PS2 and the new Gen

[Leo_A]

In my opinion the last thing this place needs is three main discussion forums. There's not really enough activity now to even justify the divide we already have. If anything, condensing Classic and Modern going forward should be what we're looking towards to encourage those that largely ignore one of the two to partake in discussions they otherwise wouldn't of by exposing them to the topics they'd miss and hopefully catching their interest.

So whatever is done, if anything, I hope it doesn't increase the number of forums. Changing the forum definitions might be a good idea, but adding hoops to jump through just to look through new posts with our modest forum traffic isn't going to do what's left any favors like if we went to a decades scheme. Our crowd, for instance, partakes in occasional Atari 2600 conversation that sometimes adds up to multiple pages even today with the current scheme. But push it to a 70's forum and I guarantee you might see one thread every few months at best and that it will be a rare day that a topic surpasses a half dozen replies.

[Leo_A]

That modern gaming has now gone 24 hours since my reply with it still being the 3rd most recent post in this section and that just two other threads have seen activity since then (One thanks to me bumping it) kind of illustrates what I'm getting at better than I could ever express in words although it usually isn't this slow.

Fragmenting things would be disastrous to the classic gaming forum that still has some life in it. I'm not even sure that limiting this area to current gen and the preceding generation of discussion like is being pushed in here would be a good idea since at least there's a bit more subject area to help sustain the modern gaming forum by it encompassing discussion of the PS2 and its contemporaries (even if we all don't agree that they qualify as modern gaming any longer).

[Nature Boy]

At first I was against the idea of changing the forums, but thinking on it more and typing up a reply convinced me I could go either way.

It's not a matter of whether or not they still sell the game in stores or not. It's a matter of what I expect when I open a forum called 'Modern Gaming' or 'Classic Gaming':
- For 'Modern Gaming' it does feel weird to see PS2 stuff in there.
- For 'Classic Gaming' it also feels weird to see PS2 stuff in there.

If I were in charge I might re-consider how/where I draw the lines. Maybe have multiple forums, splitting them up into decades/'generations' or something else. Having said that, of course, I don't like the idea of splintering conversation *too* much. Which of course leads me back to my original statement: nothing seems obvious, so I could be convinced either way.

[Polygon]

I think a system becomes retro when games are no longer being mass produced for them. I say that because there are new games still being made for older systems like the Dreamcast. But I would go even further to say that it's split up to more than just two groups though.

Classic: Atari 2600, Itellivision, Odyssey, etc. Basically, all the pre-crash systems.
Retro: NES and Master System up to the PS2, X-Box, and GameCube. Pretty much anything post crash up the current generations.
Current: PS3, 360, Wii and up.

I know, I only included mainstream systems, but it gives you and idea. At least that's how I feel about how they break down.

[bangtango]

I can go to my local Wal-Right right now and buy brand new Dual Shock 2's, brand new 1st party memory cards, and a small variety of PS2 software that's still sticking around (Not to mention brand new games are still being released although they seem to largely be online exclusives around the world). Some of you folks were ready years ago even when new PS2's were everywhere and games were regularly coming out.

If that's not modern gaming, just what is? To me, classic gaming is when all but a select few have left the console behind and mainstream retailers and the manufacturers have ceased any sort of support since there simply isn't a customer base left to justify it any longer. That makes far more sense than an arbitrary standard that if it's two generations out of date then it's classic gaming. It's far too subjective a subject for that sort of a standard I think and not every system from the same generation experiences the same lifespan. And when there's signs it's not even completely dead commercially, I certainly think that here's a bit of room for debate.

That said, I'd be comfortable shifting related discussion at this point to the classic gaming forum. I just don't think that it's un-debatable that it's not still modern gaming.

Couple things:

-Stores like Walmart, Target and Best Buy still got PS2 games, yeah, but most of it consists of games that are 4-5 years old, way overpriced, not in demand titles or all of the above. My nearest Walmart store still has multiple copies of about 10 different PS2 titles, none under $10 in price and most priced at $20. They include 2 skiing titles, two 3 pak releases (the MK & GTA collections), one Eye Toy game, 2 racing games and a summer olympics game. None of them is the last copy left in the store. That store doesn't even have EA or 2K titles left, such as the last couple Madden, NBA or MLB releases.

