like the 360's short lived attempts, on a per-title basis? Obviously if its the latter its going to cost more.

    But like I said in the other thread (and I think you've already covered here) there's no incentive on Sony's part to include BC (after you've kept the early adopters happy with it at least) when you're going to monitise your PS2 back catalogue through PSN down the road. Hurrah!

  • The-Bodybuilder #50 3 years ago

    When will people learn....
    Only the hardcore and nerds care about BC (sorry). The vast, vast, VAST majority couldn't give a toss. I'm surprised how some harcore gamers cannot dissasociate thier own views from that of the vast majority; just because you still play PS1 and PS2 games on your PS3 doesn't mean the rest do.
    And no BC certainly hasn't hurt the 360.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #51 3 years ago

    "Rev Stu - You've already got a PS3 so the slim line isn't aimed at you."

    Except I just told you that I would be interested in a smaller, less ugly, quieter, less power-hungry one. I owned a fat DS but still bought a DS Lite. I owned a fat PSP but still bought a Slim. But neither of those involved sacrificing highly-valued features in the machine I upgraded.

    "You think all those people who bought a Wii care that they can't play Gamecube games?"

    Boy, your face must be red right now.

  • Darren #52 3 years ago

    It's quite disappointing to see Sony abandoning backward compatibility on the PS3 because they were pioneers of the concept on the consoles when they released the PS2 with PS emulation built in and led to both Nintendo and Microsoft adopting it for their own consoles. I can understand why they've done it though, emulation takes a lot of time and money to perfect, and those resources are better being used on current gen games.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #53 3 years ago

    "Only the hardcore and nerds care about BC (sorry). The vast, vast, VAST majority couldn't give a toss."

    Do share your survey data for this claim with us. Oh, wait - you don't have any. What you mean is that YOU don't.

  • Retroid #54 3 years ago

    I love all these "Only *nerds* care about playing old games. There's no money in it!"

    I give you: Final Fantasy VII on PSN. A game which was already supported by BC to play from disk but still sold hundreds of thousands of (additional) copies.

  • jack_klugman #55 3 years ago

    @ Darren

    I can understand why they've done it though, emulation takes a lot of time and money to perfect, and those resources are better being used on current gen games.

    A reasonable assumption, but the real reason is going to be "greedier" than that.

    1) For starters you're probably looking at utilising a different programming resource for building emulation solutions to coding for original titles, so the conserving resources argument probably doesn't apply.

    2) Its in Sony's interests to offer the consumer some way of accessing their software back catalogue because they can still make money from it, so in principal BC makes sense.

    3) But if you take away BC as a general case solution (a general case solution permits the consumer to use their existing library of PS2 games or purchase new from the second hand market or any retailer out of Sony's control) then you can deliver PS2 games direct to the consumer in a way where you entirely control the revenue stream i.e. via PSN.

  • RESIDENT_nEVILe #56 3 years ago

    Backwards Compatibility will obviously, obviously be back.

    It isn't a case of Sony letting us know where we stand. As GreyScale posted, they want you to keep buying the ultracheap to produce PS2. It's their computer division's cash-cow.

    When sales drop off Sony will turn to legacy software to turn more profit. It may be during the PS3's cycle, it may not.

    If you really wanted BC you would have to stop buying PS2s. Catch 22, and Sony know it.

  • SEVQA #57 3 years ago

    If my launch 60gb dies I will jump camp Sony you hear me! I was an Xbox 1 junkie and I missed out on the PS2 library, so BC was a massive selling point for me! This seems very misguided considering the economic climate and the amounts of games people will be able to afford to buy. I'm sure the loyalty of the fans at this stage would be the winning factor these coming years and Sony is unfortunately losing me slowly!

  • M_of_the_sys #58 3 years ago

    Hmmm. I thought they had a way of adding BC with a firmware upgrade without having to add any hardware to it? If it's a case where they can release PS2 games as downloads then that's fair enough. I still don't fancy paying more for games I already own.
    I was about to sell off all my old PS2 games until I heard of the possibility to re-add BC. As many have already stated, I don't fancy having to get my old PS2 out every time I want to play it. It's a hassle to get to the back of the TV and I simply don't have the room to sit my PS2 anywhere despite it being the slim model.
    For a company that was boasting about having lots of multi-media functionality in one box, you'd think they'd be all for BC.

