Regarding the PS3's Claimed 10 Year Life Span Propaganda

Sorry, I posted this in another thread, but I felt that it was valid enough for a new thread to be made about this. The whole "10 year lifespan" claim is the biggest bunch of bullcrap propaganda. Did the PS1 really still have legitimate games made for it 10 years after it first came out? No. Will the PS2? No. New consoles are released about every 5 years or so, and there is a little overlap between the old and new generations (as seen with PS2 and PS3 right now). This is further exacerbated by backwards compatibility. Otherwise, the real "lifespan" of any system is at best 5-6 years, and that is if you buy it at launch.

PS3 claiming a "10 year lifespan" is untrue propaganda, plain and simple. That for some reason is spouted off over and over by rabid, mouth-breathing PS3 fanboys.

this gen adaptation rate of the next gen consoles is slower than others. expect a longer life from them.Blinblingthing

No, I expect to see a new XBOX in 2010, and a new playstation in 2011 (or possibly sooner, after learning from past mistakes). Ever since the SNES it has been 5-6 years per cycle, no reason why it would change now.

It is possible, but not probable. Unless Kutaragi was so far ahead in his thinking that he put a lot of technology into the PS3 that is way ahead of its time.

Even today the whole Blue Ray high definition thing is kinda outdated with the whole digital download concept.

Also in 10 years, a 60GB HDD is nothing.

Sorry, I posted this in another thread, but I felt that it was valid enough for a new thread to be made about this. The whole "10 year lifespan" claim is the biggest bunch of bullcrap propaganda. Did the PS1 really still have legitimate games made for it 10 years after it first came out? No. Will the PS2? No. New consoles are released about every 5 years or so, and there is a little overlap between the old and new generations (as seen with PS2 and PS3 right now). This is further exacerbated by backwards compatibility. Otherwise, the real "lifespan" of any system is at best 5-6 years, and that is if you buy it at launch.

PS3 claiming a "10 year lifespan" is untrue propaganda, plain and simple. That for some reason is spouted off over and over by rabid, mouth-breathing PS3 fanboys.

accameron

Unless Kutaragi was so far ahead in his thinking that he put a lot of technology into the PS3 that is way ahead of its time.

BlueBarad

I don't think that you have to worry about that. The whole "way ahead of its time" is 100% pure propaganda hype, being spewed by mouth-breathing PS3 fanboys.

[QUOTE="accameron"]

Sorry, I posted this in another thread, but I felt that it was valid enough for a new thread to be made about this. The whole "10 year lifespan" claim is the biggest bunch of bullcrap propaganda. Did the PS1 really still have legitimate games made for it 10 years after it first came out? No. Will the PS2? No. New consoles are released about every 5 years or so, and there is a little overlap between the old and new generations (as seen with PS2 and PS3 right now). This is further exacerbated by backwards compatibility. Otherwise, the real "lifespan" of any system is at best 5-6 years, and that is if you buy it at launch.

PS3 claiming a "10 year lifespan" is untrue propaganda, plain and simple. That for some reason is spouted off over and over by rabid, mouth-breathing PS3 fanboys.

Ibacai

PS1 didn't really last 10 years. Sure, they sold the cute little PS1 mini for $99 for a while (because people still bought them), but no important games were made on the PS1 for years. Buying systems after they are over is great because you can buy so many great used games for almost nothing. The PS2 had a few games come out this year, but this is the last year for the PS2 to have any real legitimate titles. The 10 year lifespan is hype. Do you really think in 2016 people will still be playing their PS3??? I guess that you are guessing as well.

Its BS.....I can honetstly and realisticly see a new Xbox coming out 5 or 6 years from now....and PS is not going to just sit back and watch MS launch a new console with better tech. Crazy Ken's only truth to it is that it will be a movie player that will last 10 years....lol

[QUOTE="Ibacai"][QUOTE="accameron"]

Sorry, I posted this in another thread, but I felt that it was valid enough for a new thread to be made about this. The whole "10 year lifespan" claim is the biggest bunch of bullcrap propaganda. Did the PS1 really still have legitimate games made for it 10 years after it first came out? No. Will the PS2? No. New consoles are released about every 5 years or so, and there is a little overlap between the old and new generations (as seen with PS2 and PS3 right now). This is further exacerbated by backwards compatibility. Otherwise, the real "lifespan" of any system is at best 5-6 years, and that is if you buy it at launch.

