40GB PS3 has more BC than 360........ but they both ****

http://www.psu.com/SCEE-explains-loss-of-PS2-bc-for-40GB-PS3-News--a0001491-p0.php

Nick Sharples, SCEE Director of Corporate Communications said, "The PS3 has never been equipped with either the CPU or GPU that were used in the original PlayStation, and the backwards compatibility for PS one titles has therefore been made available through software emulation from the beginning. Therefore backwards compatibility for PS1 titles remains the same no matter how many times the model is changed."

So, take all of the PSOne titles and compare them to the LIST of titles for 360 backwards compatibility. There are more PSOne titles than there are xbox titles on that list. Therefore, the 40GB PS3 has more BC than 360 and that's great. Except for that little fact that it alienates a whole slew of PS2 gamers.

Now, does this mean the titles available in BC with the 40GB PS3 are better than the Xbox titles on the 360? No, not at all. That's all personal preference.

All I'm trying to point out here is that neither system is doing very good on BC. While some models offer total BC for PSOne games and 90% or 0%for PS2 games on PS3, the 360 doesn't support 100% of the Xbox titles either.

What do you guys think. Is either console really doing a very good job at BC????

PS1 titles hmm - I see nothing about PS2 BC.

Cmon now lets not try to compare the 360 doing Xbox BC with PS3 doing PS1 not PS2 BC b/c if thats what the deal is; it's weak ! :o

PS1 titles hmm - I see nothing about PS2 BC.

Cmon now lets not try to compare the 360 doing Xbox BC with PS3 doing PS1 not PS2 BC b/c if thats what the deal is; it's weak ! :o

SecretPolice

What a stupid comparison, ps1 games are horrible nobody wants to play them anymore they look very outdated.[

QUOTE="The_Crucible"]

http://www.psu.com/SCEE-explains-loss-of-PS2-bc-for-40GB-PS3-News--a0001491-p0.php

Nick Sharples, SCEE Director of Corporate Communications said, "The PS3 has never been equipped with either the CPU or GPU that were used in the original PlayStation, and the backwards compatibility for PS one titles has therefore been made available through software emulation from the beginning. Therefore backwards compatibility for PS1 titles remains the same no matter how many times the model is changed."

So, take all of the PSOne titles and compare them to the LIST of titles for 360 backwards compatibility. There are more PSOne titles than there are xbox titles on that list. Therefore, the 40GB PS3 has more BC than 360 and that's great. Except for that little fact that it alienates a whole slew of PS2 gamers.

Now, does this mean the titles available in BC with the 40GB PS3 are better than the Xbox titles on the 360? No, not at all. That's all personal preference.

All I'm trying to point out here is that neither system is doing very good on BC. While some models offer total BC for PSOne games and 90% or 0%for PS2 games on PS3, the 360 doesn't support 100% of the Xbox titles either.

What do you guys think. Is either console really doing a very good job at BC????

[QUOTE="SecretPolice"]

PS1 titles hmm - I see nothing about PS2 BC.

Cmon now lets not try to compare the 360 doing Xbox BC with PS3 doing PS1 not PS2 BC b/c if thats what the deal is; it's weak ! :o

river_rat3117

What a stupid comparison, ps1 games are horrible nobody wants to play them anymore they look very outdated.[

digitalman42

Well, I personally feel the same way about PS2 games. Any older-gen games. I'm all about whats new.

But a lot of gamers obviously don't feel this way. They want to be able to play their old games. And if it is important to them I would think missing out on PS2 games and a mass amount of Xbox games would disappoint them.

Funny.... the only console with full backwards compatibility is the weakest of the three.REVOLUTIONfreak

Who's got full BC? Wii?

Yeah but with the 360 I can play games that are only 1 generation old, not games that are 2 gens old and came out 10 years ago.

Sorry but this isa fail, before Xbox there wasn't even another Microsoft console.

Now good luck playing those 480x320 PS1 games on a HD-tv, believe me it doesn't look very nice at all, I have tried it.
haols

But PS2 and Xbox games look good? Right.

Yeah but with the 360 I can play games that are only 1 generation old, not games that are 2 gens old and came out 10 years ago.

Sorry but this isa fail, before Xbox there wasn't even another Microsoft console.

AdolescentDon

You can't do that with PS3? You sure can, you just have to pay more for it. Just like if you want a HDD with 360.

