Why The PS3 Slim Has No Backwards Compatibility

ps3-slimMost of us has already figured the PS3 Slim will not be backwards compatible with the PS2 but there were many who still had their hopes up from the fact that it has been removed from later models of the Playstation 3.

For most PS3 owners, this probably wouldn’t matter but none-the-less, there are still Sony fans who would be interested in this feature. I, myself enjoy playing old games once in a while, especially if I’m trying to pick up on a new sequel that I’ve never played before but would like to enjoy the previous releases.

If having backwards compatibility is a great deal to you, here’s an explanation from SCEA’s director of marketing John Koller:

“Now that we’re at a point where we’re three years into the lifecycle of the PS3,” he told us earlier today, “there are so many PS3 disc-based games that are available that we think — and noticed this from our research — that most consumers that are purchasing the PS3 cite PS3 games as a primary [reason]”.

“And it’s not just like 50 or 60 percent. It’s well into the 80 or 90 percentile range who are purchasing it for PS3 [games]. We do know that there are next gen consumers wanting to come over the the PS3. Most of those are consumers who have not utilized their PS2 for a little while and they’re ready to jump into the PlayStation 3.”

Disappointment, one extra console to waste space and collect dust.

  • More Stories You May Like


142 Responses to “Why The PS3 Slim Has No Backwards Compatibility”
  1. Montoya says:

    Obviously being paid to promote the PS3. Normal people don't link to preorder sites.

  2. bmab says:

    and what about the ps1 retrocompatibility? do people buy the ps3 because of ps1 games?

  3. brian says:

    Well, he's probably right. Most people who buy a PS3 buy it to play PS3 games. If they were buying it to play PS2 games, they'd buy a PS2. I mean, that's obvious. Duh. Idiot.

    That doesn't mean they don't want to play BOTH. I'm seriously considering a PS3 (mostly for Blu-Ray), and I never owned a PS2. I don't understand why it wouldn't play both. It can't cost that much to add the funcionality. The only thing I can think is that they'll start selling PS2 games in their online store. Which sucks.

  4. Kyro_Kun says:

    Quote Mike: "Great info! Who really plays PS2 anymore any how?"

    I have an Xbox 360 every game coming out for the PS3 is also on 360 (aside from 'Resistance' ) what is the point of having a PS3? (note: FFXIII will be coming to 360 and the next Metal Gear solid)

    What made the PS2 such a great system as its backwards compatibility. To date it was the longest living system. Is that not proof how much backwards compatibility really means?

    I still have a PS2, with PS2 and PSx Games. A little retro gaming never hurt anyone, Its fun sometimes to go back to those old games.

    Personally I think Sony has shot themselves in the foot with this move from the start. If your going to do it, do it right and make it worth it: make it last.


  5. Charasan says:

    Let's not forget how much in sales Sony makes per year by actually selling PS2 units. Last time I checked, they were still on the shelves right next to the current gen consoles. Why add backward compatibility when you can still milk people for the older, yet cheaper, "last year's model" as it were. And there still are fairly "recent" PS2 games as well (God of War II for example) that people without backward compatible PS3s would have to buy the cheaper PS2s in order to play. Marketing is what it comes down to, not popular opinion. 😛

  6. DoctorMontalban says:

    Yet it still is compatible with PSX games? I think the lack of BC for PS2 games is mostly driven by the fact that they still sell an asston of PS2's, which must be a more profitable than building the BC back into the PS3. It's certainly not what they're saying. 90 pct forgoing PS2 games. That would be 135m out of 150m ps2 owners. Laughable.

  7. Aaron says:

    You should have bought one back in 2006 when we told you to. YOU WERE WARNED!! You doubted the power of the Ps3 and waited too long. NOW YOU GUYS HAVE TO PAY FOR IT!! People like me who got the old ps3 have Backwards Compatibility!

  8. george says:

    i play ps2 games everyday, still getting caught up with games i never beat. yes it would be fantastic to have a ps3 that handles 3 generations of video games in one box.

