PS2 and the new Gen

[Nz17]

As for the organization of these message boards, Classic is for consoles released before the year 2000 while Modern is for consoles released in 2000 or later. Think of it as the distinction between B.C. and A.D. (or for you more contemporary types, the difference between B.C.E. and C.E.).

This split on the year 2000 is to keep maintenance easy and hassle-free. After all, if we kept Modern Gaming as a moving target, every few years we'd have to redo things either by moving thousands of threads or creating a new sub-forum for the latest stuff. As you might imagine, it would start looking like five different forums with the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's, 2000's, and 2010's each having their own forum... and eventually we'd need to add a sixth.

But to keep it simple, we split the difference on 2000 A.D. Think of it as, "Classic Gaming covers the first thirty years of consoles and Modern Gaming covers everything after that."

[SuperEliteGamer]

Lulz........the PS2 IS classic,mate.
It's a legacy platform.
It's retro by now.

[DiEsmitty]

If you can walk into game stop and buy a game for it, its not a classic. The only remotely retro feature about a PS2 would be the external memory i.e. memory card.

[Satoshi_Matrix]

Technology advances quickly. Anyone who doesn't consider the PS2 retro by this point is simply an adult gamer who doesn't want to admit to getting older themselves.

It's time for Dreamcast, PS2, Xbox and GameCube, and GameBoy Advance to be moved to the Classic Gaming Section.

Perhaps we should have a vote?

[Leo_A]

I just bought a new PS2 last year at a local Wal-Mart and I still see new PS2 software and accessories at retailers that carry videogames. So I think that there's a fair argument for it not being classic gaming just yet.

It's still for a few more weeks Sony's last gen console hardware and not everyone subscribes to the thought that two generations out of date means it's automatically classified as such.

[Tupin]

Just a question: would anyone in 2004/early 2005 have argued that the SNES wasn't a "retro" system? It was the same age as the PS2 is now.

[Leo_A]

I think there was room to argue it since you could even still find the stray Majesco reprint here and there back then at major retailers and the Super Famicom had just recently been discontinued and the SuperNes hadn't been dead very long at that point (70,000 systems were sold in the US alone as recently as 2001).

But I'm not sure that's entirely a fair comparison thanks to the 3D transition that happened with the generation after the SuperNes and 2004/2005 was nearly two full generations after the Super Nintendo had been Nintendo's premier home console. The Nintendo 64 had came and gone and the GameCube had nearly ran out of steam.

[Satoshi_Matrix]

I just bought a new PS2 last year at a local Wal-Mart and I still see new PS2 software and accessories at retailers that carry videogames. So I think that there's a fair argument for it not being classic gaming just yet.

It's still for a few more weeks Sony's last gen console hardware and not everyone subscribes to the thought that two generations out of date means it's automatically classified as such.

I don't buy the "if a retailer still sells it, it isn't retro" argument. There's a game store in Toronto that I recently visited that sells new old-stock N64s and PS1's, even brand new shrink wrapped NES games.

Does that mean the N64, PS1 and NES aren't classic gaming systems just because they can still be found brand new?

I don't mean to sound insulting, but that very notion that the PS2 is not retro because it is sold in some stores is baffling to me.

[Leo_A]

I don't buy it either since nothing would be classic gaming then. But where mainstream retailers are concerned, it most certainly is a factor and hardly something to be confused about. You must realize that's what I meant and that I surely wasn't inferring that a system couldn't be viewed as a classic just because there were still brand new items available for it at something like an independent gaming store or up on eBay. Not sure why you decided to be difficult about that by twisting that around.

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.

[Guyra]

To those saying that it's not a retro system because you can still find games for it at retailers, I must ask: What does large print runs have to do with it being classic or not?

I would've understood anyone saying that it's not a classic system because there are still games being officially released for it, though. FIFA 14 was just released for the PS2. It's actually called "FIFA 14 Legacy Edition" - no joke. And as I mentioned in my first reply to this thread, PES 2014 will come out soon and be the last game for the system.

Personally, I think it should be considered a classic system when both the final game for it, and the PS4 and XO, are released.

The only remotely retro feature about a PS2 would be the external memory i.e. memory card.

And wired controllers as the standard.
And no HDMI connection.
And no system online store for buying digital release games.

[Niku-Sama]

^to add to this^

do you expect every copy of that crappy sports game to sell out completely in a few years ant not have any left overs in a retail store because people just don't want it?
where I work there are 2 PS2 games, GTA 3 collection and Mortal Kombat Kollection.
these cases aren't bad games, every one and their dog own them by now so they do not sell, and home office keeps sending us this crap!
an extreme case, NBA 2k4. it was at the new old store I worked, freight got transferred in from a store we closed and it went with it, still has a tag for about $40.

walmart is notorious for keeping crap and trying to make something back on it. I remember for the LONGEST time there were 3do accessories at one, they were there till probably 2005 I think. when I started working there and we closed that store down I was hoping to find some in the back room but to no avail...did find a set of SNES cables, they told us to sell them for what ever we could get for them as-is. cheapest set of SNES cables I have ever bought...

