Same here. I even have a Sony clock radio, telephone, MD player and tons of other products over the ages. I have nothing against Sony in the least. Their Playstation division is just reeking of that heir of arrogance Nintendo had with the N64. They have made wrong move after wrong move where Nintendo seems to have learned their lesson from being at the bottom for ten years. Almost every move they make seems to be the right one all of a sudden.

You would think Sony would learn from history. Gamers know their history, why don't Sony execs?

Why should they? Sony is an unstoppable gaming juggernaut incapable of making even the slightest mistake!!!!!!

Of course he's not an idiot and knows what the situation is. It's spin.

That video was incredible. I have no interest in the PS3, but now I really don't have interest in it if it won't at least upscale my PS2 games like the 360.

Could you provide a link to any articles that discuss this issue--it is the first I've heard of any compatability issues and I would like to read about it more in depth.

I seriously hope Sony gets it's act together and fixes a lot of things about the PS3, notably that BC issue, because damn was that video ugly. I think this ablility to patch a console (which first started with the PSP) is kind of a dangerous thing, a double edged sword, since you can put out an unfinished product and hope for the best with a "we'll fix it eventually" mentality. I find myself constantly wanting to defend Sony, which is funny since their launch turned me off to the point of picking up a 360 and a wait-and-see attitude about the PS3. I do hope they work things out though, since I much preferred the PS2 exclusives (R&C, Jax, Sly, FF, KH, Okami) over the Xbox ones (Halo, PGR, ummmm.....). I think the PSP is a great gaming device. I'll defend it until I (or that format) dies, but the jury has spoken on that front, I guess. If they are really able to integrate the PSP into the PS3 functionality, that would be cool.
I don't fault anyone for criticising Sony; they're a bunch of arrogant pricks in suits, but I'm still hoping for some degree of success for the system. As far as the MSRP, I really don't think it's any higher than the 360, comparibly equipped so I don't understand why people harp on the price so much.

This video is fueling a lot of the discussion:

<embed width="425" height="350" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/IoCD9TwLrVs" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" ></embed>

I look at it like this: I can walk into a store and get a 360 for $400 and a $60 game and be good to go. I'd need to spend $600+$60 for a PS3.

I don't care about Blu-ray, HD size, internet play or wireless at all. I just want to get the system and a game and take it home and play it. There's a $200 price difference there.

They've also apparently not seen the online comparisons between the 360 and ps3 on the same games. Pretty much across the board the 360 graphics look better than ps3 (admittedly the differences are slight but they're pretty 1 sided).

Actually I disagree here. The 360, is IMO, technically superior to the ps3. The ps3 has one processor that is more powerful and it chooses to do everything with software. The 360 on the other hand has multiple processors with hardware dedicated to things such as scaling, etc. The end result you see is the ps3 has issues with resolution changes and backwards compatability issues that they *must* resolve using software because the hardware is not present in the system. The net result is on paper the ps3 has a more powerful processor but in reality the ps3 is significantly weaker than the 360. In my opinion what happened is the powers that be at sony set out to make an entertainment unit that oh by the way does games too and neglected the games as the priority in their design.

Since you don't care about online gaming & HD size then you wouldn't need the $600 PS3, you could just get the $500 version and it would only be $100 more.

Man, that video really puts it into perspective. I figured it was a small problem only graphic whores cared about so I didn't bother looking into it, but it is seriously bad! I just picked up Final Fantasy XII from the sale at TRU, it would suck to play it like that, but luckily I still have my nice slimline PS2. Anyway I'm not buying a PS3 for 5 years so by then there must be a fix for it.

Someone needs to post the comic from the last page of EGM. I think it sums up this thread pretty well...and it is dang funny.

That's fair, but I still cannot shake the idea that the only reason the PS3 is $600 instead of $400 is the Blu-Ray player, which I could not possibly care less about.

For me, the main question is can the different storage medium allow for greater content on the disc and therefor deeper gameplay expierence. The early PS2 games were on CD-Roms but soon they moved to DVDs which allowed for, if not better games, at least a better expiereince with more detail and dialog. Games like Kingdom Hearts or FF X wouldn't have been the same on CD Rom. I just wonder if the Blu Ray will give the PS3 some sort of advantage in the future because of the storage medium.
.

video: Wow, that's awful. Those colors and jaggies/stairstepping for the FF movie on PS3 suck.
If I were to get a PS3, I would most likely be getting the 600$--yes it's 100 more, and no I'm not hardcore interested in wireless or hdmi or HD size but my thinking would be 'for only 100$ I get this and this and this", regardless of if I would really use it.
I agree about the storage medium--bigger isn't necessarily better, and 1080i zillion color 90fps crap is still crap [not saying PS3 games are necessarily crap, but you get my point]. It doesn't matter how fancy the game looks, if it's not fun.

Sure they would have been the same. They would just have been on 3 or 4 CDs like the PS1 Final Fantasy games. The only thing a higher capacity storage medium really provides is less disc swapping.

I'm a Sony defector as well. We had a launch PS2. I have more PS2 or PS1 games than anything else. My wife was the one that bought the GC and mostly all I played on it was Zelda WW and all the party games.

But I'm not paying $500-$600 for a console. No way. I don't care how good the games are. Even if you loaded it up with all my favorite franchises - Dragon Quest, Civilization, Final Fantasy (kinda off the FF bandwagon here anyway), Devil May Cry, etc.

I don't even like the $400 pricetag for the 360. I'll bite on a 360 when there is a pricedrop. I want to play Dead Rising and Blue Dragon. And maybe play some online games, depending on how many asshats I encounter.

It feels weird to have the Nintendo system instead of Sony. But Nintendo has been doing everything right since the release of the DS. The Wii is great. I personally wish Nintendo would toss on a bit more AA on their games, but the console is priced right, with original ideas. And that counts for much more to me than shiny graphics. Add in the VC and I've been able to liquidate a few Sega systems I was keeping around for just a handful of games. Too bad there's no Sega Saturn emulation

I'll bite on the PS3 when it approaches $300-$400 somewhere. That might be years, though, considering how much money they're losing on them.

I was doing some searching on the PS3 cell specs and stumbled across an old article back in June with a cell specs pic from Sony and was wondering if Sony had improved the specs of the cells local read memory since then. If not then maybe this is causing an overtaxing of other components and is affecting the PS2 games played on the PS3.

Just wondering.

And mini-disc, and their memory sticks.....

Sony always wants to have their own proprietary products, increasing their product. What they need to recognize is that they are losing money hand over fist because of this arrogance.

Their real problem has been in that, save for the CD, they don't license their media formats well. Betamax was far superior to VHS, but, it was much more expensive to license.

Oh, and let's not forget the UMD.

Aside from development, I don't think Sony had or has much to do with the CD.

I used to think like this too, until I realized that most games will be multi-platform and therefore not take advantage of anything the blu-ray format might offer.

I don't think that's really true, since the best of the best games are almost always first or second party exclusives.

This stands to be seen.