  9. Franklin says:

    Really Koller? We should be surprised that the primary reasons a person buys a PS3 is to play PS3 games? He is either purposely giving us irrelevant data to mislead us or just plain stupid for citing this statistic as relevant. Of course the main reason most PS3 owners buy a PS3 is for games; but that doesn’t mean that 90% of THOSE users also want backwards compatibility. If they wanted to primarily play PS2 games, they’d get a PS2.

  10. Matt says:

    Obviously, there’s 2 reasons:

    – To drive down the cost of manufacturing them
    – To drive up sales of retro games online – who needs discs anymore?

  11. stealthyg says:

    They are just scared that their PS2 was so successful that they will never be able to beat it at current prices. I have close to 30 PS2 games and some of them I still play. With prices $5-$8 in bargain bins and on ebay you can get better games than what they are producing nowadays. (SSX3, SSX Tricky, Need for speed: Undergound, Hot Pursuit 2, MGS2, Matrix games, God of War, Shadow of Collosus, Devil May Cry 1, all those RPGs, Timesplitters, RE:4, etc. etc. all awesome PS2 games) With used ps2 prices you can afford to get a game just to try it out. Its not a good deal when you pay $300 for a console, and $60 for a game, and perhaps you took a risk and bought a game you didn’t like. Is just a waste of money for extra lines on your HD set.

    The only thing PS3 has going for it is a “wow” factor. Where is GTA5 with damage and online play? You could get that from TOCA 3 on PS2. So its pretty crummy to remove a feature that was supposed to be standard from the beginning. Its pretty crummy for developers to promise games and have to wait 4 years or more to play it.

    What if I had sold my PS2 in anticipation for PS3 like I did with my gamecube when Wii came out? It just kinda sucks. I think sony hates how good the PS2 was.

  12. J says:

    Still not going to buy the thing and I won’t be buying any other sony product until its backward compatible with its predecessor already got screwed with xbox not doing that again.

  13. Steave says:

    10-20% are not buying PS3s with PS3 games in mind for the primary use? That figure seems quite high actually. When I buy an espresso machine the primary use is to make coffee, doy. Where is the data on secondary use. Where is the data on which customers would get rid of their PS1 and PS2 but still play the games and purchase new PS1 and PS2 games on the PS3. There is something wrong with the logic being applied here.

  14. Bleexnod says:

    I still drive my 1993 Ford Escort of course if I had $1,000,000 to blow I’d buy a Ferrari, but I’m poor.

  15. dishwasher says:

    Well I was one of the ones hoping that it would have back compat. Now im going to have to buy an older console off ebay.. probably paying more for back compat but it is a must have feature for me. Guess sony will not be getting my $$

  16. SadistiX says:

    when will the psp slim be out?

  17. Pat says:

    They’re obviously don’t have gamers’ best interests in mind. I’m sure the angle they take is that Sony and their current developers don’t stand to make any money from the retro gaming market (unless they’re selling downloads online). It’s second-hand dealers who collect from retro game sales, and assuming that gamers have a fixed amount to spend on gamings, backwards compatibility “takes” from Sony’s bottom line. As shitty as it is, it’s in their best interest to kill it.

    Grrr… I hate that. Perfectly good material goods being pushed into irrelevancy so that they can peddle more of what we already had, but in a NEW format (downloads).

  18. occibrm says:


  19. Kevin says:

    When my PS2 stops working I will buy buy whatever PS3 has the best backwards compatibility. If none of them do, I will buy another PS2. There are still a couple dozen PS2 games that I would still like to play. I’m in it for enjoyable games. I don’t have to have the latest and greatest. There is plenty of time for that.

  20. Qwerty says:


  21. JaxSean says:

    100% of the people who buy the PS3 buy it to either (a) play PS3 games or (b) as a Blu-Ray player. None of them buy it to play PS2 games – because it can’t.

    100% of the people who own a PS2 console and would buy / have bought a PS3 would want the PS3 to have backwards compatibility so they can get rid of the PS2 and still play any games they have.

    One of the reasons I didn’t buy a PS3 is because of the lack of backwards compatibility. (Sure, it had it initially, but at that time the price was insanity.)

    Maybe when it drop to $99, I’ll get a PS3 to replace my DVD player – unless Sony takes away the backwards capability there as well.

