The 10 Biggest PS2 Rumors Analyzed

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The 10 Biggest PS2 Rumors Analyzed

Posted by simoniker on Saturday June 21, 2003 @04:50AM from the won't-burn-patterns-in-your-toast dept.

Thanks to an anonymous reader for pointing to IGN.com's article discussing the 10 biggest Playstation 2 rumors currently circulating. Subjects discussed include whether Final Fantasy VII-2 is really planned, if there's actually a sequel to Ico called Nico, the chances of Starcraft:Ghost ever appearing on PS2 (low, apparently?), the likelihood that UGO/Sega are working on an Astro Boy game, and, naturally, rumors about the PS3. As IGN so succintly puts it: "What's the truth worth when you have imagination?"

24 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Ridiculous by PyroMosh · 2003-06-21 05:39 · Score: 1, Troll

This list is ridiculous.

1) They're saying that Ghost is going to be x-box only since they've only been showing screen shots of the x-box version? Huh? The x-box has the nicest graphics. It makes sense that they'll only show screen shots and videos for one platform and they'll use the one that looks nicest.

Not to mention that if you go to the Ghost homepage what do you see at the bottom of the very first page? A PS2 logo, and a Gamecube logo, right next to the X-Box logo.

Every trailer and ad I've seen has the same thing too. Is blizzard just lying? They just want to put the other logos on everything because they think they look cool? No, somehow I think blizard is saying it will be on all three consoles for a reason.

2) The perdictions about the PS3. It'll have CD and DVD playback, and backwards compatability with the PS1 and PS2. Well duh. Why would they take a step BACK from their current generation? That's not a prediction, that's an expectation.

Likewise, the Ethernet and hard drive. X-Box has them now, so they've upped the ante for the next generation. It's not a wild prediction to say that every next gen console will include these features. Just like the coming of the Saturn, and PS1 ensured that all consoles to come in the next generation would use optical media instead of cartriges.

3) Starwars Galaxies not coming to consoles! Wow. that one blew me away! You mean to tell me that a game genre that is best on the PC and that PCs are best equiped to handel won't be coming to consoles?!? I mean they might stand to loose HUNDREDS of sales from this not being on the PS2. The x-box I can see selling quite a few of these, but let's be real here. This is a PC game first, a console game second, if at all.

What exactly is the point of this article? Everything that isn't obvious seems to be just plain stupid (for instance the Ghost exclusivity).

--
Touch everywhere, even when inappropriate.
1. Re:Ridiculous by erpbridge · 2003-06-21 06:37 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Well, I could easily see them phasing out PS1 game backward compatibility. It might not be the best step for them to do, as it will alienate some gamers. But, as with almost all companies out there, you do have to stop supporting legacy hardware and software at some time (in this case, only the software part counts).
  
  I hope they don't, though, as having the backward compatibility built in saves on the number of boxes you have to hook to your TV.
2. Re:Ridiculous by Babbster · 2003-06-21 06:52 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  1) You're probably right but there's still time for Microsoft to make a deal and it's certainly possible that the rumor of Xbox-only Ghost could be traced back to those kind of negotiations.
  2) What's ridiculous about calling PS3 features "rumors"? The specs haven't been finalized, so ANY predicted features are rumors. That particular entry isn't ridiculous at all. Obvious maybe, but not ridiculous. (I would also note that by your logic all three consoles should have come with some kind of network compatibility since Dreamcast "upped the ante" by including a modem.)
  3) You're welcome to deride the idea of console versions of SWG, but the fact is that LucasArts THEMSELVES announced the development of said ports in the past. In their deal with SOE, in fact, they retained the rights to do the console versions themselves while using the code SOE has developed for SWG. It was only recently (just before E3, as I recall) that LucasArts made the announcement that console versions of SWG were on hold while they focus on the PC version.
  My take on the SWG issue is that they've likely decided to push the console versions into the next generation so that they can get more bang for their buck - by this, I mean that if they did 2004 releases on PS2 and Xbox versions (the consoles previously announced - Gamecube was left out) they could have as little as 18 months' worth of subscriptions before the next console generation is released (note that the only date I've seen so far is Microsoft predicting a 2006 Japanese release of Xbox Next while not mentioning a US timetable). Add in the X-factor of the PS2 hard drive and how well it's going to be received stateside (which will be the biggest market for SWG), and it makes said release even more iffy.
  In short, IGN isn't being ridiculous at all. They've merely tried to firm up or discount rumors. I consider it a laudable endeavor and something that should probably be a regular feature.
3. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-21 13:25 · Score: 0
  
