View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
garymatic Basic Member
Joined: 12 Mar 2009 Location: California, doggy! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
8ftmetalhead Trick Member
Joined: 29 Oct 2008 Location: Auckland, New Zealand |
1. Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dance_Dance_Revolution_(2009_video_games)
PS2, 360 and PS3.
This might be the last PS2 release, but the PS2 is still hugely popular due to the astonishing failure of the PS3. (I won't get into a debate here, but it does, IMO. Backwards compatibility is one hell of a sell for me)
And we can't forget the 360 releases. Or the Wii.
And failing all else.... Stepmania's still gud.[/url] _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
HumanBeing Trick Member
Joined: 24 Mar 2007
|
2. Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PS2 has been out for a long while now. I'm actually somewhat surprised they're still making new games for it, although it is on the tail end of being phased out.
Console systems come and go. You can't expect whichever console you have to stick around forever and still have new stuff always developed for it.
I agree with the backwards compatibility notion. That is important. One of the biggest problems with games such as DDR is in their specialized controllers (game dance pads in the case of DDR) when, even if back compatibility is offered, usually it extends to games only and not peripherals.
In short, yes, if you want to continue playing new releases, at some point you'll have to buy new console(s) and new peripheral(s) along with the new game(s). _________________
I'm a human being! :-O |
|
Back to top |
|
|
8ftmetalhead Trick Member
Joined: 29 Oct 2008 Location: Auckland, New Zealand |
3. Posted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
I love the idea of being able to play my old favourites on one good console, even if it means buying a bit of hardware (like a converter or adapter or whatever)
I like the PS2 because it lets me play my old ps1 games. And dvd's. And Cd's.
I like my xbox 360, because while it's not entirely backwards compatible, at least it is for the most part. I can play every one of my games (to my knowledge) with a small update from the internet, which (if necessary) I can download to a USB stick.
I hate the ps3 because it means I'd have to have another big clunky console around, and another set of inputs on my TV, another set of wires, another power plug, another headache. I don't have any room as it is, and while it may look slick and chic, the ps2 that I'd have to keep right next to isn't, so it'd just ruin the look.
Not making the PS3 fully backwards compatible was one of the biggest failures for sony I think. I mean why trade in your console that's lasted for years and has a library of thousands of games for one with about 10 release titles, and won't play your old ones?
It certainly put me off buying it at the time of release. That, and the $1400 price tag. Seriously, it did cost that much over here. And the price on the games. ($130 for a short lived FPS? not likely.)
Anyway, /rant from me for now. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
HumanBeing Trick Member
Joined: 24 Mar 2007
|
4. Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, some of the PS3s do have backwards compat with the PS2s. As far as I know they look absolutely identical to the ones which don't though, lol. Also lol at this inconsistency.
They had the right idea to make it backwards compat with the PS2, even implemented it, then I guess decided to remove that feature to shave production costs or something. The problem is this creates a lot of confusion, especially later on when someone's buying a used PS3.
I don't know if it was feasible for them to sell the PS3 at reasonable cost without removing the backwards compat hardware/firmware or not. For whatever reasons, it may not have been (there are certain expenses inherent in production of physical goods varying on what exactly is being produced) and if that's the case, there wasn't really a good option.
On the other hand, if they were just being greedy and could have easily lowered the price while retaining the back compat stuff down to a reasonable price point to still make profit, there's no one to blame but Sony. Since I don't have any insider information I don't know which of these it is. _________________
I'm a human being! :-O |
|
Back to top |
|
|
8ftmetalhead Trick Member
Joined: 29 Oct 2008 Location: Auckland, New Zealand |
5. Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Despite the high price of the console when it first came out, they still made a rather large loss on a console by console basis.
The same held true for the xbox 360, but then as manufacturing processes grow more efficient and a console picks up speed, the companies are able to make money from games while they wait for the consoles themselves to become profitable.
With the PS3, they took the whole idea too far though, so they had to cut it back, and quickly at that.
Hence the removal of the ps2's hardware, some of the usb ports, and other downgrades.
If they had made the slim console backwards compatible though, it would be selling a lot better than I've heard it is.
I suppose the plus about having next gen consoles use DDR is that they'll be able to recieve patches for their issues, but then that simply encourages lower levels of QC'ing.
But then that's kinda made up for by the addition of DLC too.
Oh and returning to the original post (since we've digressed a bit, haha)
I don't believe the next installment will cost $300, it would cost a maximum of around $200. Considering, for example, that DDR universe 2 is $140 on sale over here (NZD) a ps3 title shouldn't cost anything more due to them being the exact same game just on slightly different consoles. _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|