A topic on the ps 2 about games and the ps2 future.

silversun 4 Feb 2011 19:33:07 149 posts
Seen 3 weeks ago
Registered 3 years ago

I recently saw on the web a story about how the ps 2 is still selling millions in its 11 th year, so i just wondering really if more games companys should make new games for ps 2.

Just checking europe launch line up and can only see a ben 10 game comming out soon and it mainly ea and sports title that still get a release.

With many saying the cost of games is going up and they wont take a risk with different types of games surely the ps 2 is the perfect place to try and take a risk with a game and sell at a lower price so can get more people to buy it.

Also games like crisis core or god of war psp that where on psp would be perfect to port over to ps 2 and there is still a huge install base of people that have ps2 consoles, some are probley new buying catching up on last gen and the amazing line up of games the ps 2 had.

Another place that companys could take a risk on a game is the pc.

Sure put out that games you know will do well on ps 3 like uncharted and halos on xbox 360, but maybe it not such a great idea what i suggested but id love to know why not.

i still play games on ps 2 while also playing newer games and dont see my line up of ps 2 titles finishing intill midway through next year.

whatever people think on this i just want say what an amazing console the ps 2 is and what its done for games is amazing really , games may be changing but i wont forget the ps 2.

Log in or register to reply

Cappy 4 Feb 2011 20:01:36 11,130 posts
Seen 1 hour ago
Registered 7 years ago

Publishers abandoned the PS2 a little too early perhaps, they actually acknowledged their error dumping the PS1 too soon, then they went ahead and repeated the same mistake.

Sony could have done more though, I remember some waffle from one of their execs about 'opening up the platform' i.e. limited homebrew, nothing ever came of that.

They could have introduced much lower license fees to try and get independent developers onboard, keeping publishers like 505 Games and Atlus USA interested, they could have got a few years of low budget localisations and 'classics' reprints out of the PS2.

Another overlooked possibility would have been to introduce PS2 discs that work worldwide and don't trigger the region lock, allowing publishers to sell to a niche audience spread across the globe with one release.

The PS2 could have occupied a new market position much like the Dreamcast does in Japan. But Sony did nothing, at this point it's too late, the PS2 is too far gone.

Log in or register to reply

RipperSU 10 Apr 2011 02:14:46 1 posts
Seen 1 year ago
Registered 4 years ago

Although I disagree with it, it seems like the general consensus is that God of War II was the last big AAA title that was actively marketed by SCE. I remember at the time even critics were using the phrase 'swansong' a hell of a lot. Alas, even that sold quite a bit less than the first game due to coming out in 2007.

Not that there isn't a market for the PS2 still. More than likely the same thing that happened to the PSX and 16-bit consoles will occur, where it will enjoy very nice sales in places such as South America, (seriously- the Megadrive is still one of the best selling consoles out there). That said, the sales figures for last year were incredible considering it's a 10 year old console with pretty poor support from publishers.

Still, I've still got a few PS2 games I still look forward to playing through for the first time and plenty more that I love to revisit.

Log in or register to reply

silversun 10 Apr 2011 17:31:09 149 posts
Seen 3 weeks ago
Registered 3 years ago

Im still enjoying the ps 2 even though i have current gen consoles and talk of maybe eairly ps 4 and new xbox , i probley still be playing on ps 2 then.
If the ps 4 does not have full ps 2 and 3 bc then i wont be buying it.
Atm enjoying the ps 2 classic valkyrie profile 2 , on 2nd chapter looks like game might be good so far.

Log in or register to reply

lucky_jim 10 Apr 2011 17:54:23 4,925 posts
Seen 25 minutes ago
Registered 11 years ago

I think the tail-end of the PS2 (in terms of new games) would have been longer if all PS3 models were backward-compatible with it.

Log in or register to reply

redcrayon 10 Apr 2011 19:11:26 4,340 posts
Seen 23 minutes ago
Registered 4 years ago

I still don't understand why they actively removed BC. It doesn't bother me now that the PS3 has a games library, but it certainly stopped me upgrading when I only had limited space under the telly and a huge pile of PS2 games to get through, some of the tail-end PS2 games looked better than the PS3 launch games.

Can anyone imagine the next set of home consoles not being BC? I suppose the big problem is the Wii- the next Nintendo console will have to keep some kind of wiimote/nunchuck support, and seeing as they are the company that has changed their controllers the most over the years, it'll be interesting to see what they do.