[QUOTE="haols"]Now good luck playing those 480x320 PS1 games on a HD-tv, believe me it doesn't look very nice at all, I have tried it.
The_Crucible

But PS2 and Xbox games look good? Right.

[QUOTE="REVOLUTIONfreak"]Funny.... the only console with full backwards compatibility is the weakest of the three.The_Crucible

Who's got full BC? Wii?

[QUOTE="REVOLUTIONfreak"]Funny.... the only console with full backwards compatibility is the weakest of the three.The_Crucible

Who's got full BC? Wii?

PS1 Titles > PS2 titles. End of story

It's a shame that it doesn't do PS2 games but I doubt many people that want a PS3 will slit their wirst open because it can't play PS2 games.

What the ps3 fanboys are forgetting is the b/c is a KEY selling point for the ps3 as it was for the ps2.

even sony bragged about it before the ps3 launched... then pulled it away.

isn't the b/c list for the 360 growing thru xbl updates?

The problem is that BC was such a huge thing to them early on...

just like rumble

My 60gb plays every piece of Playstation software on the market today...its gotta sting someone who bought the 40gb knowing that it can't.

[QUOTE="The_Crucible"]

[QUOTE="REVOLUTIONfreak"]Funny.... the only console with full backwards compatibility is the weakest of the three.river_rat3117

Who's got full BC? Wii?

did you guys now that in europe they never had the emotion chip in it but still hase 70% backwards. if the europe guys can play ps 2 why can't the 40 gig use emulation also. so yes it does have better backwards compatible.GARRYTH

[QUOTE="river_rat3117"][QUOTE="The_Crucible"]

[QUOTE="REVOLUTIONfreak"]Funny.... the only console with full backwards compatibility is the weakest of the three.Zerostatic0

Who's got full BC? Wii?

What the ps3 fanboys are forgetting is the b/c is a KEY selling point for the ps3 as it was for the ps2.

even sony bragged about it before the ps3 launched... then pulled it away.

isn't the b/c list for the 360 growing thru xbl updates?

tango90101

The problem is that BC was such a huge thing to them early on...

just like rumble

My 60gb plays every piece of Playstation software on the market today...its gotta sting someone who bought the 40gb knowing that it can't.

TheSystemLord1

I'm with ya. I totally get the disppoinment in Sony for changing their story. But you have to consider what they are working with. They have a system that they need to drop down $100-$200 to get to $399. And in order to do that they had to drop something.

Do you drop wireless? No, because thats one of two ways to get people online and enjoying the DL content thats so big this gen. Do you cut out HDD? No, because then those owners would be limited on new games to play. Do you take out blu-ray? Like it or not, you can't. Again they would be unable to play new PS3 games. Do you take out BC that didn't cover all of the last-gen games anyway? Sounds like the best option to me.

My 60Gb PS3 offers the best backwards compatability for playstation games...oh but we're talkin about the 40Gb version and 360 aren't we...ha ha ha...

[QUOTE="tango90101"]

What the ps3 fanboys are forgetting is the b/c is a KEY selling point for the ps3 as it was for the ps2.

even sony bragged about it before the ps3 launched... then pulled it away.

isn't the b/c list for the 360 growingthru xbl updates?

The_Crucible

The problem is that BC was such a huge thing to them early on...

just like rumble

My 60gb plays every piece of Playstation software on the market today...its gotta sting someone who bought the 40gb knowing that it can't.

TheSystemLord1

I'm with ya. I totally get the disppoinment in Sony for changing their story. But you have to consider what they are working with. They have a system that they need to drop down $100-$200 to get to $399. And in order to do that they had to drop something.

Do you drop wireless? No, because thats one of two ways to get people online and enjoying the DL content thats so big this gen. Do you cut out HDD? No, because then those owners would be limited on new games to play. Do you take out blu-ray? Like it or not, you can't. Again they would be unable to play new PS3 games. Do you take out BC that didn't cover all of the last-gen games anyway? Sounds like the best option to me.

For those who dont really care; thats money saved as the selling price for PS3 would come down.

PS - just remove anything that can be purchased separately so the gamer has the choice not Sony - one of there big errors this gen.

I think they should drop the wifi as that is something that can be purchased separately like the 360.

For those who dont really care; thats money saved as the selling price for PS3 would come down.