    Rev. Stuart Campbell's links say it all really.
    Edited by 1 at 19/08/09 @ 11:20

  • Meho #59 3 years ago

    Just to chip in: I waited with my PS3 purchase until I could secure a hardware-based BC 60 GB model. Because, of course, I have a TON of PS2 games at home and while my PS2 works well, I still don't want to have dozens of consoles in my living room if I can help it.

    Keeping BC may be "expensive" for Sony, but it's a way of telling your loyal customers you think about them and does wonders for the image of the company. As Rev. already chronologised Sony's backtracking in one of his posts, I feel it's safe to say that they still havent a clue about how to keep their customers happy.

  • PlugMonkey #60 3 years ago

    Once the PS2 has died they will add PS2 games to the store, but while you hangers on are still clinging to your PS2's then why should Sony add BC?

    Why would I want to pay money to play games I alraedy own? When the software to emulate a PS2 has already been developed and put in other PS3s, why now remove it?

    Yes, people can buy an old 80GB model if BC "means that much to them", but how does that help Sony PS3 Slim sales? Does that make the decision correct? I'm not convinced.

    Rev. Campbell - That trip down memory lane makes pretty depressing reading. They just seem to have completely lost the plot on PS3.

  • laudy #61 3 years ago

    I hope it hasn't escaped people's attention that there are currently quite a few psone games available on PSN (especially the US store). Nobody purchases psones these days.

    I hope it hasn't escaped people's attention that there are currently no ps2 games available on PSN. The ps2 is still being sold worldwide (no, I don't have any facts and figures and I can't be bothered to make some up like some folk on here, anyone anal enough can look it up for themselves).

    I have an old, fat, 4 usb port launch model and the other day i found a copy of Legacy of Kain: Defiance hiding in the bottom of a cupboard. It worked fine, nicely upscaled etc. and was thoroughly enjoyable. I also found Scarface: The World is Yours in the same cupboard. It played atrociously, and at half speed. So to play it I hooked up my old ps2. It's clear that BC isn't something they've paid too much attention to, otherwise every game would work no? it was just to help folk get over the transition from ps2 to ps3. Some have...others, going by this thread, clearly have not.

    The only ps2 games that currently sit on my shelf are GOW 1 & 2 and The Getaway featuring the "BT van" mission that sparked a worldwide recall (BT were NOT happy that an engineer of theirs was portayed as a killer of policemen!) i'm hoping it'll be worth something on e-bay! maybe not...

    This will get me loads of negatives, but if you want to play ps2 games, get off your lazy a*ses and hook up your old ps2's. You think Sony could care less that you can't be bothered to hook up a machine that they still sell? oh dear oh dear...

  • Gaol #62 3 years ago

    I have a hardware compatible launch US model. I rarely use it to play PS2 and PS1 games these days because they look like SHIT on an HDTV display, and I could be playing something new in 720p. It's nice to know I can play my back catalogue whenever I wish, I have a portable CRT hooked up through the old AV connection - but it's something I use increasingly rarely, and I think the move to HD has made playing older games less appealing.

    My opinion is that Sony should have had a premium model with more HDD space, full hardware backwards compatibility and a bundled HDMI cable but they clearly believe the potential take-up of such a product doesn't justify the cost of maintaining and extra SKU; or they have come to the conclusion that multiple SKUs confuse the market too much.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #63 3 years ago

    "This will get me loads of negatives, but if you want to play ps2 games, get off your lazy a*ses and hook up your old ps2's. You think Sony could care less that you can't be bothered to hook up a machine that they still sell? oh dear oh dear..."

    Sigh. Try to get his into your thick skull, will you? We're not complaining about the loss of BC. Most of us already have BC. We're pointing out Sony's idiocy in removing a feature that costs peanuts if anything and will beyond any reasonable doubt cost them hardware sales, and is currently costing them software sales until such times as they might make PS2 games downloadable. Even if and when that happens, it's limiting their sales, because a 120GB hard drive isn't actually that much if you have to install entire PS2 games to it at several GB a time, as well as installing PS3 games so they run properly and storing media too.

