Earlier today the announcement was made: Sony has officially released a PS3 for €399! Reason to celebrate? Not if you've viewed message boards across the net. The reason for the uproar despite what should seemingly be a good thing? To deliver the PS3 at this price, Sony had to omit a few things. One of those things was the PS2 backwards compatibility. Yes, you read correctly: On this new model of the PS3, you will not be able to play PS2 games.
I decided to go against the grain and really look into this an determine if it's really as bad as it's being made out to be or if it's just more fuel into the fire of the already burning anti-sony perception that's out there.
The 60 gig model starter pack in europe also received a price drop to €499 and comes bundled with 2 sixaxis controllers and 2 first party titles while supplies. Now in europe, that's great value for €.
Before I dive into the BC issue, the new PS3 comes with a 40 gig HDD, 2 usb ports and sans the card readers found on the 60 gig model, and of course, no PS2 BC, though it is capable of playing PS1 titles.
So now we have established two price points at €100 difference. As a disclaimer: I really feel it's a shame that the new PS3 was not able to have PS2 BC, and it would have been far easier to write an article on how this was a bad move. Instead I challenged myself to go against my initial reaction and look deeper into this decision made by Sony.
Based on the 2 skus, the new low-end model is Sony's attempt to carve out a slice of the holiday pie for itself by appealing more to the masses at a friendlier price point, but is the ommission of the PS2 BC worth it? When one considers the amount of PS2's already in consumers living rooms, really the BC is not as big of a blow as initially perceived. The PS2 was the #1 selling console last gen and of all time, Sony knows this and probably banked on that factor when they made the decision to drop the BC from the low-end PS3. According to President of SCEE, David Reeves, there was an extensive amount of research done before making the decision.
Is missing BC a bad thing? Of course it is, removing features is rarely a good thing unless the trade-off is worth it. So the question of the hour is: Is it worth it?
When factoring that the majority of the market already has the PS2 and coupled with the reality that as times goes on, only a niche crowd will take advantage of the feature at length, I have to say it's a bittersweet deal from sony. Initial reactions will of course be bitter, especially as the PS3's library is still in its infancy, some planned on using their PS3's to play PS2 games to tide them over. Also, there's the small crowd that would have liked to trade in their PS2 to get a little extra € off their PS3 purchase and still be able to play their PS2 titles.
It must have been a tough decision for Sony, but in the grand scheme of things they needed a PS3 model that was priced competitively with their competition this holiday season. The XboX 360 was heavily criticised for its lacking XboX BC, but that was due largely to the fact that a lot of 360 owners never owned the original XboX. That's not the case with the PS2 as it was owned by the majority.
In closing I personally would take the €499 bundle while they're available, but for the masses, the new 40 gig model should not be overlooked as it still provides a solid PS3 experience and is a great alternative for those looking to get into the PS3's upcoming titles this winter at a reduced cost.
Agree/ Disagree? If so, feel free to email us at mail@gamersperspective.com or join us on our forums.
By Manimal Forever Contributing Writer Gamer's Perspective
|