PS - just remove anything that can be purchased separately so the gamer has the choice not Sony - one of there big errors this gen.

SecretPolice

But Sony doesn't have that approach. And I think its a good thing. They want you to buy ANY PS3 and to be able to play ANY PS3 game. You make the wireless optional, you take that unit home and have your TV too far from your router and you're **** out of luck. You then need to go back to the store and spend more. BC has nothing to do with PS3 games. But wireless does.

Its just like MS' take on the HDD. Yeah, thats great they made it optional. But if you have no HDD, you miss out. And it will only get worse.

[QUOTE="SecretPolice"]

I think they should drop the wifi as that is something that can be purchased separately like the 360.

For those who dont really care; thats money saved as the selling price for PS3 would come down.

PS - just remove anything that can be purchased separately so the gamer has the choice not Sony - one of there big errors this gen.

The_Crucible

But Sony doesn't have that approach. And I think its a good thing. They want you to buy ANY PS3 and to be able to play ANY PS3 game. You make the wireless optional, you take that unit home and have your TV too far from your router and you're **** out of luck. You then need to go back to the store and spend more. BC has nothing to do with PS3 games. But wireless does.

Its just like MS' take on the HDD. Yeah, thats great they made it optional. But if you have no HDD, you miss out. And it will only get worse.

idk where you live but in NA cable ISP are the biggest providers. they use the same jack (in most instances) for the tv and 'net modem. thefore yuour connectivity to the 'net and your tv are never far away from each other..

but the reality is; MOST gamers are NOT online.... wifineeds to be an option.. like bluray.

most gamers do not have a hdtv either...;)

but there sony is; forcing both on the consumer...

idk where you live but in NA cable ISP are the biggest providers. they use the same jack (in most instances) for the tv and 'net modem. thefore yuour connectivity to the 'net and your tv are never far away from each other..

but the reality is; MOST gamers are NOT online.... wifineeds to be an option.. like bluray.

most gamers do not have a hdtv either...;)

but there sony is; forcing both on the consumer...

tango90101

I live in the US, so I know very well how cable works. Have you ever tried splitting the connection from your wall to run internet and cable at the same time? I guess not, otherwise you wouldn't have suggested this. Its takes a very, very strong signal to even get close to doing this. Most homes already have that signal split to different rooms, so the signal is diminished before it even hist the wall jack.

Not a good solution.

And MS doesn't have HD games even though most gamers don't have an HDTV? Blu-ray, in theory, has much more to it than just HD. Its the capacity.

Are they going to have software emulation for PS2 titles in the future?Wasdie

Thats what i wondered yesterday. But if you read the linked article in the topic, you'll see that there's no such plan at this time. They had to take the hardware out and that leaves software emulators. problem is, its takes a lot of time and money to make sure each PS2 title works properly. Doesn't sound to be cost effective.

[QUOTE="The_Crucible"]

[QUOTE="SecretPolice"]

I think they should drop the wifi as that is something that can be purchased separately like the 360.

For those who dont really care; thats money saved as the selling price for PS3 would come down.

PS - just remove anything that can be purchased separately so the gamer has the choice not Sony - one of there big errors this gen.

tango90101

But Sony doesn't have that approach. And I think its a good thing. They want you to buy ANY PS3 and to be able to play ANY PS3 game. You make the wireless optional, you take that unit home and have your TV too far from your router and you're **** out of luck. You then need to go back to the store and spend more. BC has nothing to do with PS3 games. But wireless does.

Its just like MS' take on the HDD. Yeah, thats great they made it optional. But if you have no HDD, you miss out. And it will only get worse.

idk where you live but in NA cable ISP are the biggest providers. they use the same jack (in most instances) for the tv and 'net modem. thefore yuour connectivity to the 'net and your tv are never far away from each other..

but the reality is; MOST gamers are NOT online.... wifineeds to be an option.. like bluray.

most gamers do not have a hdtv either...;)

but there sony is; forcing both on the consumer...

I'm happy Sony did what they did b/c they as a company needed to be cut down to size but...

Had they gone the same route as MS and made those things optional and sold the PS3 for 299.99 from day one; they would have sold 25 - 30 mil. by now. IMHO

[QUOTE="tango90101"]

idk where you live but in NA cable ISP are the biggest providers. they use the same jack (in most instances) for the tv and 'net modem. thefore yuour connectivity to the 'net and your tv are never far away from each other..

but the reality is; MOST gamers are NOT online.... wifineeds to be an option.. like bluray.

most gamers do not have a hdtv either...;)

but there sony is; forcing both on the consumer...