PS3 claiming a "10 year lifespan" is untrue propaganda, plain and simple. That for some reason is spouted off over and over by rabid, mouth-breathing PS3 fanboys.

accameron

PS1 didn't really last 10 years. Sure, they sold the cute little PS1 mini for $99 for a while (because people still bought them), but no important games were made on the PS1 for years. Buying systems after they are over is great because you can buy so many great used games for almost nothing. The PS2 had a few games come out this year, but this is the last year for the PS2 to have any real legitimate titles. The 10 year lifespan is hype. Do you really think in 2016 people will still be playing their PS3??? I guess that you are guessing as well.

[QUOTE="accameron"][QUOTE="Ibacai"][QUOTE="accameron"]

Sorry, I posted this in another thread, but I felt that it was valid enough for a new thread to be made about this. The whole "10 year lifespan" claim is the biggest bunch of bullcrap propaganda. Did the PS1 really still have legitimate games made for it 10 years after it first came out? No. Will the PS2? No. New consoles are released about every 5 years or so, and there is a little overlap between the old and new generations (as seen with PS2 and PS3 right now). This is further exacerbated by backwards compatibility. Otherwise, the real "lifespan" of any system is at best 5-6 years, and that is if you buy it at launch.

PS3 claiming a "10 year lifespan" is untrue propaganda, plain and simple. That for some reason is spouted off over and over by rabid, mouth-breathing PS3 fanboys.

Ibacai

PS1 didn't really last 10 years. Sure, they sold the cute little PS1 mini for $99 for a while (because people still bought them), but no important games were made on the PS1 for years. Buying systems after they are over is great because you can buy so many great used games for almost nothing. The PS2 had a few games come out this year, but this is the last year for the PS2 to have any real legitimate titles. The 10 year lifespan is hype. Do you really think in 2016 people will still be playing their PS3??? I guess that you are guessing as well.

No. We will senselessly argue about things that will reveal themselves in 5-6 years from now. Because this is system wars.

No. We will senselessly argue about things that will reveal themselves in 5-6 years from now. Because this is system wars.accameron

I dont see how you cant see the PS3 lasting 10 years I think 10 is an easy lifespan. Look at the PS2 it launched a year before the Xbox and Gamecube did and it is still selling and is very much alive even after the Xbox and GC are basically lifeless, but they are still fun to play. So once the PS3 is on its feet then the PS3 has the means of lasting a long time. I plan to get a PS3 in the near future.

The Wii I believe could have t\ shortest lifespan but it doesn't matter because it is still very awesome to say the least I just got mine 2 days ago and love it. It so cool, but I think it could have the shortest lifespan due to game dev making games just for the wii and some could get reptitve although I guess alot of games are similar. The Wii will be amazing with SSBB, MArio Galaxy, MP3, Legened of Zelda TP , and the new Zelda, so many great games

I am sharing a 360 with a friend we bought the original Xbox together and did the same w/ the 360 for Halo really . the 360 I believe could have a 6-8 lifespan with a great library of games and with its capabilities and future games like Halo 3, Bioshock, Mass Effect to many to name

GO SONY NINTENDO AND MICROSOFT all of the consoles are great and I cant wait to own the best of all worlds

It is possible, but not probable. Unless Kutaragi was so far ahead in his thinking that he put a lot of technology into the PS3 that is way ahead of its time.

Even today the whole Blue Ray high definition thing is kinda outdated with the whole digital download concept.

Also in 10 years, a 60GB HDD is nothing.

BlueBarad

Are you suggesting people would have to download a 30gig game or so. Its infeasible which is where blu ray comes in.

[QUOTE="Blinblingthing"]this gen adaptation rate of the next gen consoles is slower than others. expect a longer life from them.accameron

No, I expect to see a new XBOX in 2010, and a new playstation in 2011 (or possibly sooner, after learning from past mistakes). Ever since the SNES it has been 5-6 years per cycle, no reason why it would change now.

Hells no. There is no way there gonna make cash on the now current gen consoles, And have cash to market , launch dev games for next gen consoles just yet.

Also expect the next xbox / ps to cost more than the consoles they are replacing. too much cash

In~6 years PC games will look about 5 times better than PS3 and XBOX360 games, then they will have no choice to release newly released and more powerful hardware to keep up with the times, I think 2012 will see the release of new consoles. themyth01

I think MS and Sony wanna make cash and not compete with who sports the best visuals

I believe it. I still see fools go to best buy and walk out with a PS2.-Ninja_Dog-

Are you suggesting that buying the best console ever made is a bad investment??

