Whoa, you've got a chart? Know where I can get one? My monitor's pretty old, and I'm on the lookout for a better CRT.

Oh, anyone want to bet Sony (and a load of third party suppliers) will make a PS2 -> USB multitap peripheral?

Amen to that. you know at least it wouldn't crash on ya like a PC.

Something like this?

Bingo. With the PS2 having been around for 5+ years, there's an immense amount of Dual Shocks out there that would be useless come PS3-time. Of course, people will want to use what they have at hand. Easy money, pretty much.

I have that, i never knew i can put a multi-tap on it !!!

Are you sure you can?

No, the point was that there will likely be PS3 peripheral that does the same as that product, seeing as how the console lacks PS1/PS2 controller ports.

That way, PS2 owners can use Dual Shock 2s to play games on the machine if the new controller doesn't suit them.

but I thought that the ps3 controller was exactly the same thing as the ps2 just wireless (and with the motion thingy)

so beside to save some money I don't see why someone will not like it...

PS3 controller lacks rumble feature, and has a 'Home' button, like the PSP.

I really can't think of a single wireless conroller feature a rumble feature, then again, I stay away from 3rd parties. So whatever.

But on the idea of a PS2 controller fitting into a PS3 via outside peripheral....how much do they plan on selling this for? Because you're not saving much money if this peripheral costs as much as a PS3 controller. I guess if you really must have the rumble feature, ok. But you do lose the wireless capability as well as the tilt sensor. It's probably not worth it, IMO.

Couldn't tell you, sorry. One of the graphic designers had one at work so I went over to Kinkos and had a copy of it made.

Xbox 360 controller?

The loss of the rumble feature is something that really bothers me. I've been playing my PS2 games with them off after the announcement and you really don't appreciate what the feature does until it's gone. I'm really going to miss it.

Wii controller, Logitech Cordless Action Controllers, etc.

you know if the ps3 controller wil not have this rumble feature, I don't think any video game company will create those rumble feature for a controller that don't support it >.>

so the ps2 controller is still the same as the ps3 (except the cord >.>)

Uh, what? And no, the PS3 controller is not the same as a PS2 controller. :boxing:

I haven't touched a regular Gamecube controller once I got hold of my Wavebirds so the loss of rumble while wireless might not be as noticeable to me, but for a good bit of Sony's third party titles, it's a loss. MGS is a good example in how it helps set the player up (or spook them).

Both the Xbox 360 and Wii controllers are wireless and have rumble support. Basically, Sony is the only first-party company this generation that DOESN'T have a wireless gamepad with rumble support.

But I don't see how they'll handle backwards compatability without rumble, many PS2 games use the rumble for rather important purposes (such as the sensors in MGS3). Seems like a pretty strange thing to remove.

Oh, and have they said if the buttons are analog sensitive, or are they going to pull an Xbox 360 and remove that feature as well? I believe the L2 and R2 triggers have analog, but I haven't heard of the other buttons.

Still pressure-sensitive. The buttons have been raised so it won't be as annoying to use now (how many guys did I kill in MGS3 when I only meant to interrogate them? ugh)

I don't know how old the news is, as I haven't been following much PS3 news lately, but I recently learned that Half-Life 2 is confirmed for the system.

If HL2 makes launch, then I guess that makes it the game of choice for me, as I've never played the PC or XB version. The only thing I'm wondering is if the game still looks incredible when pitted against other next-gen launch games. Or maybe I just answered my own question.

Also, a rumored TGS list was posted.

It's most likely fake (it's way too soon for KH3), but who knows. It'll be a cruel joke if someone was lying about ZOE3 though. :(

The fact that they're listing a sequel to SotC alone makes me think its fake. As much as I loved the game, I don't expect a sequel (and if there ever is one, it'll be more of a spiritual sequel, sorta in the same way SotC and ICO are in relation to each other).

- WraithTwo -

Dear god, is there a single NON-SEQUEL game for the PS3? Next to Heavenly Sword or whatever it's called? It seriously looks like an endless list of numbers except for Assassin's Creed. Or, at least, god forbid, be creative with the title or something.

Well, most of those games did debut on the PS2 (or PS1 even). Sony has as much right to make sequels to their greatest hits as Nintendo does (not numbering Mario and Zelda doesn't hide the fact that they're still sequels).

Besides, I believe the main purpose of the TGS is to tantalize people with established names. Save the original properties for E3 or in the magazines, but in this case the people want to see more MGS/FF/DMC footage above anything else.

It's hard to take risks when games cost millions to make. Sequels are guaranteed to sell, new IPs are not. That's why the 360 and PS3 seem to be full of Halo 3s and GTAwhatevernumber.

That list looks completely fake anyway, so stop with being a pissy bitch.

There are plenty of non-sequel games coming for PS3.

EVERY system relies on sequels anyway, plus I love video game sequels.

Me too. I don't see why people bitch about it. As long as there are a few new IPs here and there, I personally love seeing sequels. If the games good enough, chances are fans want to see more.

Touche.

I'm not saying that sequels are necessarily bad, but it does make me cringe to see nothing but. On a second note, I stand by what I said about needing more interesting titles.

That is true that it's a hard proposition as game costs skyrocket to take chances.