The_Crucible

I live in the US, so I know very well how cable works. Have you ever tried splitting the connection from your wall to run internet and cable at the same time? I guess not, otherwise you wouldn't have suggested this. Its takes a very, very strong signal to even get close to doing this. Most homes already have that signal split to different rooms, so the signal is diminished before it even hist the wall jack.

Not a good solution.

And MS doesn't have HD games even though most gamers don't have an HDTV? Blu-ray, in theory, has much more to it than just HD. Its the capacity.

Comcast, Brighthouse, and others "split" these for you.... the cable modem is separate... they set it up and even set up the home networking for free as part of their services... the customer has to do nothing...

you obviously don't have this service....

MS isn't charging for a "hi def movie player"... they give hidef gaming at no upcharge... unlike sony...

c'mon...stop the spinning...you KNOW sony blew it... you just can't admit it...;)

[QUOTE="tango90101"][QUOTE="The_Crucible"]

[QUOTE="SecretPolice"]

I think they should drop the wifi as that is something that can be purchased separately like the 360.

For those who dont really care; thats money saved as the selling price for PS3 would come down.

PS - just remove anything that can be purchased separately so the gamer has the choice not Sony - one of there big errors this gen.

SecretPolice

But Sony doesn't have that approach. And I think its a good thing. They want you to buy ANY PS3 and to be able to play ANY PS3 game. You make the wireless optional, you take that unit home and have your TV too far from your router and you're **** out of luck. You then need to go back to the store and spend more. BC has nothing to do with PS3 games. But wireless does.

Its just like MS' take on the HDD. Yeah, thats great they made it optional. But if you have no HDD, you miss out. And it will only get worse.

idk where you live but in NA cable ISP are the biggest providers. they use the same jack (in most instances) for the tv and 'net modem. thefore yuour connectivity to the 'net and your tv are never far away from each other..

but the reality is; MOST gamers are NOT online.... wifineeds to be an option.. like bluray.

most gamers do not have a hdtv either...;)

but there sony is; forcing both on the consumer...

I'm happy Sony did what they did b/c they as a company needed to be cut down to size but...

Had they gone the same route as MS and made those things optional and sold the PS3 for 299.99 from day one; they would have sold 25 - 30 mil. by now. IMHO

oh gawd yes... sony could have CRUSHED ms into a pulp.... but alas...

Comcast, Brighthouse, and others "split" these for you.... the cable modem is separate... they set it up and even set up the home networking for free as part of their services... the customer has to do nothing...

you obviously don't have this service....

MS isn't charging for a "hi def movie player"... they give hidef gaming at no upcharge... unlike sony...

c'mon...stop the spinning...you KNOW sony blew it... you just can't admit it...;)

tango90101

First off, where do you put your PC, then? Set it right next to your TV? You obviously don't have wireless in this situation so you'd have to hardwire the PC by the TV. Yeah, thats a set up a lot of people would use. Great idea Tango.

Second, you totally ignore the fact that HD is only part of what blu-ray offers. Its the capacity that will come into play during this gen. Shoot, its already started. And having that large cpacity disc media and standard HDD give gamers the ability to take on whateverr comes along with games this gen. No need to go buy anything but the console.

c'mon ......stop the spinning....... you KNOW MS blew it.... you just can't admit it. Well see how it goes as this gen gets more and more advanced and 360 owners are left to go back to the store and buy more equipment just to play.

[QUOTE="tango90101"]

Comcast, Brighthouse, and others "split" these for you.... the cable modem is separate... they set it up and even set up the home networking for free as part of their services... the customer has to do nothing...

you obviously don't have this service....

MS isn't charging for a "hi def movie player"... they give hidef gaming at no upcharge... unlike sony...

c'mon...stop the spinning...you KNOW sony blew it... you just can't admit it...;)

The_Crucible

First off, where do you put your PC, then? Set it right next to your TV? You obviously don't have wireless in this situation so you'd have to hardwire the PC by the TV. Yeah, thats a set up a lot of people would use. Great idea Tango.