  • spookyzombie #64 3 years ago

    My problem with the PS3 and the whole BC issue stems from lack of RPG's. Yes it would be nice to replay some classics from time to time, but I currently have to fire up my PS2 to play RPG's due to the shocking lack of titles available for the PS3.

  • Mr_Dodger #65 3 years ago

    I finished FF X, FF XII, MGS 2 and 3 on my BC 60gb, and am currently plowing through Rogue Galaxy & Persona 4. They look FAR from 'shit' on my 42" LCD - they look perfectly acceptable. When they're finished I know I have the choice of Digital Devil Saga, Okami, Shadow of the Colossus and a host of other PS2 titles I missed the first time round. I have yet to finish inFAMOUS, and soon I'll be playing Arkham Asylum. It's the best of both worlds in one box and I love it.

    If no-one can understand the benefit of BC I don't know what to say.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #66 3 years ago

    "I don't know, but they should. And I'm sure they will if enough people vote with their wallets and tell them to stick non-BC consoles up their arse."

    Thing is, people are. Sales of the PS3 are down by a third in the last year compared to the previous year, which coincides with the introduction of the models with no BC at all. Of course, it might be just that - a coincidence - but it's an interesting fact nonetheless. It's certainly remarkable that sales are going DOWN so dramatically at this point in the lifecycle, despite a price-cut when the 40GB model came out, when other formats which haven't dumped their BC are doing just fine.

  • laudy #67 3 years ago

    Thanks for the personal jibe Rev Campbell, really mature. Writing on this thread gives no indication of an individual's intelligence. I'm sure that folk without BC will thank the heavens that they have you as their champion.

    I can't be bothered to trawl through this thread to find people who are actually complaining about the loss of BC, I'll leave that to you. Your concern for Sony's sales figures borders on the staggering. I personally couldn't care less whether removing the feature affects their sales, but what is clear is that a business decision they have taken has really bothered you, and for that, I suggest you write to Sony and demand an apology (you might want to compare what costs "peanuts" with them as well).

    Let Sony worry about limited sales. In my opinion, I repeat, MY opinion, BC is not highly valued. Feel free to insult me again but be sure to ask your congregation for forgiveness.

  • PlugMonkey #68 3 years ago

    I can understand why they've done it though, emulation takes a lot of time and money to perfect, and those resources are better being used on current gen games.

    Given the choice between decent BC and the gargantuan white elephant that is Home, I know which I would prefer Sony to be spending money on.

    This will get me loads of negatives, but if you want to play ps2 games, get off your lazy a*ses and hook up your old ps2's. You think Sony could care less that you can't be bothered to hook up a machine that they still sell? oh dear oh dear...

    No, they clearly couldn't care less, which is a shame. They used to care. And though not a crucial feature, it would be more useful in what's supposed to be primarily a games console than a lousy social networking 'feature' or a media server that only supports a tiny fraction of video codecs. In a games console, I'd take a feature that makes me playing games easier over just about anything else.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #69 3 years ago

    "for gods sake,just buy a ps2 from the local smack generator there only £20,whats the big deal. "

    Your inability to fucking read?

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #70 3 years ago

    "I'm getting mixed messages here. Do you care about this discussion topic? Do you think it's lame to care about it? Are you actively involved in it or not? "

    No, he's right. I'm making comments about something, on a comments thread. What am I thinking? I must look a fool.

  • Law07 #71 3 years ago

    Bet if they did announced BC you'd all be crying for something more.

    Never happy ;D

  • laudy #72 3 years ago

    "No, he's right. I'm making comments, on a comments thread. What am I thinking?"

    This is what you're thinking isn't it?

    Sigh. Try to get his into your thick skull, will you? We're not complaining about the loss of BC. Most of us already have BC. We're pointing out Sony's idiocy in removing a feature that costs peanuts if anything and will beyond any reasonable doubt cost them hardware sales, and is currently costing them software sales until such times as they might make PS2 games downloadable. Even if and when that happens, it's limiting their sales, because a 120GB hard drive isn't actually that much if you have to install entire PS2 games to it at several GB a time, as well as installing PS3 games so they run properly and storing media too.