  22. Rokas says:

    ehh… I have PS2 and I don't really care about this one but still people who don't have PS2 should be concern about it

  23. bk says:

    I see a lot of people assuming that only the 60gb PS3 had PS2 compatibility. The real tragedy of this story is that the current compatibility comes from SOFTWARE. That's why Sony sucks. The only difference with the 60gb was it had the actual PS2 hardware on the board (and so usually worked better with PS2 games).

    The crime is that the only cost to Sony is lost revenue on PSN. It costs nothing to let the hardware play the discs with SOFTWARE they've already developed and are now removing.

    Even Microsoft is better at this top-down control-freak business model, Sony.

  24. Cloud says:

    if ps3 can support ps2 game, i will buy it at once. if not, i will not buy ps3 because ps3 don't have any super good game to make me need to buy a ps3 at once. I just bought a WII to play because MHP3. that's the true~

  25. jason says:

    Its all about the money. Thats why I try not to buy anything from them. As a leader in the DRM movment their brand represents corporate enslavement IMHO. This PS3 to PS2 BC thing is one of many things they do to milk every cent they can from their customers. With the number of PS3 sold if even 5% wanted the feature it would be the right thing to do if they really liked their customers. But they don’t like their customers, they like their customer's money and will come up with any kind sneaky business model to get as much of it as they can. If you have a problem with it don’t buy their stuff, its not important to them how much fun you can get for your money or what features you want till they loose business to someone else. Its the same way for almost any business profit is the only real motivating factor. It not like sony is some video game non-profit trying to entertain the world because its the right thing to do.

  26. Dave says:

    I don't see what people are complaining about that say the PS3 sucks because it has no backwards compatibility. Sony still manufactures and sells PS2's for like $99US, and game developers are still make games for it, mostly ports but who cares. It's still selling.

  27. me says:

    I really think this was a poor decision. I don't know how the demographic of people that actually took the time to answer their survey skewed, but just based on every day interaction with other gamers and people who spend a lot on consumer electronics I can't see that 80-90% buy primarily for ps3 games number as being true… SO many people I know who have bought the ps3 only cared about getting a 'good bang for your buck' blu-ray player and either didn't care at all about ps3 games or just saw them as a bonus. I know a lot of people who still play ps2 regularly as well and were interested in the 60gb version of the ps3 for BC. I don't know how much it would cost them to leave it in there, but if it's a software based thing I can't imagine it being so high that it wouldn't be made up by the boost in consoles and games they would experience from people who finally moved on from ps2 because of the feature… I think their reputation would get a boost from giving the gamers what they want as well. Maybe if it was never in to begin with that would be one thing, but you don't give your customers a feature and then take it away, you're supposed to BUILD on what you have! lol

  28. matt says:

    Well First off some PS2 and PS1 games would barely work on the PS3 or had problems in some sections of the games. Might have been because the PS2 or PS1 discs were two scatched up to begin with. But now that the PS3 is only $299 I think I'll be buying a PS3 with a couple good games and a cool Blu-ray movie or tv show (maybe DOCTOR WHO is that on blu-ray)? Then on top of that I'll buy a PS2 for $100 and about $200 of PS2 games. Now being a true gamer that I am and have been since I could pick up a controller way back in 1992. When I was just 4 years of age. I think that the fact that I can spend $299 for a PS2 with probably 10-15 awesome 5 star games. or I could spend $299 for a slim PS3 and no game is stupid. I mean I'm a movie buff and love great twisting storylines with brilliant acting and setting but think about it the same blu-ray movies and tv shows are on dvd and can play perfectly in a PS2. and on top of that u get all those cool games. and RPGs omg the RPG's that the PS2 was known for. Along with the warriors and everything else except for KOTOR series and Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind along with the timeless halo series. I think I'll wait another 2 or 3 years until I buy a PS3 and I'm going to buy a PS2 instead. Then in 3 years I'll have 10-15 5 star games to choose from on the PS3 and I'll be done playing all the 5 star games on the PS2! It just makes so much sense…….Either way Sony's getting my money and this is the real reason why Sony got rid of BC…..hell it probably cost them a pretty penny just getting rid of BC. They knew in the end that the PS3 game lineup was limited to a handful of 5 star games and that when people start rationalizing the situation they found out that the PS2 had so many more 5 star games than the PS3 and was $399 cheaper than it to. So Sony scrapped it knowing that in the end they'd make more money from all the people who would buy a PS2 when they realized that the PS3 wasn't compatible anymore. At least Sony is still supporting the previous console more than I can say about Microshaft. I'll say…….sometimes I wish I wouldn't have bought a dell for one thing….but that I'm not buying a PS2 or PS3 and that upgrading a PC ever 3-5 years seems like you'd save more in the end anyways. Upgrading every 3-5 years might cost you $500 but multiplayer is free, old school games are free, PS2, PS1, N64, SNES, NES, Dreamcast, Genesis. free movies, free music, internet, dvd burner, cd burner, heck buy a High definition monitor and watch 1080p blu-ray movies on it with a non-PS3 blu-ray player. Plus you get all the games except the exclusives on the PS3 with exclusive PC games and some XBOX 360 games like L4D, Gears of War, etc, etc….lastly porn all I got to say! PC the way to go. Most of the time you won't have to upgrade a PC for more than 5 years because games nowadays are being made so that people won't have to upgrade! Which is sweet. PC rules!