The PS2 is 7 years old and is STILL outselling the Xbox 360 and PS3 almost everywhere. I expect a 10 year life cycle for PS2 as well :)Supernova_86

Yes, but PS3 is unlikely to last that long due to its low sales,the comparisons in launch sales between PS2 and Ps3 are not even close, PS2 was just a console that had no competition in its time, mainly due to its great name, affordable price and tremendous library, and the PS3's $600dlls heavy price is really cutting it short, I really doubt it will last that long.

[QUOTE="-Ninja_Dog-"]I believe it. I still see fools go to best buy and walk out with a PS2.Blinblingthing

Are you suggesting that buying the best console ever made is a bad investment??

Buying a PS2 right now is a good investment. It was an awesome console and $130 for the silver one is a sweet purchase.

BUT...following that up with a 'hardcore', super-expensive console alienatesa vast majority of potential buyers.

A little history lesson... the NES was a 10 year console, or very close to it... so there is precedent. The NES era started in 1983 in Japan, 1985 in the U.S. Nintendo made numerous games for the NES well into the SNES era, with Wario's Woods being the final licensed NES game in 1994. They kept cranking out NES systems in Japan for years, plus there's that niche market that loves old school games. The PS1 had a fairly long life and the PS2 has another year or two left.

A 10 year console is possible, but I doubt the PS3 will make it to 2006 considering its lower sales and diminishing support. The Wii or 360 are more likely to be 10 year consoles at this point, but I doubt they'll last longer than 7 or 8 years, personally.

Sorry, I posted this in another thread, but I felt that it was valid enough for a new thread to be made about this. The whole "10 year lifespan" claim is the biggest bunch of bullcrap propaganda. Did the PS1 really still have legitimate games made for it 10 years after it first came out? No. Will the PS2? No. New consoles are released about every 5 years or so, and there is a little overlap between the old and new generations (as seen with PS2 and PS3 right now). This is further exacerbated by backwards compatibility. Otherwise, the real "lifespan" of any system is at best 5-6 years, and that is if you buy it at launch.

PS3 claiming a "10 year lifespan" is untrue propaganda, plain and simple. That for some reason is spouted off over and over by rabid, mouth-breathing PS3 fanboys.

accameron

Dude it lasted well over 10 years, even when the ps2 came out, ppl were still buying ps1 games, and the ps2 will last 2 more years, it is almost on its 8th year, so whats the big deal? The ps2 even now still sells well and the games still sell well aswell, so I dont see the ps2 going anywhere until the ps3 keeps cutting down its price where then the ps2 is not needed anymore and by then sony will be ready to bring in a new console. If there is any company that would jump ship and leave everyone hanging in such a short time it will prolly be MS, since they did the same with the xbox 360 and abandoned the xbox, and kind of forced there consumers to jump ship and get a xbox 360. I have this feeling MS is going to have a new xbox console in 2010 due to the high % of faulty xbox 360's. http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=119888

this gen adaptation rate of the next gen consoles is slower than others. expect a longer life from them.Blinblingthing

Only for sony. MS's rate is the same, and N's went up.

A little history lesson... the NES was a 10 year console, or very close to it... so there is precedent. The NES era started in 1983 in Japan, 1985 in the U.S. Nintendo made numerous games for the NES well into the SNES era, with Wario's Woods being the final licensed NES game in 1994. They kept cranking out NES systems in Japan for years, plus there's that niche market that loves old school games. The PS1 had a fairly long life and the PS2 has another year or two left.

A 10 year console is possible, but I doubt the PS3 will make it to 2006 considering its lower sales and diminishing support. The Wii or 360 are more likely to be 10 year consoles at this point, but I doubt they'll last longer than 7 or 8 years, personally.

TDLlama

Last time I checked it launched in 2006 and its 2007 and its still here.

Diminishing Support? So what does the Wii have? All its half decent games are first party. If PS3 has diminishing support then the Wii must have absolutely no support at all. PS3 doesn't have the same support as 360 but its getting better. So in the 360 has the most support, PS3 in the middle with support, and Wii is dead last with third-party support. Unless you consider Cooking Mama and all those other PS2 ports support for the Wii.

It could last for 10 years. Technically PS1 and PS2 lasted that long because people still bought them that long so until i'm proven wrong i'll say the PS3 will last 10 years.