  • laudy #73 3 years ago

    "Bet if they did announced BC you'd all be crying for something more.

    Never happy ;D"

    Ah...but most on here already have BC, it's the fact that folk won't be able to have it from now on that grates the nerves of folks in here...

  • laudy #74 3 years ago

    "Do you care about this discussion topic?"

    I must admit, I do find it interesting, what I don't care for are personal jibes, particularly coming from a man of the cloth.

    "Do you think it's lame to care about it?"

    Absolutely not.

    "Are you actively involved in it or not?"

    I'd like to think so, but I choose not to pick up the metaphoric ruler and rap Sony's knuckles...I'm just trying to look at this from another perspective.



  • solidSnake04 #75 3 years ago

    "most consumers that are purchasing the PS3 cite PS3 games as a primary [reason]".

    Primary you idiot, doesn't mean they wouldn't buy it for other "secondary" reasons. This guy should be sacked for being an arrogant twat.
    I play my SOTC, ICO, Farenheit and PES 1 (yes, the first) and more every so often and they are bloody ps2 games. Now that ZOE 2 is coming out would people who no longer have their PS2 have to buy another ?
    PRICKS
    I'll keep my BC fat PS3 thanks.
    Edited by 2 at 19/08/09 @ 12:36

  • malexous #76 3 years ago

    @Darren

    Sony pioneers of BC? Nintendo had it in their Game Boy line since the Colour (did anyone else have it before Sony as well?) and it would hardly have been feasible for N64 games to work in a Cube...you know without adding a cartridge slot to the Cube.

  • laudy #77 3 years ago

    I see...

    trying to see things from another perspective earns you negatives, whereas stuff like "Your inability to fucking read?" gets rewarded.

    someone should have told me that this is not a thread for balanced debate, just another corporation-bashing exercise. I suppose Sony have brought this on themselves really, too many top notch ps2 games.

  • GundamJehutyKai #78 3 years ago

    @Malexous: everyone seems to forget that Sega pioneered the idea of backward compatibility with their master system adaptor for the MegaDrive!!!

    But back to sony, I bought one of the last few BC capable PS3s before the newer SKUs came out and I have used it for exactly 3 games: Odin sphere, Yakuza 2 and Persona 3. admittedly, my perchance to import a massive plethora of games renders the PS3 BC moot as it will only play PAL games but this argument feels like it's between haves and have nots. Nothing more.

    Those who can't get it without paying through the nose for it want it because they can't and those who have it almost never use it!!
    Look back at your PS2 (or at your PS3 as well, since it's still applicable). Do any of you remember the last time you used your PS2 (or PS3) to play old PS1 games? There are some fantastic classics there as well but I'm fairly sure nobody has thought to pop in a disk of resident evil 2 or some other game even though the capability is there. The last time I used PS1 BC was to play valkyrie profile. that was before even the PSP was released!!

    On another note, I'm pretty sure that adding BC back would cost considerably more than "peanuts"
    For starters, all BC capable consoles have at least 1 part of the PS2 in the architecture. To put BC back in that way would mean that sony would need to continue to manufacture the chips and kepp a factory open, pay employees, etc to keep it going for very little gain (going back to the "those who have it don't really use it" theory)
    Software emulation is a possibility but the PS2 was rather complex and you only have to look at microsofts attempt to see how difficult it can be. Developing an emulator which is capable of running the vast majority of the PS2 library would take considerable resources and manpower away from other areas. Of course, 1 could argue that they could just take the money from some forgotten crap like home and charge for a download to make the system BC capable but then some other group(s) would start moaning.

    Sony will most likely begin releasing PS2 games as DDL later on. And people will buy them, again, regardless of what naysayers think. You only have to look at the DDL sales of FFVII and MGS to see that!! I'm sure most people still have their copies!!

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #79 3 years ago

    "trying to see things from another perspective earns you negatives,"

    No, but trolling and nitpicking with no discernible point does.