  29. matt says:

    I know right the reason why more people play the PS2 than the PS3 is because there are millions more people who own a PS2 over a PS3 and that all the good PS3 games people have already beaten and went back to playing their beloved PS2 games. There's like maybe 5 good games on the PS3 in what 3 years! WTF. PS2 has like 10 times that many good games like 50 to be exact. 50! WTF. I'll be waiting even longer before I buy a PS3. But I do think that now is as good as any time to buy a PS2. What I really want is to upgrade my PC to play the upcoming Star Wars: The Old Republic! Diablo 3! Starcraft II! and most of the games for Xbox 360, PS3, PS2, Xbox. I really hate paying to play online for Xbox live but, games for windows is perfectly free which is the same service only on a PC where they know PC users won't pay for a service!

  30. John says:

    Well, of COURSE only 80-90% of PS3s are bought for PS3 games—-Because they KILLED backwards compatibility on the systems far over a year ago. You can't get one anymore with the BC…My girlfriend and I wanted it for the BC, and had to purchase a separate PS2 because of this…it would have been really nice to get one with BC, because they have a feature known as "PS Upscaling), which essentially soothes out the images to imitate HD on HDTVs…We can't use the PS2 now on the HD tv because the pixels look terrible, we use a seperate sdtv for that.

  31. Tony says:

    So much conflict, or confusion… I can't decide on waiting for the dying hope of backwards compatabilty or getting the PS3 (Slim or the 80GB, I'd rather save money from the watt usage of the slim though). It's like this, some will say, PS3 does have good games, and obvious good, or great, graphics, but the games are expensive compared to the PS2 and Wii, getting it now would mean, 3 consoles, or more, that's not convient, although Sony's removing PS2 compatabilty for price reasons, look at the economy, still it's annoying to have 1 thing made for 1 thing instead of 1 made for 2 or 3 things. Another reason of getting rid of an older console and it's games is that you're throwing away your money, my PS2 and the games I own total to about $1000, my parents money thrown in the trash, that's not what anyone wants to do, especially if it's someone else's money. There's also another reason, some games have great philosophy, like Super Mario Galaxy (believe it or not), the never ending cycle, we die, our bodies decompose and the minerals are use to feed nature, nature then grows again, it repeats over and over, some of my PS2 games have philosophy that I've found yet, and for those who understand will never want to lose a chance to find it. Plus, there are the classics, and great PS2 titles

    Then there's this, when you start playing a new (next-gen) console more, you tend to forget about your older console, this happened to me with my Wii, I forgot about my GameCube(GC)games, it was at first weird, considered that it had some great titles. So, what if I bought the PS3 and played it for a while, will I forget MGS3 in favor for MGS4, or Ratchet & Clank in favor for their Future series? I hope not, but it might be inivitable. When I mean I forget I mean like you tend to play PS3 games more than PS2, Wii than GC, Xbox 360 than Xbox. When you notice it, it feels hard to accept it, you remember it, but feel guilty you haven't played it for a while, and for some reason you don't want to play it. So to forget or to stay in the past? That's the question of gaming, but my piano teacher once said to me, "The past and present is what makes the future", so do we abandon the past and never remember or take a glimpse at it and live in the present? Or do we stay back?