  Actually, the rumor I heard was that the PS3 _wouldn't_ be backwards compatible because they were having too many hardware issues with it. The PS2 I/O chip is what does the PSX emulation, and it's because of that that the PS2 only has two controllers instead of four, so they've decided to just get around that can of worms by not doing any emulation at all for the PS3.
4. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-22 05:07 · Score: 0
  
  You think you're pretty smart for a guy who says "Perdictions".
  1) If you saw early screens for Halo it was going to be for PC and Mac. Then it becomes Xbox exclusive. The console business lately is all about securing your exclusive game, such as Grand Theft Auto for Sony. Games deciding they're not going to be multiplatform happens all the time.
  
  2) I don't really see your argument. What would be a step backwards? If it wasn't backward compatible? Not really.
  
  3)Ever heard of phantasy star online? How about the new multiplayer Final Fantasies. MMORPGs were pioneered on the PC, but they don't solely exist there. And maybe it is the best platform for it. It's the best platform for FPSes as well, but that doesn't stop anybody.
  
  I found all the points to be pretty valid. Some people just like seeing anything about the PS3, and so why not shed as much light as they can on it (i.e. not much). The point was to discuss rumors. Since they're rumors, you can't make a concrete statement about anything.
  
  Why don't you go into videogame journalism, buddy? Until then, let them do their job
5. Re:Ridiculous by PyroMosh · 2003-06-22 14:17 · Score: 1
  
  Wow. I had a typo. I guess this invalidates the rest of my arguments, huh?
  
  As for your first point, Halo was being developed for PC and Mac (Actually Mac first) by Bungee. Then they got bought by Microsoft. What did you expect to happen? Sure the console business is all about exclusives. But Blizzard has done nothing but say that this WOULDN'T be an exclusive title. In fact the only thing they've said is that they have no plans to put it out on the PC.
  
  GTA III never had Nintendo or MS logos associated with it during it's development. I can't think of a single example where a game was supposed to come out on a platform and then it changed last second. Except in the case of a buy out. Will MS buy Blizzard? I doubt it, but stranger things have happened, I suppose.
  
  As for point 2, try to follow with me now. I'll use as many small words as I can. The current Playstation (that would be the Playstation 2) supports backwards compatibility. Hence, people expect it now. If the PS3 were to not support backwards compatibility at LEAST to the PS2, then that would be a step backwards. It would be a feature in the PS2 that is missing form the PS3.
  
  Your third point is rather a good one, but I still can't agree 100%. Sure I've heard of PSO. It's the only Gamecube online game right now. And to be honest, I don't know anyone that has it, or the online adapters. People aren't exactly beating down the door of my local retailers to get them. MMORPGs are popular on PCs because PCs are set up to make them enjoyable. The lack of a keyboard or network connections out of the box really hurts the consoles for MMORPGs. The X-Box, of course has a decent install base for it's online service, so it's really just a matter of a lack of a keyboard there. But so far, the Gamecube's (much to my disappointment) and the PS2's online offerings have been a joke. A sad, sad joke.
  
  Why publish rumors? That's not journalism, that's just speculation. I *can* do that. And that's my criticism: If I can write the article from right here in my home, without making a phone call or getting out and doing any research; hell, without even firing up Google, then it's not good journalism. At best it's editorialism. Stupid editorialism at that. At worst, it's just garbage. But you've inspired me. I think I'll go into videogame journalism.
  
  Here are my predictions for Sony's next generation console:
  
  1) It will be called the "Playstation 3".
  2) It will use optical media.
  3) The PS3 "cell's" much hyped grid based tech will be just that - hype.
  4) It will retail the Triangle Square X Circle controls.
  5) You will be able to hook it up to most televisions.
  6) It will probably have a form factor resembling a piece of consumer electronics. My inside sources at Sony tell me that the rumors saying that the case would resemble a potted plant are completely untrue. Officials at Sony could not be reached for comment.
  
  There you have it folks. Just remember. When the PS3 doesn't look like a potted plant, you HEARD IT HERE FIRST!!!
  
  --
  Touch everywhere, even when inappropriate.
6. Re:Ridiculous by PainKilleR-CE · 2003-06-23 01:39 · Score: 1
  
  Well, I could easily see them phasing out PS1 game backward compatibility. It might not be the best step for them to do, as it will alienate some gamers. But, as with almost all companies out there, you do have to stop supporting legacy hardware and software at some time (in this case, only the software part counts).
  