  • laudy #80 3 years ago

    "No. The grating thing is that I'd quite like a non-dust magnet, smaller PS3, but without backwards compatibility, they might as well have not bothered."

    That's more than fair enough.

    I think all that's needed here is transparency. We need to know how much the whole backwards compatibility thing costs (no estimation) and why (apart from the 80-90% figures quoted by the Sony dude) the ultimate decision was taken to remove it. It's not unknown for them to backtrack, (remember dualshock was NEVER coming to the ps3) so who knows, if all that's required is a software update, maybe further down the line it will be released. If some sort of hardware is required then perhaps there is no going back...

  • laudy #81 3 years ago

    "No, but trolling and nitpicking with no discernible point does."

    I fear however I respond to this will be perceived as one or other of the above. So I'll just leave it at that.

  • Bazfrag #82 3 years ago

    Bc helps at launch when there are generally only a couple of worthy titles but 3 years later? I didnt spend £300 to play last gen. (maybe Persona 4, but average Joe wouldn't even know about that)

  • erp #83 3 years ago

    Percentile is such a dumb word.

  • laudy #84 3 years ago

    "Bc helps at launch when there are generally only a couple of worthy titles but 3 years later? I didnt spend £300 to play last gen. (maybe Persona 4, but average Joe wouldn't even know about that)"

    Absolutely.

    \whispers "what's Persona 4?"

  • bad09 #85 3 years ago

    That's OK Sony seeing as my 2nd hand PS2 has more games (again 2nd hand - no PS2 money for you until b/c is back) than my PS3 My 2nd hand PS2 will keep me well away from the PS3 games and PSN and you away from my money.



  • des #86 3 years ago

    Stupid move,but not unexpected,PS3 slim is as cheap as possible,it wouldn't be any cheaper even if it was Chinese knock-off.
    Launch 60GB and PS3 slim are like two different consoles,amazing really.

  • TravisTouchdown #87 3 years ago

    No1_Dave: Stupid or wealthy? Or both?

  • BM #88 3 years ago

    I've got a Wii and have been surprised how often I've grabbed a Gamecube game and had a quick blast on it. I imagine there's a helluva lot more PS2/PS3 owners that would like to do the same.

    Shame really, can't see it being too difficult to implement. Didn't the original PS3 have SACD support as well? I'd be sorely tempted by the Slim if that was supported.

  • PlugMonkey #89 3 years ago

    Look back at your PS2 (or at your PS3 as well, since it's still applicable). Do any of you remember the last time you used your PS2 (or PS3) to play old PS1 games? There are some fantastic classics there as well but I'm fairly sure nobody has thought to pop in a disk of resident evil 2 or some other game even though the capability is there. The last time I used PS1 BC was to play valkyrie profile. that was before even the PSP was released!!

    Well, I haven't played a PS1 game in a while. I still boot up Tekken 2 occasionally as it was the only one I ever bothered to learn. But that wasn't the case when the PS2 first came out, and if there was no interest whatsoever in PS1 games, Sony wouldn't be flogging them on PSN.

    Coming a little more up to date, I have in the last 12 months played Odama without dragging out the GameCube. I've played through the whole of Fable without risking lower lumbar injury hefting the Xbox down from the loft. The only last gen console that is still stubbornly attached to the TV is the PS2 (the new one I got at xmas when I gave up on SCEE and bought a PS3 from America) because I'm still working through Shadow of the Colossus and Okami, haven't even started Ico yet, and still stick the original Guitar Heros in for an occasional blast through Sweet Child of Mine to remind myself what the world was like before I became a drummer.

    I can see why all this makes sound business sense for Sony. They've already extracted an extra PS2 sale out of me, and they'll most likely extract a lot of extra PS2 games sales out of everyone else on PSN. The fact still remains that it's a massive u-turn and the loss of a useful feature, no matter how much they try and tell me they're doing it because I want them too.

  • GundamJehutyKai #90 3 years ago

    @MilkybKid1985: There has not been a software only emulated BC PS3. the very first batches were fully hardware run (the PS3 basically had a PS2 inside it) and the second lot kept the graphics chip but emulated the emotion engine. After that, BC was taken out.

