I´m shocked at these people answering no, how hell don´t the games count? They are playable on the ps2 so they are part of the ps2´s library, they aren´t ps2 games but they are part of the ps2 library.Eddie-Vedder

I don't understand it either. This is the second board where I had a debate like this... so obviously people don't agree. But I honestly feel like what I and you are saying is 100% right. I don't see why people are picking no. And I haven't came across one reply that made me question where I stand on the topic.

[QUOTE="GoldenGlove"]>I'll give you people an example of why I feel like PS1 games are apart of the PS2's library. Say for instance you have a database online containing specific information(PS1), okay then you have another database that gives you access to the original database and additional information. (PS2) With this being the case, the first database is actually a part of the second one, because you can access of it's information there. I hope you can understand what I'm saying.Gallion-Beast

True, but the database was made for you to have access to the previous one. Just like the PS2. Sony purposely made the console BC and they didn't have to do that. Same with the PS3.

The 360's hardware is an example of a company NOT keeping it's previous console's titles in mind when they made the console. That's why all of the Xbox1 games aren't compatible with the 360.

I didn't say they weren't PS1 games, I just said they are apart of the PS2's library. It's really not that hard to understand.

The PC is a neat example of this concept b/c it happens inherently with gaming PCs. Everytime you upgrade it's usually to be able to play something new that wasn't possible on your old hardware. Yet, when you upgrade doyou expect to lose the ability to play previous titles? No. You expect you hardware to have backwards compatibility with previously released titles. Here we have PC's pulling off BC all the time, and yet the PC library despite being huge is considered a single entity.-RPGamer-

Exactly...

The same thing can be said about consoles.

I guess you might be right in saying PS1 games are part of PS2 games libary because you can play PS1 games on a PS2... but thats doesn't change the fact that they are still only PS1 games and older gen games and I doubt many peoples decisions back then to buying a PS2 where based off knowing you could play PS1 games aswell, people wanted next gen games, the PS2 games.. Same now, you wouldn't buy a PS3 just to play older gen games, you'd buy it to play next gen games I would think...

Dahaka-UK

You are missing the point. My point is that you can access those games on the current console thus for it's a part of the consoles overall library. It doesn't matter if people don't buy it for older games or not, the fact is that they can still play them on it.

I plan on buying quite a few PS2 games to play on my PS3 now actually. So your statement isn't as true as you may think.

I'll give you people an example of why I feel like PS1 games are apart of the PS2's library.

Say for instance you have a database online containing specific information(PS1), okay then you have another database that gives you access to the original database and additionalinformation. (PS2)

With this being the case, the first database is actually a part of the second one, because you can access of it's information there. I hope you can understand what I'm saying.

[QUOTE="-RPGamer-"]

Sure, a library consists of what the system is capable of playing. The reason people don't want to go along with this idea, is b/c it essentially voids out many previous consoles.

What's better a PSX or a PS2?

PS2 easily. You get the PSX content and that generations content as well.

What's better a Wii or GC?

Wii easily. You get the GC content and slowly a growing library of many previous gen consoles.

So on and so forth.

GoldenGlove

Thank you sir.

Common sense isn't really that common

The poll stats clearly prove that people don't have common sense with this topic.

[QUOTE="GoldenGlove"]But that's not the point if it's adding to the library to YOU so to speak. That's not sayin' that its not adding to somebody else. I'm sure everybody didn't have every game for PS2 or PS1 that was great. So if they bought a PS3 and missed out on a PS2 game they have the luxury of going out and buying that game and enjoying it. (now in 1080p).Gallion-Beast

No, a console's library consists of what games are compatible with it. So you disguard old games because it's not new? That doesn't make sense at all because I'm sure a lot of people didn't play every game that they wanted to so in actuallity it is new to them anyway.

Sure, a library consists of what the system is capable of playing. The reason people don't want to go along with this idea, is b/c it essentially voids out many previous consoles.

What's better a PSX or a PS2?

PS2 easily. You get the PSX content and that generations content as well.

What's better a Wii or GC?

Wii easily. You get the GC content and slowly a growing library of many previous gen consoles.

So on and so forth.

-RPGamer-

Thank you sir.

Common sense isn't really that common

[QUOTE="GoldenGlove"][QUOTE="JiveT"][QUOTE="GoldenGlove"]

[QUOTE="JiveT"]You are on shaky ground there my friend. You could force the argument but I wouldn't risk it. You might end up regretting it for the rest of your life.Gallion-Beast

So do you agree with what I'm saying?

In spirit yes. I was the idiot that voted Yes in the poll. But if I took it to court I don't know what would happen.

In my opinion it's really common sense that the PS2's library consists of the PS1's as well. If they made the PS2 so that it only played PS2 games then of course you could say that they are separate libraries. But with the way it is now, the libraries are merged for you to play all the games on the PS2. It's really not that hard to see. Just like the PS3's library is PS3+PS2+PS1 games.

But that's not the point if it's adding to the library to YOU so to speak. That's not sayin' that its not adding to somebody else. I'm sure everybody didn't have every game for PS2 or PS1 that was great. So if they bought a PS3 and missed out on a PS2 game they have the luxury of going out and buying that game and enjoying it. (now in 1080p).

[QUOTE="GoldenGlove"][QUOTE="SpecialForcesOp"]

Hell no PS1 games = PS1 Libary

PS2 = PS2 Libary

PS3 = PS3 Libary.

Bluestorm-Kalas

A library is defined as a collection of things at your disposal to use. Sony made the PS2 with the PS1 in mind, so they made the console fully BC with all the PS1 games. So why shouldn't those games count as a part of PS2's library when you can play them all on one console?

Yes I know, but it seems like people love the SNES so much that they'll strongly disagree with me feeling that the PS2 has a better list of games to play for it. They don't want PS1 games to be counted toward the PS2's library for fanboy reasons in my opinion.