PS3 cant play ps2 games?

Mega Man X 5 doesn't work on my PS3. Anyway, they could bring it back but the price would have to rise again. You aren't to get the premium package for a cheap price. They had BC and no one wanted the system. Sony did research and found out a lot people didn't care about BC because they already had a PS2, so they said hey since everybody has PS2 we don't need BC. We can now make the system cheaper. Are you really going to play 40 PS2 games on PS3. If you are, why don't you finish your old games before buying a PS3? True it does that they remove it but why does everyone care about playing last generation games SOOOO much? I basically finished off all my PS2 games before I got a PS3. The only reason I played some older games on it was just to see how it worked and the fact that there weren't any games out on the system really except for resistance, Ridge racer and call of duty.

If you wanted the 60GB to stay you should have bought one while they had it. It's called "the long term." The PS3 wasn't great at the start but in "the long term"it will be. I knew this and so I got one anyway. I saved up for it a year ahead of time. People are so eager to play"in the moment" that they don't think things through. The 360 was worse at launch. It had no BC at all and had games that were on Xbox 1 and PS2 and ran worse than the those systems.It had PC ports thatran like crap. It wasn't until a year afterward that the 360 actually had good games.

The same with the PS3. It started outroughbut by the end of 07 it had some cool games. Ratchet, Folklore, Uncharted, Warhawk, and Unreal Tournament 3 were awsome. Most of the good multiplat games ran = as well on PS3 as it did on 360.

Yeah you can say $600 isn't worth it, but hey who is complaining because they can't play with BC? The early adopters got the best deal. We went for "the long term" and we made out well even if it tookawhile for things to get good. We took the humiliation and knocks about paying for a "paper weight." It's not like you are losing out on some main feature like the xbox arcade owners are.PS3 owners can play 100% of thePS3 games out there while not all 360 owners can play all of the 360's games.Being cheap sometimes is a good thing but with electronicsyou usuallyend up getting shafted. That is how it is.

Then don't buy one,That leaves more copies for people that actually appreciate the system for what it doeshave.

I am sorry that I might come off as a "rich snob" but I amalso sorry that people can't pay $50 more for an overall better value system even without BC.

post the link and then I will trust what you say. Also if BC is so bad on PS3 why do you want it? You totally bomb your whole argument by saying that The BC was crap sure it needed fixing in the beginning, but 3months down the pike they fixed most problems with BC. No I am not a rich snob. I saved my money like people do when they want equipment like a luxury car or stereo or whatever. Everyone new back in 05 that the system wasn't going to be no 250-300. The cost was estimated to be about a lot more than what it came out as. Everybody promises things and then goes back on their word when it comes to business. Sony thoughtthe PS3would sell better than it did. It didn't so business had to change.

Nintendo promised that there would extra things in the virtual console games and also promised that you would be able to rent VC games but hey it never happened. Nintendo has barely supported N64 and they used come out with relatively cool games for VC in the early days. Now they are focusing more on Wiiware. It's funny how people claim the wii has 100% BC with GC but last gen people claimed that the GC sucked but yet it's a great feature to be able to play with the GC games. They also promised a storage solution that pretty much never happened. MS had huge failure rates from the start of their system. MS said that hard drives aren't needed but you look at Halo 3 and Burnout Paradise on 360? Comapnies say a lot of things, you have to grow up and get over it or get in there when it was offered. BC was offered for a year and no one did anything. No one saved up, everyone complained, hey you got your wish for a cheaper system. You can't have it all for $10 dollars. It was your own fault you didn't want to buy for the long term that is all I can say.

PS2's still cost $100 brand new, and you want to buy a PS3 with the premium bells and whistles for the price marginally stripped version of the console. You are the same people that thought the PS3 would die and go down and didn't want to have anything to do with it because you lived in the moment. I say you all got what was coming to you. You had no faith and therefore you lost out. All the early adopters had faith and won out. You don't invest early, you don't get the spoils. You don't want to put in the effort to work hard and save up then you can't complain. You made the choice not to get it early and now you have to deal with the consequences.

I don't get whats so hard to understand. Why can't people do a quick google search?

And sony most likely took away bc because either it was taking away sales from the PS2 (still in its 10 year life span) or for cost reasons

I don't have to post a link. It was(or probably still is) right on Sony's compatibility listing page. :roll: Nintendo implemented direct BC for GC games in the Wii because it was easy for them, and Sony has pretty much put the hammer down in making BC a selling point from the PS2 and onward. There were a lot of problems with the GameCube last generation, but that doesn't mean that it should be so completely ignored like Sony has effectively done for the PS2 with regard to the PS3. And 100% BC is always a good thing. :) Not to mention with as long as it took me to finally afford a ps3, it did royally piss me off to face this same situation too. While I do finally have a working 60GB unit now, it still pisses me off that they won't make BC units anymore. Why? well... what the hell am I going to do when this one breaks? Considering my extremely bad luck with Sony hardware reliability ( keep in mind, this one working ps3 I have now? it's #4 ), this means that if this one breaks down on me, that's it. I have no way of being able to enjoy a proper PS3 anymore to continue playing the PS1, 2, and 3 library that I have since amassed by now.codezer0

My current PS3 is original 60GB model and sadly it did went down on me back in early 2008 when blu-ray player stopped reading disks.

It was a bit of a shocker for me since I still had both PS and PS2 working with little over 13 now years now between them and they never broke on me before I exchanged them and got a bit of a discount on 699$ PS3 launch price.

I send the system in for repairs which took around a week to come back. Fortunately I got back the 60GB and since then it worked well. It seems original 60GB had some issues with blu-ray drives, not necessarily a new concept in technology but it still felt little disappointing when PS3 stopped reading disks.

You never know but I have a good feeling once PS2 eventually stops being supported the game library is to large for Sony to ignore or for that reason just let go of the market. I believe implementing PSN software update for PS3 B/C compatibility is around the corner in near future. ;)

so you are only mad bady becuase you are one of the .0005% population who has had bad luck with PS3. I am on the other end of the spectrum. I have had a 60GB since December 27, 06 and still haven't had anything breakdown or wear out except for a link cable for the controller.