  As it stands now, the PS2 uses an I/O chip that provides the backwards compatibility with the PSOne. Sony has also moved the CPU and GPU for the PS2 onto a single chip. Therefore, maintaining backwards compatibility for the PS3 with both the PSOne and PS2 means including 2 chips, and maybe some sort of chip to sense whether or not the PS2 chip needs to be used for a particular game. If the PS2 could be embedded into the I/O the way the PSOne has been, then it would probably be even less complicated (though the I/O chip would be much more complicated). The added bonus is that existing peripherals would also work to some extent, as is the case with the PS2.
  
  Of course, if the PS3 isn't backwards compatible all the way to the PSOne, it makes PS2 compatibility less important to someone like myself, that uses the PS2 more often for PSOne games than for PS2 games (though, admittedly, the other people I live with spend more time playing GTA than I do playing any PSOne or PS2 games).
  
  I own a PS2 because it allows me to play current games while still playing older games (or even recent games that were made for older hardware). Old hardware is often a pain to keep working, but old software, especially in the case of optical media, can often last nearly forever. The PS2 fully replaced a console I already had, and therefore became the 1st console I bought of the current generation (I bought the DreamCast much earlier, but since it's pretty much a dead console now...). If the PS3 doesn't fully replace the PS2 in all cases, then it'll have to compete for a place rather than simply taking an existing spot, and I'm not sure that Sony can do that quickly (their strength is in numbers, not in the signal-to-noise ratio). With 4 systems already connected to my TV, space is becoming a premium.
  
  --
  -PainKilleR-[CE]
7. Re:Ridiculous by iainl · 2003-06-23 02:47 · Score: 1
  
  As the other person replied has sort of described, the PS2 currently uses a "PS1 on a chip" as its I/O controller when in PS2 mode. As I understand it, then, its not actually really practical to have a PS2 compatibility mode without having PSOne for "free".
  
  --
  "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
8. Re:Ridiculous by PyroMosh · 2003-06-23 12:54 · Score: 1
  
  Why is this a troll? Because someone disagrees with it? I'm serious. This is a pointless,
  ridiculous article. Don't like my comments? Respond with words. Hell, even an "overrated" moderation would have been okay. But how is this a troll? Look at my post history for pete's sake. Ugh.
  
  --
  Touch everywhere, even when inappropriate.
Final Fantasy VII-2, eh? by Man+In+Black · 2003-06-21 06:01 · Score: 2, Funny

Sorry, but I think I'll wait for Super Final Fantasy VII-2 Turbo Championship Edition.

--Zero

--
-"One machine can do the work of fifty ordinary men. No machine can do the work of one extraordinary man." -EH
1. Re:Final Fantasy VII-2, eh? by th3space · 2003-06-21 08:03 · Score: 1
  
  that made me laugh so hard that I damn near cried. (no sarcasm was included in this post)
  
  --
  "How like you to drag your keyboard to a gun fight." - Aaron Bedard (BANE)
2. Re:Final Fantasy VII-2, eh? by M3wThr33 · 2003-06-21 19:59 · Score: 1
  
  They merged with Enix, not Capcom.
  Your probably going to end up waiting for a box collection of VII with a soundtrack, DVD of cinema and about 3 volumes worth of sketches that were drawn, embossed toilet paper, a collectible life-size sword, keychain and money clip, coupon for a PS3, a brand new DualShock2 controller with a VII-2 logo, your own private ranch in Arizona and a Q-Tip.
3. Re:Final Fantasy VII-2, eh? by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-25 08:52 · Score: 0
  
  ...in a custom briefcase, with phone cards randomly seeded into the initial production run.
ICO 2! I hope so... by jedo · 2003-06-21 06:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

ICO is the greatest game that no one has heard of.
There is no dialogue that you can understand and the graphics are gorgeous. Within 15 minutes of playing I actually cared what happened to the characters and was upset if I screwed up. Not because I messed up so much as I wanted them to be OK.
I was up to my 4th notice from Blockbuster and owed them about $180 before I brought the game back.
1. Re:ICO 2! I hope so... by May+Kasahara · 2003-06-21 07:15 · Score: 1
  
  I liked ICO as well (and boy was it frustrating at times!). The only thing it really had going against it was that it was too short; otherwise, it was great.
  I would love to see a sequel, but I can't really see it happening.
2. Re:ICO 2! I hope so... by Scrameustache · 2003-06-21 08:03 · Score: 1
  
  I bought it for 40 canadian bucks at zellers...
  