-Not to mention retailers like them have been dabbling in used games (including PS2 titles). Half the stuff available from those three chains in retail mentioned above is preowned, especially online. We can't put a hold on reclassifying a system as "Classic" just because some retailers still have unsold PS2 games that they likely ordered too many of :roll:

-Think of all the retail stores that were sitting on copies of the later day PS1 releases up until just a few years ago, games like FIFA 2005, Madden 2005 and Gameday 2005. In fact, retail chain Meijer is still sitting on new in the shrinkwrap PS1 stock on their web store today. See below.

http://www.meijer.com/s/nba-shootout-2004-for-playstation/_/R-19134

-Hasn't been a US PS2 release since Pro Evolution Soccer 2013 over a year ago. Fifa 14 and PES 2014 haven't been released in the US and neither of them are going to be. Bottom line.

[Leo_A]

With all due respect, I've clearly communicated my opinion and addressed all of that at various points in this thread. So as I already said, I won't argue for what I've spoken about in here any further since it's beating a dead horse at this point.

That said, I've never seen a preowned videogame at any retail chain I've ever visited outside of Electronics Boutigue/EBX/EBGames/GameStop. Any used videogames I've seen outside of those chains has been at independent stores. No sign of used videogame software at Wal-Mart, Target, and Best Buy around here.

So I definitely wasn't mistaking what I've seen for used software (And even if I was, the availability of used software for it at mainstream chains rather supports my point anyways). There's still very much room for debate on if the PS2 is classic or modern.

[Rickstilwell1]

I've communicated my opinion and addressed all of that at various points in this thread, so I won't argue for what I've spoken about in here any further.

That said, I've never seen a preowned videogame at any retail chain I've ever visited outside of Electronics Boutigue/EBX/EBGames/GameStop and I think Big Lots. Any used videogames I've seen outside of those chains has been at independent stores. No sign of used videogame software at Wal-Mart, Target, and Best Buy around here.

So I definitely wasn't mistaking what I've seen for used software (And even if I was, the availability of used software for it at mainstream chains rather supports my point anyways). There's still very much room for debate on if the PS2 is classic or modern.

My best buy has tons of used games. A lot of them don't even have the original cases, but some do.

[parallaxscroll]

Yeah, I think it's time to put PS2 in the "classic" category now that the new generation is coming. The final game for the system is also coming out soon(PES 2014), though it doesn't have an exact release date yet as far as I know. But I read that the PS2 version of it would come out a bit later than the versions for other systems.

I completely agree with you. It is now time for PS2 to be in the classic category.


The next gen is fully here in the western world. Xbox One and PS4 are quickly becoming the new current gen.

[FFStudios]

It's just laughable that a website that declares itself as "The Video Game Database" refuses to categorize the 13 year old best selling video game console of all time as classic. It even says in the huge description for the forum that it doesn't have to be old to be CLASSIC.

[Leo_A]

You make it sound as if classifying it as modern gaming is somehow an insult.

It's just an arbitrary divide to separate discussion, a hold over from the days when the forum was booming and the forum needed organization to best handle the various needs of the community which led to the creation of several sub-forums. It's not as if they're somehow cheating it of its birthright by having discussion assigned to this particular area of the forum.

Some of you are giving this way too much thought.

[parallaxscroll]

It's not a big deal to me at all, whether PS2 remains in Modern Gaming, or gets moved to Classic Gaming.


That said, I will start to no longer refer to PS4 and Xbox One as 'next-gen' anymore. They are (along with Wii U) now what I consider to be the new current-gen.

The Xbox 360, Wii and PS3 are now, last-gen.
After all, why would I, or anyone, still refer to last gen as being Dreamcast, PS2, Xbox and GameCube?

As we move into 2014 and past the time PS4 launches in Japan, NEXT-gen will start more & more to mean the future generation that refers to consoles that are now being planned, that will be going into the first stages of R&D (or already have) meaning Sony PS5, Microsoft's successor to Xbox One and Nintendo's 7th home console, which Iwata already stated (http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/130131/05.html) back in January this year was being R&D'ed as of 2012 along with their next handheld which will be two separate pieces of hardware sharing the same hardware & OS software architecture, regardless of the actual performance/power/speed of each system. It is not as if they're making a single hybrid machine, as some might think--Be sure to read the last two paragraphs in the link very carefully.