    By the I do support the console war, nor do I favor any console over another, the war to me is idiocracy and true gamers in my eyes are men and women who play games whether they're hardcore or not and don't favor any console, it a game is made for that console, they'll buy it and the console to play and enjoy it, they will no say the console or the game is the best in the world and everyone should play it.

    My final words are for this very long comment is that, I'm only 13 soon to be 14 years old, please take my advice in consideration, thank you.

  32. cloud says:

    I just bought a PS3 so I could play my old shitty PS2 games.

  33. Nick says:

    Well, it was a deal breaker for me. Not a fan of companies that take features away just to make an extra buck. Who wants to have like 8 game systems set up when you know the manufacturer has the capability to make something backwards compatible….

  34. Kellan says:

    Sony isn't Sony anymore they used to know hardcore gamers and what's best for them. Now they don't know shit this lack of PS2 compatibility fucking blows way to go Sony. Distance yourself from your fans even more you numskulls.

  35. Mr puffin says:

    I love how they say there research says 80-90% buy for ps3 games when all it currently can do is play ps1+3 now I got my ps3 for ps3 games but I no longer have a ps2 beause it got stolen when we moved so I would want to be able to play my old games without haveing two consoles he'll even if they had the same ps3 for $100 more with ps2 compatibility I would go for that

    If you factor it differantly 50-60% want backwards compatibility another 20% have ps2s not careing leaving 20-30% who don't give a danm at all happy with just ps3 games

  36. sam a says:

    im 46.been playing video games since child molesters were cruising kids in arcades.when 'pong' hit the the streets,i thought "this is better than the moon landing".as the years went by i still went to arcades because even tho i had consoles at home-arcades had better games.there are some who say consoles killed arcades.i disagree.the quality of the ported games from arcades is what wounded it.better games killed it. that and the creepy people you find in arcades.time marches on and wife and kid show up and im bying consoles for my children.nintendo,sega…ive bought them all.but i still played in arcades(disney,that upside down building place)because the games seemed to play better. at the end of my arcade days my fave game was soulblade.mortal kombat was fun but blade seemed(to me) to be a better game.when it was ported to psx i went nuts.bought it the day i found out. my son already had a psx so it was all good.so when dreamcast came out and calibur was going to be on it…SOLD.

    so now i have a dreamcast,i may as well by other games for it.sports games? i suck. other fighting games? i suck. killing games? on consoles..they suck.until i played unreal(i know,pc version is better.this is not about pc's)new fave game.but of course ps2 and bad marketing killed dreamcast.then unreal came out on the xbox…SOLD. soul calibur 2 on 360…SOLD. unreal 3 on ps3…..SOLD. the wii? come on man? im a real gamer i dont what…come over to play tiger woods golf?…..SOLD.in fact now i cant imagine certain types of games on any thing but a wii like console. but in the end its always the games.ive had all the consoles except one(nes).and except for the ones i bought for my children,it was to play a particular game.and if they wanted a console and the game i wanted to play was on a diffrent one? well ive got two kids.loyalty to a console is weird to me. a game publisher? ok..i can understand that.silly..but i understand. maybe because im old and thats the reason i feel this way about this next thing but……..500 for 360/600 for ps3 seemed fair to me…..now hold on! lets consider–the game system with pong was almost 100 dollars. PONG!!!!!!!! now almost every game on any current system is five times better than PONG.these are sophisticated machines.do people really think they should be the same price as the old models? most people have to choose one,at the original price,that can get costly.at these prices for what 360 and ps3 can do its a bargain.and as a pure gaming console the wii is pretty cool.but you should shop for games,then decide on a console. one last thing. these companys need to compete.wishing a console to fail is not in your intrest. people comlpain now that there are not enough "good"games. if we go down to two or heaven forbid one console….

  37. Advent says:

    I want backwards compatibility because I would rather have 1 console on my entertainment center rather than 2. It's that simple.