Second, you totally ignore the fact that HD is only part of what blu-ray offers. Its the capacity that will come into play during this gen. Shoot, its already started. And having that large cpacity disc media and standard HDD give gamers the ability to take on whateverr comes along with games this gen. No need to go buy anything but the console.

c'mon ......stop the spinning....... you KNOW MS blew it.... you just can't admit it. Well see how it goes as this gen gets more and more advanced and 360 owners are left to go back to the store and buy more equipment just to play.

my pc and laptop have integrated wireless cards...as most do nowadays...new to this? :lol:

the "large capacity media" isn't needed as proven by the 360's superior graphics and gameplay (look at the average reviews for proof).

the bluray drive comes at a huge cost and is not necessary for games. in fact sony NEVER stated bluray was a benefit for gaming...ONLY hd movies... that was their plan. sneak a hd movie player into homes... at a HUGE upcharge... not good biz..

if ms "blew it" AND is kicking the junk out of the ps3 what does that say about the ps3? ;)

there's nothing else gamers need to buy with the 360. it's a GAMING console... unlike the ps3...

ps...you DO know that cable companies will add a line to your house/apt at your request, right? apparently not... :lol:

Now good luck playing those 480x320 PS1 games on a HD-tv, believe me it doesn't look very nice at all, I have tried it.
haols

Personally I like it. I play MGS1 on my PS3 and it looks great. When I was playing Halo2 on my 360 I had very bad artifacting

my pc and laptop have integrated wireless cards...as most do nowadays...new to this? :lol:

Wow, do you even follow along with your own conversations? We're talking about someone who doesn't care about wireless for the PS3. And why would they not care unless they DIDN't have wireless? If they have wireless at home, BAM! They get wireless in the PS3.

the "large capacity media" isn't needed as proven by the 360's superior graphics and gameplay (look at the average reviews for proof).

Really? Devs haven't come out and said that its due to time with the PS3? You haven't seen a graphics match from the PS3? You have to be kidding. This is only going to get worse for the 360.

the bluray drive comes at a huge cost and is not necessary for games. in fact sony NEVER stated bluray was a benefit for gaming...ONLY hd movies... that was their plan. sneak a hd movie player into homes... at a HUGE upcharge... not good biz..

Sony never said it was for gaming? No one has ever mentioned how DVD-9 may cut game features? Now who's twisting?

if ms "blew it" AND is kicking the junk out of the ps3 what does that say about the ps3? ;)

Its "kicking" it because of a year lead. You know that as well as I. the playing field has gotten quite even lately and the PS3 still has to show its big guns. 360, on the other hand, has already done that. And price didn't have an effect?

there's nothing else gamers need to buy with the 360. it's a GAMING console... unlike the ps3...

HDD's aren't needed? Great point, Tango. Take you HDD out of your 360 and tell me how much fun you have. Thanks.

ps...you DO know that cable companies will add a line to your house/apt at your request, right? apparently not... :lol:

First off, if you just sign-up with a cable provider, they will do that. To say they'll come out for free to add any additional connections is ridiculous. It costs money, homey. And so, you'd rather have a non-wireless console and pay to have the cable company run a second line to your gaming room (whatever that may be) instead of just getting a console with the wireless included? Wow, thats a lot of run-around when it can be supplied up front.

tango90101

[QUOTE="tango90101"]

my pc and laptop have integrated wireless cards...as most do nowadays...new to this? :lol:

Wow, do you even follow along with your own conversations? We're talking about someone who doesn't care about wireless for the PS3. And why would they not care unless they DIDN't have wireless? If they have wireless at home, BAM! They get wireless in the PS3.

the "large capacity media" isn't needed as proven by the 360's superior graphics and gameplay (look at the average reviews for proof).

Really? Devs haven't come out and said that its due to time with the PS3? You haven't seen a graphics match from the PS3? You have to be kidding. This is only going to get worse for the 360.

the bluray drive comes at a huge cost and is not necessary for games. in fact sony NEVER stated bluray was a benefit for gaming...ONLY hd movies... that was their plan. sneak a hd movie player into homes... at a HUGE upcharge... not good biz..

Sony never said it was for gaming? No one has ever mentioned how DVD-9 may cut game features? Now who's twisting?

if ms "blew it" AND is kicking the junk out of the ps3 what does that say about the ps3? ;)

Its "kicking" it because of a year lead. You know that as well as I. the playing field has gotten quite even lately and the PS3 still has to show its big guns. 360, on the other hand, has already done that. And price didn't have an effect?

there's nothing else gamers need to buy with the 360. it's a GAMING console... unlike the ps3...