  And when I got home, I couldn't find my memory card, so I tried t go through the game in one go (on account of caring so much about Ico and that glow in the dark princess)...
  
  Of course, when the queen screwed me on the bridge (in the nasty way, not the naughty way), I decided that 3 am was a good time to shut the console off and go get some sleep.
  
  --
  You can't take the sky from me...
3. Re:ICO 2! I hope so... by TrebleJunkie · 2003-06-21 16:04 · Score: 1
  
  I soooo can't wait for an Ico sequel!
  
  (I figured there'd be one... (little spoiler here...) If you sit thru the credits and run the whooooooole way down the beach, you find the girl. They just HAD to make another one.)
  
  Ico is one of the best games few people played. Not only does it look good, the puzzles are challenging and the control is really intuitive and slick, but you *do* get attached to the characters in a hurry. If you can find this on the shelf somewhere, BUY IT AND PLAY IT.
  
  Awesome stuff. Can't wait for the sequel.
  
  --
  Ed R.Zahurak
  
  You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.
IGN... by neostorm · 2003-06-21 06:52 · Score: 2, Interesting

IGN is right up there with website gags like file planet. Thinking of the stupidest reasons to filter people to their site.

This is really old journalism BS. "Let's feed the audiences imaginations to increase industry demand..."

By spreading rumors they don't have to be held responsible for anything if (when) they don't come true. Plus it allows them to make the most outrageous claims and not have to worry about it because "eh... hey, we were just speculating...".
Nintendo used to (does) do it, Sega used to do it, IGN is just a marketting vehicle for all the publishers. It's blatantly obvious, as a poster above pointed out, that Ghost will most likely be on all three platforms, but who knows how much brownie points they win from Microsoft for giving them the speculative advantage.
Of course, IGN editors and writers are notoriously stupid, so it could be that too...

I thumb my nose at thee...
1. Re:IGN... by Martin+Blank · 2003-06-22 03:20 · Score: 1
  
  Considering that most of the rumors ended with "The company won't comment on it, but it might happen" kind of responses, the article is mostly useless anyway.
  
  Then again, why am I reading it? I don't even have a PS or a PS2, nor do I have much interest in getting one.
  
  I hate it when I do that.
  
  --
  You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
2. Re:IGN... by h0mer · 2003-06-22 05:35 · Score: 1
  
  Mod or post...
  
  How can you just blatantly attack IGN like that? Do you personally know the staff? Otherwise you can't make blanket statements like that. Let's face it, at this point Internet journalists are not as good as print guys. That is changing though. And aside from your personal attacks, it's not like they just made some shit up for no reason. Pretty much all of those rumors have some basis for them.
  
  Starcraft: Ghost - Why couldn't this be Xbox-exclusive like Splinter Cell was? Exclusive for X months, then comes out for PS2 and GameCube. That would make a whole lot of sense to me, considering Microsoft's tactics.
  
  Metal Gear Solid 3 - Had you read the article, there's a lot of evidence that points to the main character not being Solid Snake. Other websites have mentioned this too, IGN is not the only one.
  
  IGN is not a marketing vehicle, although I imagine the ads are pretty brutal if you're not a subscriber (like me). They give bad games bad scores just like everyone else. Whether Dead Or Alive Volleyball deserved a 9.1 is a matter of personal taste, but their reviews are spot-on.
  
  --
  
  I'm on top of my game like I'm standin' on Xbox.
3. Re:IGN... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-06-24 06:54 · Score: 0
  
  Don't defend IGN. They reviewed a basketball game without using the word "multiplayer." That's incompentence by both the writer and the editor letting this be published. This is the type of journalism they consistently pass off as professional.
  
  Reference: You can't spell ignorant without IGN.
(yawn) by May+Kasahara · 2003-06-21 06:56 · Score: 2, Informative

The Final Fantasy VII remake/sequel rumors have been circulating on the 'net for years. They've become so ingrained into Final Fantasy fandom that recently, the webmaster of the FF7 Citadel placed a whole "sequels" page in the site's rumor section (which otherwise covers rumors on hidden items and such in the game itself).
Yoshinori Kitase is right: it would be a big gamble for Square if they attempted a sequel to FF7, as the numerous fans of the game would be extra critical of such a game. I, for one, wouldn't want to see a sequel... there's no real need for one.