TheBigFatJ on 07 February 2008
| StarcraftManiac said: PS2's are below 100$ if you know where to look. And since this PS3 version is 100$ cheaper people shouldn't complain! Although i get where your comming from if you didn't know and the label is like .( |
Your statement doesn't make any sense. So you're saying that although they were told the PS3 would always have backward compatibility, they shouldn't complain to find that the $400 they spent doesn't include backward compatibility because they could spend about $100 getting a PS2, which is the same as the price gap between the higher end SKU?
Okay, so I realize that the difference between the two PS2 SKUs is $100. And that the PS2 can be purchased for about $100. But I don't see how that means people won't be surprised and disappointed to find no PS2 backward compatibility after spending $400 on the PS3.
it still plays ps1 games.
Yes, i meant that it doesn't support PS2 backward compatibility at all.