Am I saying these future consoles will come out in 2-3 years? No. I am not saying that, at all. They most likely won't arrive until sometime during the 2018-2019 timeframe. Both Sony (http://www.techradar.com/news/gaming/consoles/sony-hints-that-the-ps4-lifecycle-may-be-shorter-than-ps3-1203461) and EA (http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/ea-we-want-to-be-voted-the-best-company-in-america/0125002) have said they believe this new console cycle might not be quite as long as the last one (which was 7-8 years from the time Xbox 360 launched in 2005 and PS3 in 2006) but perhaps more like 5-6 years, which would be a more normal amount of time given this past cycle was an unusually long one.

[mercuryshadow09]

Last time I was in the United States they had them at two games stops I frequent, and a super walmart. At walmart they were next to the red PS3 classic games. Here in Japan they still are a driving force like the PSP. If the weather clears up I will go to Yamada and take some pictures . The point is they are still a factor in the market, maybe in a year or so their market share will shrink down to that of retro clone machines.

I haven't seen PS2 games in Walmart or Gamestop except in yellow disc sleaves new for at least two years, Walmart hasn't had PS2 stuff except online or discount games section for years!

[JSoup]

I haven't seen PS2 games in Walmart or Gamestop except in yellow disc sleaves new for at least two years, Walmart hasn't had PS2 stuff except online or discount games section for years!

As has been pointed out, it's a regional thing. Or at least a stock thing. My local Walmart still has a small stock of PS2 games up for grabs. Are they still getting whatever is left at the local warehouse or just burning off what they personally have left over? Who knows, but they've got'em.

[BlastProcessing402]

Just rename the sections 20th Century Gaming and 21st Century Gaming if you don't want to move systems around.

Yes, PS2 technically came out in 2000 which is technically 20th century but it had "has no gaems" syndrome until the 21st, and anyway most of it's lifetime was 21st.

[LordsOfSkulls]

>.> i kinda dont want it to go to classic... their too many threads their that dont interest me cause of how old the consoles are in their/never plan on getting any of them

i think we should have new section were it something like "Modern Classic" ;3 for PS2 Eras forward.

[Niku-Sama]

How would that be any different than your it is currently?

[Arkanoid_Katamari]

I think "retro" or "classic" doesn't really have as much to do with if u can buy them in stores, it's a more subjective thing, and much more opinion-based. PS2 is absolutely a classic system. I put on Vice City a few months ago for the first time in years, and it took me right back to being a 14yo kid again. Same with games like JAk & Daxter, Metal Gear Solid 3, Gran Turismo 3.. If u can get that kinda nostalgia from it, it's retro to me. Sure, it's not 80s or 90s retro, but who even cares? I love the PS2 and I love the endless amounts of amazing games u can find at retro game stores for next to nothing.

It's definately in that in between stage for people, where it's too old to be modern and too new to be retro. And I think it is awesome, cuz it means no one gives a crap, and so the games are dirt cheap, and I have been having a field day collecting them. I remember when the PS1 games were in this stage, and now everyone considers them to be classic games. So give it a few years. To me, PS2 games are already classics. Vice City and Metal Gear Solid 3 and FFX will always be classic games.

I remember hearing about PS1 systems and N64's first being considered "classic" or "retro", and thought that what was considered a retro system, in my eyes, was always any before this gen. 3D gaming was modern, in my eyes. Now it's changed for me.

[Arkanoid_Katamari]

U can't find Dreamcast games at Wal-mart though. And that's the same gen. If the PS2 had flopped like the Dreamcast, this debate wouldn't be happening. Plus, there's still a huge home-brew market for the Dreamcast, and lotsa other retro systems. They're still making Atari 2600 games.

[RoleyDre]

i consider ps2 classic,mainly cause it has a crapload of games,and ncaa football 2004 i have been playing for ten years,whoops 11 years ,they came out year before,forgot bout that

[GhostDog]

Yeah, I think it's time to put PS2 in the "classic" category now that the new generation is coming. The final game for the system is also coming out soon(PES 2014), though it doesn't have an exact release date yet as far as I know. But I read that the PS2 version of it would come out a bit later than the versions for other systems.

Yeah, definitely. The PS2 after all did come in Japan during Spring 2000 and later that year to North America. The year 2000 was more than a decade ago obviously and it's about time the PS2 is labeled a classic.

[Arkanoid_Katamari]

The system is 14 years old. In 2000, I owned a PS1, and got a PS2 not too long after it was released. I remember getting the Playstation magazine, and being stunned by the gameplay shots of the PS2. Metal Gear Solid 2 being the clincher.