[QUOTE="TDLlama"]

A little history lesson... the NES was a 10 year console, or very close to it... so there is precedent. The NES era started in 1983 in Japan, 1985 in the U.S. Nintendo made numerous games for the NES well into the SNES era, with Wario's Woods being the final licensed NES game in 1994. They kept cranking out NES systems in Japan for years, plus there's that niche market that loves old school games. The PS1 had a fairly long life and the PS2 has another year or two left.

A 10 year console is possible, but I doubt the PS3 will make it to 2006 considering its lower sales and diminishing support. The Wii or 360 are more likely to be 10 year consoles at this point, but I doubt they'll last longer than 7 or 8 years, personally.

Shadow2k6

Last time I checked it launched in 2006 and its 2007 and its still here.

Diminishing Support? So what does the Wii have? All its half decent games are first party. If PS3 has diminishing support then the Wii must have absolutely no support at all. PS3 doesn't have the same support as 360 but its getting better. So in the 360 has the most support, PS3 in the middle with support, and Wii is dead last with third-party support. Unless you consider Cooking Mama and all those other PS2 ports support for the Wii.

It could last for 10 years. Technically PS1 and PS2 lasted that long because people still bought them that long so until i'm proven wrong i'll say the PS3 will last 10 years.

Question: Did the PS1 and PS2 have trouble selling like the PS3????? which is the factor that madethose consoles last that long, cause they sold, PS3 isnt doing it.

No way, 10 years is too much, maybe 6hamidious

PS2 is almost on it's 8th, why cant it happen?

[QUOTE="Shadow2k6"][QUOTE="TDLlama"]

A little history lesson... the NES was a 10 year console, or very close to it... so there is precedent. The NES era started in 1983 in Japan, 1985 in the U.S. Nintendo made numerous games for the NES well into the SNES era, with Wario's Woods being the final licensed NES game in 1994. They kept cranking out NES systems in Japan for years, plus there's that niche market that loves old school games. The PS1 had a fairly long life and the PS2 has another year or two left.

A 10 year console is possible, but I doubt the PS3 will make it to 2006 considering its lower sales and diminishing support. The Wii or 360 are more likely to be 10 year consoles at this point, but I doubt they'll last longer than 7 or 8 years, personally.

Art_424

Last time I checked it launched in 2006 and its 2007 and its still here.

Diminishing Support? So what does the Wii have? All its half decent games are first party. If PS3 has diminishing support then the Wii must have absolutely no support at all. PS3 doesn't have the same support as 360 but its getting better. So in the 360 has the most support, PS3 in the middle with support, and Wii is dead last with third-party support. Unless you consider Cooking Mama and all those other PS2 ports support for the Wii.

It could last for 10 years. Technically PS1 and PS2 lasted that long because people still bought them that long so until i'm proven wrong i'll say the PS3 will last 10 years.

Question: Did the PS1 and PS2 have trouble selling like the PS3????? which is the factor that madethose consoles last that long, cause they sold, PS3 isnt doing it.

I guess you didn't know but both PS1 and PS2 had slow sales at the start but they picked up after a while. How do we know the same won't happen for the PS3? No one knows.

[QUOTE="Ibacai"][QUOTE="accameron"]

Sorry, I posted this in another thread, but I felt that it was valid enough for a new thread to be made about this. The whole "10 year lifespan" claim is the biggest bunch of bullcrap propaganda. Did the PS1 really still have legitimate games made for it 10 years after it first came out? No. Will the PS2? No. New consoles are released about every 5 years or so, and there is a little overlap between the old and new generations (as seen with PS2 and PS3 right now). This is further exacerbated by backwards compatibility. Otherwise, the real "lifespan" of any system is at best 5-6 years, and that is if you buy it at launch.

PS3 claiming a "10 year lifespan" is untrue propaganda, plain and simple. That for some reason is spouted off over and over by rabid, mouth-breathing PS3 fanboys.

accameron

PS1 didn't really last 10 years. Sure, they sold the cute little PS1 mini for $99 for a while (because people still bought them), but no important games were made on the PS1 for years. Buying systems after they are over is great because you can buy so many great used games for almost nothing. The PS2 had a few games come out this year, but this is the last year for the PS2 to have any real legitimate titles. The 10 year lifespan is hype. Do you really think in 2016 people will still be playing their PS3??? I guess that you are guessing as well.

When the hell did sony ever say that they expected theyre PS1 and PS2 to have a lifetime of atleast 10 years?