  38. Dnell19 says:

    well I would like backwards compatibility, like he said, "swap magic" and not having two systems. I don't have ps2 anymore, but ps3 and some of the best turn base rpgs are on ps2 you no. I love ps2 turn base rpgs and ps3 dosen't have any yet.

    PS: Call Of Duty Rocks

  39. John says:

    When Sony first introduced their systems they touted it as a revolutionary system which would be a multimedia home entertainment device, it all sounded so grand and granted the graphics might be in their lastest consoles and even in their earlier consoles once they established their libraries and maxed out the potential of their earlier system.

    Now we have a modern counterpart which can play High Definition Blu Ray and PS3 games of which there is a small library compared to other gaming systems and big deal you play online with your small library of titles or view photos and play music but "Backwards Compatibility" has been stripped away making their entire foundation of success mute.

    Without backwards compatibility they might as well be saying "F$@# Y*%" to all the loyal consumers whom spent hard earned dollars on their titles and truly enjoyed them and whom still enjoy such works as they have become "Classic Titles".

    Having a grand system with an entirely new library is great (if a grand library of such titles existed) but having a system that is backwards compatible is even greater because it adds an unbeatable value to the system alone in terms of the huge library of titles that is accessible by it, stripping away this feature makes the system very limited and is insulting my to the average consumer base at large which they originally sought to establish.

    I've already BOYCOTTED SONY from my list and as far as i am concerned and unless they re-establish ties with consumers and their wishes by re-instating PS3 backwards compatibility they can take their PS3 and any other iterations of it and stick it where the sun doesn't shine because "WE THE PEOPLE" want a genuine multimedia experience based on fair use and i do NOT see the fairness in completely trashing a "Classic" library which made their system in the first place and which established a loyal consumer database only to have all that undone solely because they wish to pump newer perhaps cheaper systems with poorer titles that are not only easier to beat but as well by cutting around corners and loyal fans just so that hopefully they can make a huge profit when the same thing can be done while keeping the "CLASSIC's" and backwards compatibility which would earn the respect of the even the most avid consumer/gamer and all in a slimmer cost effective model.

    SONY you were once held in high regard and now only a segment of YOYO's go for your great graphics and easier to finish/beat/play titles but the greater majority across the world and the internet KNOW BETTER and you can only get away with so many new systems with stripped components, stripped features and the great compatibility divide before even more consumers decide they've had enough and give you the boot as consumers know what they want "Complete integration and compatibility" as opposed to less while you gain the ability to $$$ more.

    It doesn't need to be that way and you can turn this all around while being the greatest system ever making huge profits and maintaining a loyal database of consumers and titles while being among the select to retain the integrity and compatibility of their system.

    The original PS3 was simply made too expensive and had you produced a backwards compatible version of the slim from the get while keeping production costs down and keeping the titles coming both for older and newer titles you'd be basking in a much much larger database of cash flow and consumers which slowly but surely your destroying rather than actually rebuilding by stripping and denying those loyal what matters to them most.

    Someday i may return to you if you come to your senses but as of this moment you SUCK.

  40. james leisure says:

    I am just gonna go ahead and say that I have one of the few PS3's that let me play PS2 games, but I would like to get a PS3 with a bigger hard drive. while most people in the US might not think its a big deal to buy a used ps2 to be able to play all of their playstation games I simply do not have the room because I am in the military.

  41. GuNKa says:

    After playing a good PS3 game in HD it's hard to go back to a inferior PS2 game. I have only 1 PS2 game that I play very rarely which is poker.

    The new PS3 slim does not have the install other OS option too so no installing YellowDogLinux. All though I am new to YDL I do like it and for this reason I will keep my PS3 60gb for as long as possible.

  42. Joseph says:

    Of course 80 to 90 percent of people "… are purchasing it for PS3 [games]." Why would anyone pay $300 to play ps2 games, but alot of people want to play ps3 and ps2 games without having to have two consoles.

  43. john says:

    theyre obviously just trying to find any way possible to squeeze every penny out of us lowly consumers. The reason this guy gave has to be one of the stupidest reasons not to have BC. You tellin me this guys a director of marketing and he couldn't come up with a better line of BS than that. Time to start looking for a new line of work i think.