    It is not impossible to do fully software emulated BC but I doubt it's as easy or as cheap as people claim. at the end of the day, sony are a company and companies want to minimise costs and maximise profits. One can only assume that the cost/benefit analysis of putting BC back in wasn't looking too hot and even pleasing the vocal group can't justify it in the eyes of the execs.

  • NorUraeus #91 3 years ago

    One clear indication of the value of BC support in the PS3 is the price for used PS3s with BC. Having seen so many people like in this thread complaining about it I figured the value of my old PS3 would be really good and that I would probably be able to get a Slim for free by selling my old PS3. From what I seen so far on ebay this doesn't seem to be the case, systems with BC are slightly better priced than those without it, but only slightly. I assume Sony has been looking at the same market ever since they stopped having BC to evaluate if for instance introducing a premium model with BC would be worthwhile. So far it seems not, while people like to cry wolf about it on these message boards, almost nobody is willing to cough up a few extra coins to get a system with BC.

  • jambii267 #92 3 years ago

    According to wikipedia the PS3 has sold roughly around 25 Million units, and if ten percent want BC in their PS3's then that works out to be 2.5 million people, Sony should have some consideration for their audience.

    I still play GBA games on my DS, i still play gamecube games on my Wii (enjoying Metal Gear Solid atm) and i played FFVII, VIII & IX at least twice on my PS2. No backwards compatability is like saying that those games arn't worth playing anymore, which certainly isn't true.

  • Sutekh #93 3 years ago

    Obviously people want the PS3 for PS3 games. That's not in question. But it'd be nice to have the option of being able to play my old PS2 games as well.

  • M_of_the_sys #94 3 years ago

    "I agree with Sony. Why the hell would you buy a PS3 to play PS2 games? LOL It makes no sense at all, just keep your PS2."

    I don't know. Why did they make the PS2 BC with PS1? Why did they make the PS3 BC with PS1? Perhaps because they thought people might want to play classic games on said current gen console? Nah! That's just crazy!

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #95 3 years ago

    Dick.

  • PlugMonkey #96 3 years ago

    I agree with Sony. Why the hell would you buy a PS3 to play PS2 games? LOL It makes no sense at all, just keep your PS2.

    Why would anyone buy a Bluray player to play DVDs? They wouldn't. Do Bluray players play DVDs? Yes they do. Why? Because people still have a load of DVDs that they still want to play and having one box under your telly is better than having two boxes under your telly. You could just keep your old DVD player too, but it'd be a hell of a lot more convenient if you didn't have to. N'est-ce pas?

    I dont want all the games I spent to be worthless - There worthless the second you buy them,

    No they're not. They are only worthless when you can't play them any more. God forbid that that day ever comes. This isn't about affecting the resale value of my retro games collection. You do realise that? I buy games for the enjoyment of playing them, not as a fucking investment!

    And 'the excuses are'? What the hell are you on about? Who's making excuses? Pretty much everyone on here has either an early generation PS3, or a PS3 and a PS2. We're just about coping, thanks. The point is that I have half a dozen things connected to the TV, I'm running out of space, and being able to remove one of them would be a handy feature.

    Having one box that does two things is superior to having two boxes that do one thing each.

    To take this to its logical conclusion: If you could have one wonder-box that played every kind of media under the sun, you're honestly saying you can't see how that would be preferable to having six different boxes?

  • crickson #97 3 years ago

    I'm really pleased to see so many people arguing for the return of BC, I used to think I was alone in mourning its loss. I hope someone at Sony is reading this:

    I often enjoyed playing PS1 games on my PS2, and I continue to enjoy both PS1 and PS2 games. The fact is that my PS1 passed away long ago. I'm on my second PS2 but it won't live forever and eventually finding replacements in good condition will be very hard. Sony, if you are listening, I would like a BC playstation3.