Log in or register to reply

morriss 10 Apr 2011 19:26:49 69,617 posts
Seen 26 minutes ago
Registered 9 years ago

They removed it because it cost too much to implement.

Log in or register to reply

redcrayon 10 Apr 2011 19:36:14 4,340 posts
Seen 23 minutes ago
Registered 4 years ago

Then why put it in to start with? Just as an incentive to early adopters?

Log in or register to reply

RobTheBuilder 10 Apr 2011 20:14:09 6,446 posts
Seen 1 minute ago
Registered 9 years ago

Funny how I remember the Megadrive and Master System living alongside each other for a fair few years. Can you imagine Sony putting out Motorstorm on PS2 in the way Sonic appeared on Master System despite the MD being out for 2/3 years.

Considering how easy it would be to port PSP games, the lack of cheap PS2 releases is still surprising.

Log in or register to reply

Obiwanshinobi 10 Apr 2011 21:20:33 866 posts
Seen 3 weeks ago
Registered 5 years ago

RobTheBuilder wrote:
Can you imagine Sony putting out Motorstorm on PS2 in the way Sonic appeared on Master System despite the MD being out for 2/3 years.

As a matter of fact, MotorStorm: Arctic Edge came out in 2009 for the PS2 and PSP. Same with Jak and Daxter: The Lost Frontier.

Log in or register to reply

RobTheBuilder 10 Apr 2011 21:26:50 6,446 posts
Seen 1 minute ago
Registered 9 years ago

Obiwanshinobi wrote:
RobTheBuilder wrote:
Can you imagine Sony putting out Motorstorm on PS2 in the way Sonic appeared on Master System despite the MD being out for 2/3 years.
As a matter of fact, MotorStorm: Arctic Edge came out in 2009 for the PS2 and PSP. Same with Jak and Daxter: The Lost Frontier.

Well that's me told...!

I think my point is still valid though, I don't think there are that many, perhaps it's more relevant with Microsoft.

Log in or register to reply

Deleted user 10 April 2011 23:46:34

morriss wrote:
They removed it because it cost too much to implement.

Thats a complete lie. In a interview Sony said it wasn't because of costs it was for to encourage PS3 sales.

google it.

Kind of a slap in the face they keep PS1 backwards compatibility but remove PS2 backwards compatibility. Were is the logic in that ?

Log in or register to reply

Retroid Moderator 11 Apr 2011 01:26:21 44,240 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 10 years ago

TheDriffter wrote:
morriss wrote:
They removed it because it cost too much to implement.
Thats a complete lie. In a interview Sony said it wasn't because of costs it was for to encourage PS3 sales.

google it.

Interesting fact: just because they said it doesn't make it true.

They also said there was no way for rumble to work in Sixaxis controllers, when all along it was because they were dragging their heals over a patent dispute. They eventually paid up and lo and behold, the DS3 was born!

US & Jap launch PS3s had the PS2 CPU & CPU.

Euro launch PS3s had the PS2 GPU with the CPU emulated in software. Hence the lower compatibility.

Stripping all those chips out saved them cash, a few dollars per console. That is a matter of record. Sony were losing money on every PS3 sold because they cost so much to make.

Kind of a slap in the face they keep PS1 backwards compatibility but remove PS2 backwards compatibility. Were is the logic in that ?

The logic is: PS1 backwards compatibility is entirely in software. PS2 would still have required legacy hardware.

Log in or register to reply

Deleted user 11 April 2011 22:29:00

@Retroid - Well they admitted it and I'm sure its true. PS3 is the only console this gen that doesn't have backwards compatibility.

Oh and there isn't any logic to have PS1 backwards compatibility but not PS2 BC.

By keeping PS1 but not PS2 BC it makes Sony look bad.

Even if PS1 BC didn't cost alot they might as well have removed that as well. No point having 1 but not the other.

Log in or register to reply

ronuds 11 Apr 2011 22:32:52 20,942 posts
Seen 30 seconds ago
Registered 7 years ago

Dolla, dolla billz, ya'll.

Log in or register to reply

BAM! 11 Apr 2011 23:23:07 26 posts
Seen 22 minutes ago
Registered 4 years ago

TheDriffter is right, PS2 BC was bad for both PS2 hardware sales and PS3 software sales, and they were the main sources of income for SCE at a time when they were really taking a financial pasting. The cost of the chips was obviously also a factor but a fairly minor one in the grand scheme of things.