Sony Reveals PS3 Slim, Drops PS3 Prices to $299

[Geoffrey42]

Actually, last time I checked, the Slim has no BC at all, not even the PS BC in the previous versions. Which makes me a sad panda.

I have read nothing indicating that PS1 BC has been dropped. The only officially dropped feature from the latest model of Phat to Slim is the Alternative OS/Linux support. Unless I've missed something. Which I don't believe I have.

 

[Pendragon9]

If they actually do manage to patch in BC after this price drop, I better not hear a single complaint. It honestly seems like they're listening to the fans now. If we're lucky, they'll fire their advertising dept next.

 

[Pendragon9]

gee i already got a ps3 and like its fat bro its fugly as for no bc thats ok , i have a ps2 for that , hey sony weres the color ? black is still a dust magnet , does it still have card slots and a web browser? being wireless is nice but not necessary

Read the article, the Slim will have the SAME features as the Fat. That means you can swap out the Hard-Drive (Ports on the front) and access the net wirelessly

Actually, last time I checked, the Slim has no BC at all, not even the PS BC in the previous versions. Which makes me a sad panda.

The lack of BC is all that holds me back now: the price is right, there are actually games out now, it's just the lack of BC that holds me back.

I call BS on this. What are your sources? And how will you play PS1/PSN games without it?

 

[scotth266]

Thats... nice? I didn't mention BC at all, simply that the same features his fat has his slim will have.

I consider backwards compatibility to be a feature. But it doesn't matter, because...

I have read nothing indicating that PS1 BC has been dropped. The only officially dropped feature from the latest model of Phat to Slim is the Alternative OS/Linux support. Unless I've missed something. Which I don't believe I have.

I call BS on this. What are your sources? And how will you play PS1/PSN games without it?

The news site that I got the information from goofed up. They've since edited the article to clarify that there will still be PS1 compatibility in the PS3 Slim. I was wondering why they had said they would cut that...

There's no reason to get so hostile Pendragon. OMNI has been acting nicer than you have in his thread, and he's the one who tends to get frustrated the most when the PS3 nay-sayers start talking (no offense Omni, you just tend to get a little worked up is all.)

 

[Cowabungaa]

Apperantly it doesn't come with an HDMI cable, but I wonder, will a standard PS3 HDMI cable work as well? As in, the connectors are the same as the regular PS3.

Sorry for being such a hardware noob, but beter be safe than sorry, right?

 

[Pendragon9]

There's no reason to get so hostile Pendragon.

Well, i didn't mean anything, but I wanted to make sure people weren't spouting claims randomly. I've seen it in a thousand threads. This is why i check multiple sites when one says something. You never know.

 

[Miles Tormani]

The reality is, it does "not". Is it passable? Sure. Maybe even your suggestion that the problem exists because users are playing on HDTV's when you are not has merit. But that is not what you stated. You said that PS2 games "look" and run "better" on bc ps3. You did not say "Some" or "many", which would lead people to assume you meant "ALL". You also state that it runs perfectly smooth on the PS3, which I can attest it does NOT. Since you made that statement as fact and truth, when it is not, that is called a "lie". Why would you lie for Sony? The only reasons to do so are that you

A. work for Sony
or
B. are willing to make excuses for Sony because of brand loyalty which = Fanboy.

Sorry, but I call a spade a spade mate.

It does on mine. Believe it or not, there are different versions of the PS3, and apparently either you never checked after the patch (making you the ignorant one) or your PS3 still doesn't work right, which isn't exactly my fault. Unless you want to come over here and see it for yourself, you'll just have to take my word for it, won't you?

As for the HDTV remark, god fucking forbid a 480i game doesn't look right in 1080p. Upscaling isn't always perfect, especially between systems.

And yet you never said they did not. You either purposely neglected to clarify that or you were so busy ranting that you were oblivious to it, or simply you refuse to acknowledge that the playstation 3 has flaws that might be legitimate concerns to people trying to decide if they wish to purchase one or not. I'm not entirely certain which it was.

I never said it because I figured that most people (not all, apparently) would be able to tell the difference between most and all. I did say that no copy of Guilty Gear works on the 80GB PS3 that came bundled with MGS4, didn't I?

That would be relevant if we were talking about PSX backwards compatibility, but we were not or if we were talking about buying PS2 systems, which we are also not. What we are talking about is purchasing a system that should be rendering it's older counterpart obsolete and instead in the infinite wisdom of Sony has decided to place itself in direct COMPETITION with its older brother. The Playstation one and it's games are old enough that in all honesty most people could care less about the PS3's ability to play those games which would look awful by today's standards no matter how well the backwards compatibility worked. What people are concerned with is that the games they own and play on their PS2 systems which are still going strong, even moreso than the PS3, and why they should be arsed to part with $300 bucks in order to buy the newer system when the OLDER system is still kicking ass and taking names, has a relevant modern library of games that are in some ways BETTER than anything currently on the PS3 especially in the RPG arena, and whether or not it's worth the trouble.