[Andreas]

In my opinion, the PlayStation2 and the Nintendo GameCube are qualified as some kind of "classic" consoles or "retro" consoles, because they established and died as "non-download-content" consoles. Their library of games is fully useable "as they known to be" without access to the internet and patch libraries.

I think the establishment of signed downloads, like patches, download content and download only games, wich required a subscription to an online service is the most important difference between two generations of gaming systems.

May be it's time for some new categories in generations. Like "before" and "after" online based services.

[DiEsmitty]

To those saying that it's not a retro system because you can still find games for it at retailers, I must ask: What does large print runs have to do with it being classic or not?

I would've understood anyone saying that it's not a classic system because there are still games being officially released for it, though. FIFA 14 was just released for the PS2. It's actually called "FIFA 14 Legacy Edition" - no joke. And as I mentioned in my first reply to this thread, PES 2014 will come out soon and be the last game for the system.

Personally, I think it should be considered a classic system when both the final game for it, and the PS4 and XO, are released.




And wired controllers as the standard.
And no HDMI connection.
And no system online store for buying digital release games.

Wow wired controllers and HDMI are the defining traits for classics. Sounds like young bucks with a small attention span. The wii lacked HDMI. Most play and charge kits for all current systems have you tethered while you charge. The Wii, the PS3, I barely remember the original Xbox I was away a lot in the military where the first consoles to have online stores. However there is nothing classic about a system that has a large online presence.
As for games here in Japan there are tons of new games for the ps2 not sports games, jrpgs, anime, eroge you name it. The peripherals that were made for this system, should demonstrate that it is not a "classic" system. I have a japanese PSX and nothing about that feels classic.

[Guyra]

Wow wired controllers and HDMI are the defining traits for classics.

I'm not sure if you noticed the quotation I did there. If the use of memory cards is a defining trait for classic systems, as the person I quoted says, then I believe the the things I listed are as well.

In addition, how about thinking of how it has all these traits at once, instead of thinking of how one system might have maybe one of these traits?

The wii lacked HDMI. Most play and charge kits for all current systems have you tethered while you charge.

I would be highly surprised if you've never heard or seen people discussing how the Wii should be considered a part of the previous generation of hardware.

And is your argument that because you have to connect modern, wireless gaming controllers to cables so they can charge, they are equal to actual wired gaming controllers? If so, then I must say that's just reaching for straws. I'm sure that if we had the technology for automatically charging wireless peripherals without connecting it to anything, in a practical and cost and time efficient manner, we would've used it. But as it stands, of course you need to connect the batteries to the charger. That doesn't make wireless peripherals(with charging cables) less wireless; This is just how the technology works.

The Wii, the PS3, I barely remember the original Xbox I was away a lot in the military where the first consoles to have online stores. However there is nothing classic about a system that has a large online presence.

Yes, the original Xbox had an online store. But you really can't say it "has a large online presence," as you put it. The Xbox Live for the original Xbox - meaning everything online about it - closed down on April 15th 2010. That's three and a half years ago. So that system does not have any online presence at all.

As for games here in Japan there are tons of new games for the ps2 not sports games, jrpgs, anime, eroge you name it. The peripherals that were made for this system, should demonstrate that it is not a "classic" system. I have a japanese PSX and nothing about that feels classic.

I'm with you on the part about new games for it. I think that was made clear in my previous post. However, how does the peripherals that were made for the PS2 demonstrate that it's not a classic system? I mean, have you even looked at the stuff they had for the Famicom and NES?

Karaoke microphones
One handed controllers
Barcode Battler II - similar to the Skylanders figurines
3D/virtual reality goggles
Internet modem
Motion controller
Wireless controller system
Controllerless system (waving your hands in the air like Kinect)

And that's just some of it.

[Leo_A]

Frankly, all these posts further the point. Two generations old equating to automatic classic status clearly isn't how many people think. There are a lot of factors that lead to a classic gamer classifying a system in their mind as classic rather than a modern game system.

So there's certainly a bit of room for argument rather than being clear cut like some suggested.

do you expect every copy of that crappy sports game to sell out completely in a few years ant not have any left overs in a retail store because people just don't want it?

When I see new PS2 games in stock, it's not lingering copies of five year old releases of Madden and such. It's popular games that have been reprinted in recent years that are still actively being stocked by the retailer.

PES 2014 will come out soon and be the last game for the system.

The last 50 games have been proclaimed as "the last game for the system".

In lieu of an official announcement of that fact which I doubt occurred, I'll believe it when a year rolls by with nothing and there isn't a PES 2015.

I'm all for "off with the cords" where anything that isn't wireless by default feels like outdated technology. From last gen (Wii/PS3/360) on out I bet nothing will come wired by default.

Xbox 360 gamepads came wired in the non hard drive model in early years. And nunchucks and Classic Controllers always have been "tethered" to a wireless Wiimote. And a lot of 3rd party controllers have and likely will continue to be wired like arcade sticks.