They only said that about the PS3 seeing as it's two succesors lasted atleast 7 years

EDIT:spelling errors

[QUOTE="accameron"][QUOTE="Ibacai"][QUOTE="accameron"]

Sorry, I posted this in another thread, but I felt that it was valid enough for a new thread to be made about this. The whole "10 year lifespan" claim is the biggest bunch of bullcrap propaganda. Did the PS1 really still have legitimate games made for it 10 years after it first came out? No. Will the PS2? No. New consoles are released about every 5 years or so, and there is a little overlap between the old and new generations (as seen with PS2 and PS3 right now). This is further exacerbated by backwards compatibility. Otherwise, the real "lifespan" of any system is at best 5-6 years, and that is if you buy it at launch.

PS3 claiming a "10 year lifespan" is untrue propaganda, plain and simple. That for some reason is spouted off over and over by rabid, mouth-breathing PS3 fanboys.

Rockman999

PS1 didn't really last 10 years. Sure, they sold the cute little PS1 mini for $99 for a while (because people still bought them), but no important games were made on the PS1 for years. Buying systems after they are over is great because you can buy so many great used games for almost nothing. The PS2 had a few games come out this year, but this is the last year for the PS2 to have any real legitimate titles. The 10 year lifespan is hype. Do you really think in 2016 people will still be playing their PS3??? I guess that you are guessing as well.

When the hell did sony ever say that they expected theyre PS1 and PS2 to have a lifetime of atleast 10 years?

They only said that about the PS3 seeing as it's two succesors lasted atleast 7 years

EDIT:spelling errors

OUCH. Good point, man. I don't remember 10 year claims for PS1 or PS2 either. And if the PS3 really is going to have a 10 year lifespan, they had better drop the price to $199 and start having some good games PRONTO.

this gen adaptation rate of the next gen consoles is slower than others. expect a longer life from them.Blinblingthing

Uh ? Last time I checked the Wii is selling like crazy since launch.

I believe it. I still see fools go to best buy and walk out with a PS2.-Ninja_Dog-

[QUOTE="Blinblingthing"]this gen adaptation rate of the next gen consoles is slower than others. expect a longer life from them.accameron

No, I expect to see a new XBOX in 2010, and a new playstation in 2011 (or possibly sooner, after learning from past mistakes). Ever since the SNES it has been 5-6 years per cycle, no reason why it would change now.

Too ******* early.... I just got settled in with this gen. PS360

With this calibur of graphics I'm sure my enjoyment will last 7-8 years, at least.

It's not bullcrap at all. It'll be about 10 years before visuals have even improved enough to justify another console. PS2 is still alive and kicking year 7.... just now starting to slow down. If PS3 does gain a large userbase Sony will continue to support it as long as possible. Lazy_Boy88

Why would you say that? At what point in gaming history has any hardware been anywhere near the cutting edge, even five years after its release? Suppose you built a cutting-edge PC, more powerful than 360 and PS3, today. Do you really think this machine would still be a monster, trying to play the games of 2012? Of course it wouldn't be. Graphics technology matures really fast, and both PC and console hardware always try to keep up. You may be able to buy PS3 games in 2016 (!!!), but at that time it will be just as sad as PS1--which was pretty hot in 1997--is now.

Don't confuse this with software support; an out-of-date, weak system can still be supported well if there are lots of units still in use, as is the case with PS2. But when you look at the best-looking new PS2 games and compare them to the current consoles, the PS2 is more than just showing its age--it's looking really bad. The same thing is going to happen to the current crop of consoles. And let's be realistic--while the 360 may not die suddenly before its successor, we shouldn't really expect 360 to be MS' new big thing much longer than 2010. The machine launched in 2005!

and do not equate it's supposed lifespan on it's success this generation. If the PS3 becomes A successful console and stabilizes itself in the market, it will last for at least 8 years. That's because Sony does not abandon their previous consoles, they support them, and learn to get the most power out of the systems. Sony will support the PS3 with so many games, the incentive to own one will be insane, you would have to be a fool to not get one. Imagine how affordable it will be with all of it's options, even five years from now, when there are price drops on it.

of course, this all depends on it getting through the rough spot, which will be this and next year. so we will just have to wait and see.

Sorry, I posted this in another thread, but I felt that it was valid enough for a new thread to be made about this. The whole "10 year lifespan" claim is the biggest bunch of bullcrap propaganda. Did the PS1 really still have legitimate games made for it 10 years after it first came out? No. Will the PS2? No. New consoles are released about every 5 years or so, and there is a little overlap between the old and new generations (as seen with PS2 and PS3 right now). This is further exacerbated by backwards compatibility. Otherwise, the real "lifespan" of any system is at best 5-6 years, and that is if you buy it at launch.