HDD's aren't needed? Great point, Tango. Take you HDD out of your 360 and tell me how much fun you have. Thanks.

ps...you DO know that cable companies will add a line to your house/apt at your request, right? apparently not... :lol:

First off, if you just sign-up with a cable provider, they will do that. To say they'll come out for free to add any additional connections is ridiculous. It costs money, homey. And so, you'd rather have a non-wireless console and pay to have the cable company run a second line to your gaming room (whatever that may be) instead of just getting a console with the wireless included? Wow, thats a lot of run-around when it can be supplied up front.

The_Crucible

it doesn't matter what excuse you use, the fact is the 360 is killing the ps3 and yet you say they "blew it"... that doesn't speak well for the ps3..

if you're going to say that hdd are not included in the 360, you need to start using a $299 price point for the 360 going forward.... hdd are in the vaaaaast majority of 360.... if you had one, you'd know..;)

are you saying core 360's don't play games that are fun? omg...:lol:

the "game room" is where your tv is; therefore that's where your cable output will be... keep spinning...

wireless should not be included as only the MINORITY of console gamers are online.... it should be an option.. yet your blind sony loyalty won't let you see reality...

btw; Comcast charges $20 to add an extra line... after paying $600 for a console with hardly any games you really have no room to gripe about $20... then again, you don't really need to since your cable output is also an output for your cable modem...;)

the point is; you don't NEED wifi when cable companies put the output next to your tv... let me guess; you don't play your ps3 on a tv? :lol:

you know there comes a time when fanboyism just goes too far... and you've easily passed that mark loooong ago...

you brag about b/c as sony did; then you say it doesn't matter...

congrats; you and renegade single-handidly make ps3 owners look silly...

it doesn't matter what excuse you use, the fact is the 360 is killing the ps3 and yet you say they "blew it"... that doesn't speak well for the ps3..

It says ZERO for the PS3. In a year's time all of the 360 flaws will be magnified. Non-standard HDD (which blows any price arguement because you have to pay for the HDD in addition to whatever the console was), non-standard high-cpacity disc media (again, go buy it) and no motion sensing. Cows my always pint to the future but you haters sure can't see past 2007.

if you're going to say that hdd are not included in the 360, you need to start using a $299 price point for the 360 going forward.... hdd are in the vaaaaast majority of 360.... if you had one, you'd know..;)

And if you're going to call out price you also have to call out the cost of buying the HDD to equal the $399 PS3.

are you saying core 360's don't play games that are fun? omg...:lol:

Not at all. You see, this is twisting words. this is what you do. you are a circle of BS. I was saying that core and arcade 360 owners without HDD don't/won't get to experience all that 360 offers. What fun is that? And we're not talking about old games. We're talking about games dev'd for the 360.

the "game room" is where your tv is; therefore that's where your cable output will be... keep spinning...

And again, you have to call the cable provider, have them come out to your house, install a secondary outlet, and pay them $20. All the while you could just get the 40GB PS3 and have the wireless and not have to do any of that. Plus, you miss ZERO PS3 games due to equipment lacking. So, you don't get to throw in your PS2 games. Its a very good trade. plus, you don't even know what the cost is of having the wireless when compared to BC. BC takes hardware. And if not hardware than the time to make the software. Tell me Tango, how much does each one cost when the day is done? Are they really equal?

wireless should not be included as only the MINORITY of console gamers are online.... it should be an option.. yet your blind sony loyalty won't let you see reality...

Okay, heard this argument numorous times. Lame each one. HD isn't used by all gamers, you have stated this. So why have the extra cost of HD games? Why have devs spend extra time money and resources to have higher resolution images for people who will never see its fulll quality? Seriously, answer that question with your take on wirelsss in mind.

the point is; you don't NEED wifi when cable companies put the output next to your tv... let me guess; you don't play your ps3 on a tv? :lol:

Here's that circle of BS I was talking about. We're on step 105 of our conversation and you go back to step 3.

tango90101

[QUOTE="Zerostatic0"][QUOTE="river_rat3117"][QUOTE="The_Crucible"]

[QUOTE="REVOLUTIONfreak"]Funny.... the only console with full backwards compatibility is the weakest of the three.river_rat3117

Who's got full BC? Wii?