When the Modern Gaming forum here was first created, you could still buy PS1 stuff at mainstream stores. So I don't think that standard holds.

I wasn't proposing a standard. Frankly, I personally think the Playstation 2 is in an in-between area. Too young to truly be considered as a classic gaming system yet too old to be a modern gaming system. So if I really cared, I'm fine either way things go. It's the suggestion from a couple that this is clear cut that I argued with.

And I don't remember when that classification happened around here, but Digital Press dates back to the glory years of the Playstation. And for years after the Playstation 2, you'd of easily found arguments if someone proclaimed it as classic. I didn't even get mine until the redesign hit $50 new and they were a popular item that year after that price drop back in 2003 or so (Often being sold with an attachable LCD screen).

And new games were still happening well after that. Games that the average person could actually find easily at brick & mortar retailers, unlike these last few PS2 soccer games.

[Andreas]

Just to recognize! The last SNES game official released in north america was "Frogger" in 1998. The SFC game official released in japan was "Metal Slader Glory" in end of 2000... a half year after the PlayStation2 has been released in japan.

The Genesis and SNES, both of them have still releases that are not official and not homebrew.

In my opinion the SNES was already a classic a long time bevor the release of the Playstation2. It's a 10 year span from the SNES to PlayStation2. And it's a nearly 14 year span between PlayStation2 and the PlayStation4.

What I want to say... The last game release, or the time between systems means nothing. NOTHING!!!!


What defines something as classic and modern is the type of system and style of play.

8Bit "homecomputer" style -> 16Bit cartridge based consoles (nes/snes/genesis/pce) -> 3D optical media (cd/gd/dvd) based consoles (ps1-2/ngc/dc)-> network service and download based consoles (ps3-4/xbox1-3) -> subscription/service based consoles (ps5? ps-gaikai)

[Niku-Sama]

When I see new PS2 games in stock, it's not lingering copies of five year old Madden's and such. It's popular games that have been reprinted in recent years that are still actively being stocked by the retailer.

I like how you snip what you want to target out of a thread and take it out of context, you missed quoting the part I mentioned earlier, you know, the part about GTA 3 and Mortal Kombat and how home office keeps sending us those games...
way to go!

so have at it right back, TLDR quoted what I saw, typed what I thought.

[Leo_A]

I like how you snip what you want to target out of a thread and take it out of context, you missed quoting the part I mentioned earlier, you know, the part about GTA 3 and Mortal Kombat and how home office keeps sending us those games...
way to go!

so have at it right back, TLDR quoted what I saw, typed what I thought.

I'm sorry I upset you, but I don't see how that changes anything one way or another. If anything, it supports what I was saying.

But all I was directly responding to you about was what I quoted. What you took offense to not being included doesn't change what you said or my response to it. And I don't even know who TLDR is. It doesn't correspond with any names in here since that post of yours and I seem to have been the only one that quoted anything from that post.

[Ed Oscuro]

After all, if we kept Modern Gaming as a moving target, every few years we'd have to redo things either by moving thousands of threads or creating a new sub-forum for the latest stuff. As you might imagine, it would start looking like five different forums with the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's, 2000's, and 2010's each having their own forum... and eventually we'd need to add a sixth.

Good as far as it goes, but that just pushes the day of reckoning down the road...yeah, I'm not suggesting finding and moving every last topic based on content. The current "Modern Gaming" thread could get split off into a "fourth to sixth generation" forum (listing consoles).

Seeing the wisdom in the big sites just proliferating new subforums to handle each individual console.

We'll see, though; it shouldn't get too stuffy in here.

It is easy to miss the "after Y2K" edit on the forum description though, and "today, classic means everything before the PlayStation 2" still doesn't really make sense to folks...maybe that could be rewritten.

[devilman]

As for the organization of these message boards, Classic is for consoles released before the year 2000 while Modern is for consoles released in 2000 or later. Think of it as the distinction between B.C. and A.D. (or for you more contemporary types, the difference between B.C.E. and C.E.).

This split on the year 2000 is to keep maintenance easy and hassle-free. After all, if we kept Modern Gaming as a moving target, every few years we'd have to redo things either by moving thousands of threads or creating a new sub-forum for the latest stuff. As you might imagine, it would start looking like five different forums with the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's, 2000's, and 2010's each having their own forum... and eventually we'd need to add a sixth.

But to keep it simple, we split the difference on 2000 A.D. Think of it as, "Classic Gaming covers the first thirty years of consoles and Modern Gaming covers everything after that."

This makes the most sense to me. Classic or not, I wouldn't fancy a moderator's task of trawling through all the PS2 threads in Modern Gaming to move them into Classic. Even if you didn't move them but just changed the classification, you'd have new PS2 threads in Classic while the old ones sat in Modern. Makes sense to just leave the cut-off as is - from a forum point of a view at least. Away from the forum, I suppose it's now a classic format, but not based on any particular measurement.