PS3 claiming a "10 year lifespan" is untrue propaganda, plain and simple. That for some reason is spouted off over and over by rabid, mouth-breathing PS3 fanboys.

accameron

First of all, you have proven how ignorant and prejudiced you are when it comes to gaming and Sony.

1) Nobody ever claimed the PS1 or PS2 had or would have a 10 year lifespan. So to act like because those consoles didn't it makes SOny's PS3 claims "bullcrap propaganda" is a lie.

2) THe PS2 was released in 2000. That meant it has already been out for over7 years in Japan and almost 7 years in NA. there are still games coming out for it and beign made because people are still buying the console and it has the largest user base. So your claim that new consoles come out every 5 years is pointless and totally meaningless. ESPECIALLY considering the PS3 came out more than 6 years (almost 7 if you consider PS2 japanese launch) after the PS2.

3) Your claim that the consoles life isn't really that long because overlap and backwards compatibility shouldn't count is so ridiculous and idiotic it is borderline offensive. Frankly, it seems to me your thread is more guilty of lies and propaganda than you accuse of Sony.

[QUOTE="accameron"]

Sorry, I posted this in another thread, but I felt that it was valid enough for a new thread to be made about this. The whole "10 year lifespan" claim is the biggest bunch of bullcrap propaganda. Did the PS1 really still have legitimate games made for it 10 years after it first came out? No. Will the PS2? No. New consoles are released about every 5 years or so, and there is a little overlap between the old and new generations (as seen with PS2 and PS3 right now). This is further exacerbated by backwards compatibility. Otherwise, the real "lifespan" of any system is at best 5-6 years, and that is if you buy it at launch.

PS3 claiming a "10 year lifespan" is untrue propaganda, plain and simple. That for some reason is spouted off over and over by rabid, mouth-breathing PS3 fanboys.

ZIMdoom

First of all, you have proven how ignorant and prejudiced you are when it comes to gaming and Sony.

1) Nobody ever claimed the PS1 or PS2 had or would have a 10 year lifespan. So to act like because those consoles didn't it makes SOny's PS3 claims "bullcrap propaganda" is a lie.

2) THe PS2 was released in 2000. That meant it has already been out for over7 years in Japan and almost 7 years in NA. there are still games coming out for it and beign made because people are still buying the console and it has the largest user base. So your claim that new consoles come out every 5 years is pointless and totally meaningless. ESPECIALLY considering the PS3 came out more than 6 years (almost 7 if you consider PS2 japanese launch) after the PS2.

3) Your claim that the consoles life isn't really that long because overlap and backwards compatibility shouldn't count is so ridiculous and idiotic it is borderline offensive. Frankly, it seems to me your thread is more guilty of lies and propaganda than you accuse of Sony.

That was the coolest ownage I have ever seen in System Wars, and I totally agree with what you say.

Otherwise, the real "lifespan" of any system is at best 5-6 years,

accameron

Erm, the PS2 has been going for more than 7 years, possibly longer, and it may well make it to 10 years, so you can and probably will be wrong.

If a console continues to sell well, then a company will continue to make that console. If it doesn't then it won't. For example, the PS2 still sells but the xbox and gamecube barely sold in the last year. Sony has nothing to do with it since its simple economics. Sony stopped making 1st party titles for the PS1 .... 6 months after the PS2 was released and never looked back. Fewer and fewer mediocre 3rd party titles were released on the PS1 but the numbers were so small.

Also, backwards compatibility furthur encouraged consumers to drop the PS1 ship and climb aboard and support the PS2. Sony shifted all its actual support for the PS2. However, the darn thing continued to sell well even in the face of next gen competition so Sony decided lets keep making this console and spin it in our way by saying we will support the console for many years to coming.................. although their definition of support is ........... "we will continue to make the PS1 if you buy it but thats it". In case you haven't noticed, they have dropped ship on many products ranging from mp3 players to tv simply because the sales aren't there. I'll say it again - SIMPLE ECONOMICS. This goes for every company in existence..... not just Sony.

10 years is a long time, I would expect Sony to take out another console before that.zsc4

That doesnt mean the PS3 will stop selling. The PS2 is outselling both the 360 and PS3. The PS2 is still getting great games. Whos to say that that wont happen with the PS3 as well?