Anyway, the system came out in 2000, and at this point the NES was 15 years old. I still had mine, along with my Genesis, and to me, the NES was an ol' school-retro thing. And I kept it around for that reason. So the PS2 being 14 years old now, it's as old as the NES was when it was first released, and the NES was retro then. So there ya go.

[DigitalKarma]

PS2 is classic. there is no more games being released for it in America so therefore it's classic.

[o.pwuaioc]

I think we should go even further and reclassify Ps1/Saturn/N64 games and up as "modern gaming".

[Tanooki]

Well if there's annoyance of PS3 era stuff going 'classic' split the board to SD-Classic and HD-Classic. That would keep the PS3 and 360 in its own area, and the pre-HD PS2/GC/PSP/DS stuff back would fall into the old old stuff.

[PizzaKat]

Don't call it classic then sellers of all forms will start jacking the price on used games. With that lame reason.

[Gameguy]

I think we should go even further and reclassify Ps1/Saturn/N64 games and up as "modern gaming".
I mentioned this exact thing before, I can't remember exactly when but I did mention it. For me PS1 and Saturn are the cutoff point, everything else is modern. I guess the N64 could be considered the cutoff at 64bit, but only because the Jaguar counts and was promoted as 64bit as well. Heck, for some people the cutoff would be the NES and up as modern.

No computer collector would consider an XP computer a "classic" and that's three generations old by now. Redefining the terms every few years makes little sense to me. DOS would normally be the cutoff, or Win 95/98 as that's still based on DOS. Even that can be late to classify as classic, to a lot of people classic computing died in the 80's.

[Bojay1997]

I mentioned this exact thing before, I can't remember exactly when but I did mention it. For me PS1 and Saturn are the cutoff point, everything else is modern. I guess the N64 could be considered the cutoff at 64bit, but only because the Jaguar counts and was promoted as 64bit as well. Heck, for some people the cutoff would be the NES and up as modern.

No computer collector would consider an XP computer a "classic" and that's three generations old by now. Redefining the terms every few years makes little sense to me. DOS would normally be the cutoff, or Win 95/98 as that's still based on DOS. Even that can be late to classify as classic, to a lot of people classic computing died in the 80's.

I agree. I consider all of those systems to be part of modern gaming. Heck, I would probably even include any of the exclusively CD-Rom based systems like 3do as they marked a distinct shift in the scope and complexity of games, as well as the introduction of a line of 3D world and character creation that has simply been refined and continued to the present day.

[WelcomeToTheNextLevel]

I believe it's time for three classifications, as opposed to two. PS2/GCN/Xbox/Dreamcast is not in the newest category of gaming, but it shouldn't be lumped with Atari either. Even lumping the 5th gen in "classic" with Atari is too much.

So I say "classic gaming" - anything pre-PS1/Saturn/N64. This includes any system on sale before the Saturn. From PONG to 3DO.

"3D era gaming" - 5th and 6th gen. This category could include the 7th gen in a few years, perhaps around 2020. I'm having difficulty coming up with a name for this era. Maybe "older gaming"? I know the 5th gen is what I started out on so it can't be lumped in with today's games.

"Modern gaming" - 7th gen to present.

[JSoup]

I believe it's time for three classifications, as opposed to two. PS2/GCN/Xbox/Dreamcast is not in the newest category of gaming, but it shouldn't be lumped with Atari either. Even lumping the 5th gen in "classic" with Atari is too much.

So I say "classic gaming" - anything pre-PS1/Saturn/N64. This includes any system on sale before the Saturn. From PONG to 3DO.

"3D era gaming" - 5th and 6th gen. This category could include the 7th gen in a few years, perhaps around 2020. I'm having difficulty coming up with a name for this era. Maybe "older gaming"? I know the 5th gen is what I started out on so it can't be lumped in with today's games.

"Modern gaming" - 7th gen to present.

This has the potential to get argued into various sub-categories as the gaming generations go on.
Let's stick with the two we've been using for a decade.

[WelcomeToTheNextLevel]

This has the potential to get argued into various sub-categories as the gaming generations go on.
Let's stick with the two we've been using for a decade.

Moot point, this three category system can last for at least 10 years. 10 years from now, everyone's going to feel pretty silly calling PS2 "modern". After all, NES is only 15 years older than PS2. Some people call NES "modern", but that doesn't make that viewpoint any less silly. I can stretch my mind to call the PSX/N64 "semi-modern" and set them apart from the classic section.

