"""Jesus me and Onna have said it a gazillion times!!! a) Many people don't want lots of consoles in their entertainment center and b) PS2 looks like SHIT on HDTV's and with the PS3's upscaling things would be MUCH better, also the fact that PS2's die rather easy is not helping... at all! """

==> many people will buy a PS3 and play it on classic TV because they dont have HD TV.

"""The "average gamer" buys new PS2,"""

==> are you sure ?
I would say the average gamer have bought a PS2 and is waiting to buy a new console soon.
The people that are buying PS2 now are not the average gamers.
Again, PS2 is not competing with PS3, PS2 is competing with Wii.

I think the average gamers expect more from a PS3 than just replaying PS2 games. People want new games, not old games.

many people this, many people that. I think we cal all agree that some people want BC and some people don't need it. We're all bringing together the same tired old arguments and it boils down to this:

A: "But I want BC"
B "But I don't need BC"
A "But I WANT BC"
B "But I don't NEED BC"
A "BUT I WANT BC"
B "BUT I DON'T NEED BC"

so let's just agree that some people want it and they can buy the model with BC (if it still exists when the PS3 is affordable) and some people don't want it and they can buy the cheaper one.

personally, I wouldn't buy a PS3 without it

The argument "The 40GB PS3 is cheaper than the XBox 360 Elite" is a foolish argument because they are (really) not alike at all; the 40GB PS3 is going to be seen as the "Gimped" PS3 because of its lack of backwards compatibility and will likely share a similar market segment with the XBox 360 Core/Arcade. I could be wrong but I believe that most people see the XBox 360 offerings as Core/Arcade = "Gimped" XBox 360, Premium XBox 360 = "Real" XBox 360, and Elite XBox 360 = "Pointless/Overpriced" XBox 360.

Whether or not people believe it, backwards compatibility is a huge selling feature and is (amazingly) useful at getting people to "upgrade" to your next system; if someone needs to keep a PS2 under their TV regardless of whether they buy a XBox 360, PS3 or Wii they're far more likely to choose the XBox 360 or Wii than they would be if the "Affordable" PS3 had backwards compability.

Arguing with libellule is like screaming at a brick wall. Sure it can be cathartic, but in the end it resolves nothing. The poster is unusually supporting of the brand, and thinks only of the price in regards to sales. Were Sony to strip out even more features and sell the box at three hundred dollars. This particular poster would endorse it. They are actually quite consistent. You cannot derail a one track mind.

Granted I agree it is a smart move by Sony given the situation. I do not agree it is something that is good for gamers it sets a bad precedent, and makes the system less attractive. What is interesting however is how will this affect PS2 sales. Will brand compatibility hurt game sales, or even hardware sales. Buying a PS2 this late in the cycle just gained a disadvantage. The second hand market will stagnate, and library retention could go out the window. So will consumers be less inclined to buy PS2 software, or even the hardware?

Well, to tell the truth libellule is not nearly as fanboyish as, say, a Diomedes1976 or a CrazzyMan. Unlike those posters, (s)he actually makes some fine points at times, and I think I've seen him/her criticizing Sony for some things.

Backwards compatibility is a fantastic feature. Depending on how it's set-up it can let you continentally experience a greater library of games with little to no additional effort, and gives people chances to catch things they may of missed, usually at cheap prices.

Also there’s some added benefit of playing legacy games on a newer system. The Advance SP’s backlight was just as useful for GBA games as it was for GB and GBC ones. (No more fighting over who gets to sit under the lamp) And both the 360/PS3 upscale older games.

To kill it just to hit the $400 price point seems absurd. $400 isn’t cheap, it’s still fairly expensive, especially for when you’re losing a very useful feature. Even more so when the PS2 is still a strong system, and can help offset the PS3’s currently weak library.

This will also generate more confusion amongst consumers. Four retail configurations in North America in less than a year? Two which had full backwards compatibility, one that has partial through software emulation and one that has no compatibility with PS2 games at all? Not to mention the other differences.

I was turned off when I found out you couldn’t plug in your old controllers and memory cards (two GH controllers, sister plays it all the time). I’ve got limited shelf space and I’m not giving up my PS2 anytime soon since there’s still plenty of titles I want to play on it, so if it breaks I’m more inclined to get a Slim PS2 over a PS3.

EDIT: In response to people wanting "new games, not old games" if you haven't experienced it, it's new to you. What if someone with a PS3 trys MGS4 despite having missed the previous titles in the series and wants to find out more about the story. He can't try 2 or 3 without hooking up his PS2 instead. Same can go for Silent Hill 5 or Devil May Cry 4. Neither of which are as a big a seller, and more likely have people wonder about it's previous titles.

If HD/Blu-Ray players didn't also play standard DVD's, they'd be selling far worse than they are now. And if the masses of movies that were on VHS didn't get moved to DVD, I'd still be using my VCR on a regular basis, because I love "old" movie as many of them trump everything that comes out these days.

You guys did notice this was posted by someone on the Microsoft Network? MSN.com?

@Libellule: I do agree that people buy their new consoles for new games. And personally, i think that backwards compatibility IS secondary, but consoles that i have had still work. BUT to new customers and people with broken PS2:s, it might be important. Anyway, it's still something that Sony has had advantage because of PS2:s large library.
Just like some people here have said, that the PS3 is the natural choice for PS2 owners. And why is that? It's "the Playstation legacy", what "Krazy John" was talking about. Without BC, there's no legacy for the next generation. And just like you said, the PS2 owner are waiting to buy new console soon, and without BC, they don't have any concrete reason to choose PS3 instead of 360 or Wii.

@GooseGaws: Actually it's not, they just re-release every game released so far on a compatible format. And i was just giving an example about how Sony could make cheaper PS3 and make it a better choice for gamers. The Blu-Ray is really required only for playing the Blu-Ray movies.

I agree with this statement; HD TV is not nearly as prevalent as some would like it to be. That being the case, a major selling point of the PS3 is not necessarily such.

Off topic question : Why is darthdevidem always typing in capitals? is his capslock button broke or does he has a sixth finger that automatically presses against it?