    I would pay more for this enhanced functionality, and rest assured I will continue to download classic games from PSN for the enjoyment of playing them on my PSP, even given the thin pickings available on the EU store. I've given you a ton of money since you launched the PS1, it really is in your interests to cater to people like me.
    Edited by 1 at 19/08/09 @ 17:24

  • max3233 #98 3 years ago

    Backwards Compatibility: I think Sony are stupid and know that most gamers and owners of ps2 and ps3 machines want the b.c. when he says that playstation consumers dont want to play ps2 titles on ps3 hes lying thru his teeth. they just want us to buy £50.00 expensive new ps3 titles so we wont hang onto our older ps2 games.

    I think every gamer should form and join an official petition worldwide website and let sony know our true feelings on this issue.
    I for one would pay 500, 1000 if neccesary for backwards compatibility in a ps3 machine that plays ps1/ps2 titles and is able to upscale the graphics a bit. there are over 15,000 ps2 titles that we all still love or have not experienced yet, so its good to play the old with the new.
    sony should know that in this modern generation we prefer just one box under the tv.

  • Wildsleven #99 3 years ago

    a lot of us ps3 owners still play ps2 games!!! if only ps3 had bc i wouldn't need to hook up 999999 consoles below my TV ....

  • aihyah #100 3 years ago

    "
    It is not impossible to do fully software emulated BC but I doubt it's as easy or as cheap as people claim. at the end of the day, sony are a company and companies want to minimise costs and maximise profits. One can only assume that the cost/benefit analysis of putting BC back in wasn't looking too hot and even pleasing the vocal group can't justify it in the eyes of the execs."

    I doubt it, remember how "powerful" the cell is supposed to be?;) they have no economic incentive to work on software emulation. they have every incentive to continue to drive ps2 sales. its a move that speaks of a motive of pure greed. they give the consumer less for their money. if the consumer bends over and takes it, they can continue. and so far, it seems the sheep say yes, do me please.

  • bad09 #101 3 years ago

    Reading through these posts this morning it saddens me what us gamers have become, it's no wonder we are getting ripped left right and centre. I honestly cannot believe people claiming to be gamers walk away from older games so readily. Why do people want BC? Because they want the best possible experience for the games they love and the ones they've not played yet. A PC CAN BLOODY DO IT FFS!!!!!!!

    I'm leaving my job next week (no tears please it was only temporary) and at first taking a much needed break to chill, rest and play some catch up on games \o/

    I have to play/finish/replay on PS1/2:

    MGS 2: Substance and MGS 3: Subsistance
    The Getaway and The Getaway Black Monday
    Hitman 2 and Contracts
    RE: CV
    G-Police
    FFVII
    Robocod
    Driver

    With more on my swapgame list.
    Yakuza games
    Path Of Neo
    Ico
    SOTC
    Okami
    The God Of Wars
    Clock Tower 3
    Silent Hill Collection

    My PS3 has....Ghostbusters and movies (at least my PSN account will get used in November). I'm gagging to give them PS2 money but only if:

    1. I can do it all in one box, a "home of the playstion brand" of sorts
    2. Nick the best idea MS had on B/C (Originals) and take it SERIOUSLY

    I'll gladly pay out to you rather than mr 2nd hand for PS2 (FYI Sony you might get more Multiplatform PS3 from me as well if I'm using one box....)

    Oh and saw this one from The Bodybuilder

    "And no BC certainly hasn't hurt the 360. "

    No it hasn't because the 360 is pretty much B/C. Sure they Pete lied about ALL games (git!) but the list is big and most of the best are covered. The original games look lovely on 360 to. Hell if they actually took the originals idea seriously I would of spent a fortune with MS.
    Edited by 2 at 20/08/09 @ 08:02

  • Bulbatron #102 3 years ago

    The slim PS3 looks nice, but if they are not including backwards compatibility with PS1 and PS2, then they can forget it. The reason I didn't get one at launch, was because of the way Sony seemed to keep changing their mind about what they were doing - such as not including vibration in their controllers. Also, the game choice at the time seemed rather limited compared to the Xbox 360s selection.

    And I was at one point convinced I would get a PS3, having already owned the first two PlayStation consoles. But bit by bit this gen, Sony have put me right off getting a PlayStation 3.

    And no, why should I buy a second hand launch unit, just to get a feature which should have been in all of them.