Point being that the two categories WILL change. It will be infrequent, but will happen over time.

[JSoup]

I highly doubt you're going to convince anyone to buy into this dubious three category system, but more power to you.

[o.pwuaioc]

I highly doubt you're going to convince anyone to buy into this dubious three category system, but more power to you.

I actually like it, but would modify it slightly. Origins until 16-bit aka "Classic gaming", 3D games era, and virtual reality era, of which we are just starting to see the beginning.

[WelcomeToTheNextLevel]

I actually like it, but would modify it slightly. Origins until 16-bit aka "Classic gaming", 3D games era, and virtual reality era, of which we are just starting to see the beginning.

Good idea.

I think between the 5th and 6th gen is a shitty place to divide "classic" and "modern" in a 2014 world, then again DP set up its two category system at a time when it DID make sense (2000s). 6th gen was an evolutionary rather than revolutionary step over 5th gen. 6th to 7th gen was a much bigger step.

Online gaming was the revolutionary step between 6th and 7th gen. There were the first forays into online gaming during 6th gen but it didn't become widespread until the 7th gen. Also the graphics/sound began to approach lifelike levels ("virtual reality") during 7th gen, casual gaming came to prominence, and motion controls debuted on all three consoles, especialy the Wii.

3D gaming separated 4th and 5th gen. There was 3D on a few games in 4th gen, a very few 3rd gen games, and even a VERY few 2nd gen games (e.g. Tunnel Runner on 2600). 5th gen saw the VAST MAJORITY of games go 3D in just a few years, 1994-1996 or so.

You also could divide 1st/2nd gen from 3rd/4th gen along the video game crash of 1984, but there was no massive paradigm shift in the styles of games like the mid 1990s or mid-late 2000s. There were big differences, but our three category system covers an average of about 13 years per category. A four category system would cover less than 10 years per category, and that's not enough. I think that whenever the next great paradigm shift comes we'll know it, but a full category update should probably be about a once in 10-15 years thing. We're due in 2014 though.

[Niku-Sama]

am I gonna have to just start posting PS2 related stuff in the classic forum?

[The Adventurer]

am I gonna have to just start posting PS2 related stuff in the classic forum?

I do!

[WelcomeToTheNextLevel]

At this point, PS2 (and Xbox, GCN, and DEFINITELY Dreamcast) are firmly in the classic category. Hell, pre-Crash stuff seems like it's not "classic" so much as it is "vintage". Demand for pre-Crash stuff seems to have dropped, it's stuff for the NES and newer systems that are most sought-after now.

The PS2 has been out of production for almost a half-decade. It's as old as the Genesis was when I started collecting in '06 (1989-2006, 2000-2017, about 16.5 years) and the Genesis was definitely classic then. No games have come out on PS2 in over 3 years.

When this thread was first active (2013/14) the successors to the PS2 and its competitors were still around. PS3 and Xbox 360 were late in their lifecycle, but still getting many new games and their successors were just coming out. The Wii was on its last legs.

Now, three years later, the PS3 is on its very last legs, the Xbox 360's been out of production for a year, and the Wii probably ceased production a few years ago (2014-15?). The PS4 and Xbox One are in their prime. The Wii U is dead, replaced by the Switch.

By the time the PS2 was nearly dead (2011-ish) the PS1 was pretty much universally considered "classic", or at least not modern.

If you replace that "2011" with "2017", you can replace that PS2 and PS1 with PS3 and PS2.

So I'd call the PS2 unequivocally classic, and would suggest that any thread about the PS2 that has been started since 2014 be moved to the "classic" section. I'd DEFINITELY say that no one should be posting PS2 as "modern" today. The argument for keeping PS2 modern may have held some water in 2013-14 (although I would have called the PS2 classic around 2012) but by 2017 any valid argument to keep the PS2 in the "modern" category has dried up, and there's really no debate today. And of course, the Xbox and GCN are classic. The GCN has been out of production for 10 years: anyone that still claims it to be modern is out of their mind.

[Aussie2B]

With the state of this forum as it is and the inactivity of anyone who has the power to change anything, I'd be damn surprised to see even this sub-forum description updated, let alone somebody taking the time to sort through years of topics to shuffle the PS2/Xbox/GameCube threads into the Classic section.

[Niku-Sama]

I wouldn't shuffle at all but encourage and move newly made topics

[FayeC86]

I understand I'm years late to the discussion, but certainly things can be modern without being current? Thats what the PS2 is to me.