  44. GuNka says:

    How many games do you get through in 3-4 months???

    I personaly play a game for 6 months with no need to buy another. Buy a good ps3 game with MP and thats it for 1/2 a year or more!

  45. brian says:

    Wait, really? A month later and people are still commenting on this post?

  46. Gabe Newell says:

    *Munch* The problem with PS3 *Slurp*, is that it has no games.*Belch* Oh and I'm pushing episode 3 back another year, and guess what,*Fart* it's a Microsoft exclusive! I actually own a PS3, I use it to play Blu-Ray DVDs.

  47. SkyGuardian says:

    Ok what about this? Remake all the games for the PS3 with better graphics. For example the most popular gams for the PS1 and PS2 be remade for the PS3. that wouldn't only make a profit in itself but would also allow those who loved the older games to actually still play them. That would solve all the problems. For ne the companies would make more money doing this and not lose money and for another it would make the older gamers that loved the older gams happier. Win win situation if you ask me.

  48. Matt says:

    Maybe I don't cause I'm not one of them, but just maybe there are some of the 135,000,000 million customers who spent there hard earned money on your previous console iteration the PS2. Those people many of whom are probably in the middle class and not strapped with money were waiting and waiting until the PS3 was fairly reasonably price like at your current price of $299! Yet when you do meat there perfect price point you'd already copped out on the PS3-PS2 compatibility. Granted, they will most likely buy a PS3 slim due to the price point anyways. Wishing they could play PS2 games on there PS3 and finally pawn there system off with a few games. Many peoples PS2's are already broke or have disc read errors, those people if they want to play there huge library of PS2 game ever again have to resort to buying a PS2 again and most likely will postpone buying a PS3 until Christmas or next year some time when GOD OF WAR 3 comes around. Sony, you just can't alienate your customers like that. You have 135 million customers who purchased a PS2, why not make them happy your sales will go threw the roof if only you make these people happy enough to upgrade to a PS3 that's all it is really an upgrade. Along with the gaming population as a whole which is skyrocketing every year. Literally everyone plays videogames. Only old people don't play videogames and thats more and more becoming a false statement due to time. If you hook someone on gaming as a child they'll most likely continue until there too old to play anymore, which is like 70+ years old. Think of how big the gaming market is going to be in 20 years, instead of your general crowd of gamers 10-32 years old, 20 years from now it'll be more like your general crowd of gamers 3-70 years old. If I'd had spent hundreds of dollars already on 10+ games for the PS2 and was waiting for the PS3 to be reasonably priced, and then when it does it no longer has PS2 compatibility I'd think twice before I purchased my PS3 Slim. I guess I'd think twice about pawning off my PS2 and a few of the less desirable games. What happens though when that persons PS2 quits on them and there PS2 games are made useless. They'll have to purchase a new PS2, Even though in there minds they know that the PS3 should without a doubt play PS2 games. Nuff Said!

  49. Matt says:

    You just can't think that everyone who has a PS2 doesn't play it anymore, just because the next upgrade the PS3 has been out for what 3 years…seriously do you…….think at all! Anyways the PS3 has been out for 3 years and has some amazing games on it. Yet, There is still only a handful of games that are really good for the PS3. 10 years from now are we going to be talking about how noone plays PS3 anymore cause the PS4 is out and only losers play PS3 games, PS4 is awesome! Yes PS4 will be awesome duh, everyone knows that but that doesn't mean that they will completely quit playing a system which some spent $600 on and $60 on each game. Get Real, PS3 should have PS2 support and it used to be that way, yet Sony is being cold and evil and they hate making there established customers happy. I'm just glad I don't own a bunch of PS2 games or a PS2 for that matter. I'll be buying a PS3 slim before the end of this year/09.

  50. granny says:

    I'm a grandmother of a boy who ownes a PS2. . he has a ton of games to go with it, too. I would have upgraded him to a PS3 for Christmas but since the Ps3 will not play his PS2 games I will buy him something else for Christmas. I think Sony has lost a bunch of "granny Christmas monies" everywhere. . .