If customers only care about the old system and don't give a shit about the new games (see: 90% of value of PS3 "killed" by lack of BC), they're not going to buy a PS3, are they? My guess is that Sony figured quite a few people already have PS2s, and aren't willing to part with them just yet. Another thing to keep in mind: the new, non backward compatible PS3s, purchased in addition to any PS2, is cheaper than buying the PS3s that had backward compatibility that, as you oh so tactfully claim, is a load of ass.

So everyone bitches about the backward compatibility in the PS3 being shit, and the price being too high, before and after the patch. Now Sony cuts out the backward compatibility and drops the price so that it'd be easier to get both the PS2 and PS3, and what happens? People ***** about that. Haters must find any reason they can to ***** it seems.

Because some people (surprise) don't want to have the most advanced console of all time sitting next to the "single most successful console of all time" of the LAST generation. These days less is more, waste is space, bro. Why have a dozen components stacked like some sort of trophy case on my entertainment system, taking up space and having to buy hubs and god knows what else in order to connect all of these things to my entertainment system? If I can eliminate a spot on the shelf, then by all means I'd rather do that. If a PS3 can do what my PS2 can do then I no longer need to have my PS2 sitting up there collecting dust. Just as I stated... if I have a PS3, why should I also have a dvd player and a Blu-ray Stand alone player if ONE SYSTEM can perform the function of 3?! It's like those multi printer/fax/copiers/scanners. I'd rather have one do-it-all machine than ten 'cheaper' machines sitting around with various degrees of quality.

Backward compatible PS3. They still exist. They're still being sold at GameStop. Something I've said.

You'd be surprised how important BC is to some gamers.
For example, I'm the type of guy that never sells his games or trades them. Why? Because I like to go back and play them again... good games are like good books.. every few years you can go back and play them and they are like new again. You mentioned Disgaea... I know it's available for the PSP now and such, but I still OWN the original disgaea. And every couple of years I go back and play it again. Why? Because I love it.
But if I were to do things your way, I'd have to go dig out my PS2 every time I wanted to do that. No thanks. The PS2 is old-hat my friend and I'm all about improving my technology. I'm not going to keep a bunch of old computers around my house on the off chance I want to go relive the joy of Diablo. No, I trust that as I upgrade my computer, I can replace the old with the new and toss those ancient parts out and STILL will be able to play those old fun games without having to hook up some archaic system to do so.
So it IS important to players, and as someone who apparently appreciates many awesome PS2 games like GUilty Gear and Odin Sphere, I would think you'd completely understand why it is so important to so many people.

Don't get me wrong. I do understand why it's important for many people. Not being able to play Guilty Gear is nothing short of an aggravation. However, as I already said, when the person in question doesn't give two shits about any of the new features the PS3 offers, and claims that the main value (see again: 90% of the system's value) is solely within the backward compatibility, said person in question may as well not bother.

Instant defensiveness is often a sign of guilt. So is denial.
Just because you like an Xbox game or two doesn't absolve you from being a fanboy if you rail on and on making fanboy-like comments. But you don't have to prove anything to anyone, least of all me. You like what you like, I'm not condemning you for it. I'm just saying you shouldnt be so quick to condemn others for liking what they like.

Which, again, is why I spend just as much time with my Xbox as I do with my PS3. It's also why "a game or two" equals half of my collection. I have both systems because exclusives on both appeal to me.

Again, do I have to fucking spell this out on a goddamn chalkboard?

Person in question likes playing his PS2 games. Person in question does not like PS3 games. Person in question therefore claims the PS3's only good because of backward compatibility. I claim that he may as well not bother if that's his opinion.

Oh noes! Please, don't attack me because of my avatar! EVERYBODY knows that an avatar is a direct representative of the person with whom you are talking! My avatar is a Sonic the Hedgehog with a friggin Pirate Eye patch... I MUST be a Furry! Yes, you can instantly ascertain from my chosen avatar on a gaming forum that I MUST love dressing up in fur and rubbing myself on the furniture! Woe is me, I am outted! Let me flee in shame.
/sarcasm

And yet you call me a Sony fanboy, repeatedly, because of one fucking post that happens to have reasons for disagreeing with someone's bullshit reason for not wanting a PS3. You claim that I'm outright lying with my "BC works fine" example (one that a good majority of my peers can attest to) just because you fail to have the same experience. You're totally on the moral high ground. +2 to agility.

 

[eelel]

If I had the money I would probubly get a slim. Still my priority would be to get my own 360.

 

[scotth266]

You checked wrong. All Playstations have PS1 BC. All of them. It's only PS2 BC that's lacking from the Slims or latter versions of PS3's

You're a little late to the party. I already said in another thread that my source for that info messed up.

 

[TheBarefootBandit]

Sony really can't keep a secret. Trying to hold off a Sony announcement is like trying to cover up nudity with lace.

Kinky...