Im sure anyone can play SF 2 on any platform these days...however it only counts if it was licensed...
Someone at capcom thought it was worth giving the license to Brazilians and releasing SF2 on sega master system...winner!

Ok, let's throw the retro gauntlet down. For those who doubt me, I do give you. Doom on the Intellivision!

http://spatula-city.org/~im14u2c/intv/doom/

Need to get this preemptive strike in before there is doubt.

I DARE anyone to one up this! This BLOWS away Street Fighter II on the C64.

And NO, Grand Theft Auto for the Intellivision doesn't count.  It is NOT A REAL GAME!

ZenfoldorVGI said: mike_intellivision said: The PS3 is bleeding edge. Most people are hesitant to be cutting edge.   "bleeding edge" is an actual term...but the PS3 ain't it. Referring to the PS3 as "bleeding edge" with a straight face is only possible in a thread that plays up the fact that the PS3 was "ahead of its time" when it was launched. The sony invisible clear paper TV is bleeding edge. Blu-Ray and The Cell are not.

for the time they were released (crappy dual pentiums, and HD DVD)

they were for 2009 not so much but still great.

 

*goes back watching movies in 1080p *

 

disolitude said: Im sure anyone can play SF 2 on any platform these days...however it only counts if it was licensed... Someone at capcom thought it was worth giving the license to Brazilians and releasing SF2 on sega master system...winner!

 

But it's so much fun posting videogs like that...

for example.

With graphics more apealing then the PS1 version no less!

 

"As for the ten-year plan? They had better start selling more systems, and find a way to drop that price if they hope to tap into the casual and lower-cost market that the PS2 has served so well in the twilight of its life."

Actually dropping the development costs and having a few years of profit from the system would serve that better.

mike_intellivision said: The PS3 is bleeding edge. Most people are hesitant to be cutting edge. That's the problem of being out too far in front. Usually you (the business) falls off. That might be what Sony is experiencing -- too much + too soon --> too bad. Mike from Morgantown

yeah back in 2006... we have video cards that do over a teraflop now and that GPU is old school... 2005 tech.

 

The quote you posted c0rd shows the difference between Sony and Nintendo. Sony try and force everything. The PS3 will be on shelves in 10 years! Whereas Nintendo simply go with what makes business sense, if it's selling in 10years it will still be there.

It's nice to see an article that points out how stupid Sony's 10year plan is. If after 5 years the console starts selling awfully you better believe it will be dropped. But even if they did continue to put it on shelves there would be no 3rd party games so what would be the point? The popularity of a system dictates it's lifetime. Not how long the company is willing to produce it.

Oh and ssj12 Sony's 10year plan could also include releasing the PS4 in 6years. They just keep the PS3 there. They constantly talk about how the PS3 will have this 10year cycle too but the PS3 released far before the PS2 got to 10 years.

The funny thing is the PS2 got support because it was so popular but once the PS3 was out it was basically just 3rd parties supporting it. How many PS2 games have SCE developed since the PS3 was released compared to the amount of PS3 games? There were 5 PS2 games in 2007 versus 14 for the PS3. In 2008 there were just 3 PS2 games and there is just 1 announced for 09. So in terms of Sony's support even the mighty PS2 isn't going to reach 10years.

So 3rd party support is there because it's popular, which isn't the case for the PS3. Even with the incredibly popular PS2 Sony didn't support the system for 10years. People always say how Sony kept the PS2 going but they basically stopped supporting it at the end of 2007 (I don't think 3 games in 2008 counts as support, especially when 2 were PSP ports). The 3rd parties kept supporting the PS2.

Sony themselves only supported the popular PS2 for 7 years (2000-2007). We are meant to believe they will support the PS3 for 10 when it is far far less popular? I very much doubt it. They will support it for as long as it is profitable, the market decides how long that is.

Depends. If you have a platform that is essentially frozen in time and is intended to last a long time it makes sense to make it as future proof as you can. I would expect that all the software in the PS3 make a great base for media centers. The PSX was a failure but a PS3X would be an amazing thing. A PS3 with DVB-C tuner and video recorder would be everything you need below your TV. Additions like the excellent image viewer they just added with 2.6 would make sense there as well. Now they only need to get the components cheaper faster.
Regarding games: The longer the platform is valid the better. It takes years until games come up to speed (you just have to look at the terrible software lineup during the first year of PS3 and 360) and developers have it much easier as well because they can reuse their tools, engine etc. the second and third time they develop for a system.

Besides the differences between PS3 and 360 are small. Both have multicore processors, both have comparable GPUs, both have a PC like hardware stack. The only difference in "future proofing" was that the PS3 sells everything together and the 360 is willing to be sold as a base version with add-on capability and nickels and dimes you for everything else from online to WLAN. Oh and Microsoft has more money and is willing to cut the price harder.

"Keep in mind it was also said that backwards compatibility was important to the PlayStation line of products, and that rumble was a last-generation feature. If it's in Sony's best interests to dump the PS3, the company will do so without a moment's hesitation, and to hell with whatever they've said in the past."

Good point

@Kyros: Oh please. The most "future proof" system in the current gen seems to be Wii. Besides, if Sony releases PS3 with more multimedia capabilities, how does it make the current PS3 "future proof"? The current customers wouldn't benefit anything from these new features that would make PS3 "future proof". They would just fuck up 20M PS fans, who thought the system was "future proof".