Live in dream world like in GTA, where whatever you lose from your sight is gone forever...
Actually, I would consider GTA far more realistic in this respect. If a person dies at your feet in real life (let's not encourage real-life killing!:) ) and you walk away without emptying his pockets of cash, that money (and, hopefully, the body) is going to be long gone when you come back a month later. It's only in a dream world that bodies would lie around indefinitely, untouched...
Yes, they did, as I typed very early this morning here. Believe me, you'll find few on this site more willing than myself to own up when they turn out to be wrong. I think MS is making a huge mistake (probably not a fatal one unless Sony changes their mind and throws a hard drive into every console) and I'm annoyed in that I feel lied to, both in some of the statements they made and in the system specifications they provided via their website (which included a hard drive).
If I could mod my own posts down as "just plain wrong," I'd do so in a minute.
I had read at least two different articles stating unequivocally that the 360 would be shipped with a hard drive at launch. Considering the most recent "leak" via the LA times (not linked because I hate encouraging people to put themselves on mailing lists) detailing the Xbox launch plans with two versions (one package with HD, wireless controller and other bells/whistles for $399 and one with just a wired controller for $299), it looks like that's right out the window and my strong words have been turned into crow. I shall eat said crow as long as I'm permitted at least a drop of Tabasco per bite.
For the record, though I'm a fan of the Xbox and am still looking forward to the 360, I think that shipping units without a hard drive, especially early, is indeed a mistake - to some degree I even consider it a Microsoft lie since they included the hard drive in their own Xbox 360 system specifications (another thing I felt confirmed the HD's presence in the default 360 configuration).
I hope the 360 does well (more specifically, I hope the 360 has good games) but this move is definitely a loss in the war of consumer homes and expectations.
This isn't that different from the DVD playback "add-on" for the original XBox. Microsoft's merely seeing how far they can take it one generation at a time.
Well, except for the fact that Microsoft saved $20 per console in licensing fees and transferred that cost into the DVD playback kit, which, in an effort to reduce their per-console losses at least a little bit, was the purpose of doing it that way.
Believe me, I'm aware of the fact that there are more videogame markets outside of Japan and the USA. The thing is, again, the list being parsed here is a list of launch titles in the United States. I don't understand why anyone would judge the list and its intended meaning on the basis of how the games will do in Japan, Australia or Zimbabwe...
Your point is, to a degree, well taken, at least as regards my "in case you weren't aware" phrase. There were any number of better ways to make my point, and in retrospect I could have better used my [admittedly limited] language skills.
As for your second quote, that's me "voicing" my frustration at folks who don't even try to think things through. This subject in particular is one that has gotten on my nerves over the years, and the fact that it ("Must make Japanese consumers happy or fail!") has become accepted as "conventional wisdom" has shortened my temper a bit. That's probably an indication that I need to step back and learn to ignore discussions such as this one, but I have little self-control.
Short version: You've got things that annoy you, and I've got things that annoy me.:)
Sure KotoR saves took up loads of space, but at least the game let you save anytime. Hard drives let you get away from the irritating save points, unless of course you can't rely on the hard drive being there.
A game doesn't need to have save points if it doesn't have a hard drive. KOTOR had a limited number of items available, they could all be held in inventory, there were a limited number of NPCs, static maps, virtually no randomness in encounters, etc. - this means that all the variables were finite (and even small, especially compared to a game like Morrowind) and could be easily indexed. The only reason Bioware went with their ridiculously huge saves was because they were too lazy (or in too much of a rush) to optimize the process. Of course, even if save points WERE necessary in that game I can't imagine anyone complaining about it because the game was VERY linear - you wouldn't run into a situation like in a Final Fantasy game where trying to get back to a save point could end in a big "game over."
And how is content download going to work? No more extra level, patches or bonus content on Live? If you can't rely on a hard drvie, where do you keep this stuff? The memomry card?
That's pretty simple: You'll need a hard drive. Even if MS does eventually release an Xbox 360 without the hard drive, installing one after purchase will be a matter of buying it and plugging it in. Obviously, people who want to download a lot of content through XBL are going to be willing to do that.
The 360 will almost certainly include the hard drive at launch.
You ALMOST have it right in that the 360 will CERTAINLY include the hard drive at launch. It's been confirmed. I'm wondering how many times Allard and company have to confirm it before people accept it.
People seem to have been so brainwashed by the speculation (not hype by MS, but wild-ass guesses by "industry analysts) over the last two years that nothing can get through the mental blocks anymore.
Allard's comments about potentially shipping an Xbox 360 sans HD are for the future, going after people who wait for price breaks and a more full game catalog before buying (like me, as a matter of fact). Hence, he wants developers to code for the possibility that a hard drive won't be on the system. That means that they have to optimize save files so that memory cards can be used (none of that "take a snapshot of memory" nonsense as Bioware did with Knights of the Old Republic). It means that they may have to include an if/then statement regarding hard drive caching and make sure that their game runs acceptably with nothing but the optical drive. What it DOESN'T mean is that the Xbox 360 is coming out with no hard drive, nor does it mean that developers have to release multiple versions of their games for compatibility purposes.
The worst-case scenario is that a few early games may absolutely require the hard drive to run. Of course, early adopters will [interestingly] not have any worries about this since they will already have the hard drive, and the hard drives will be available to anyone who wants one. This isn't an N64 situation where extra memory was required for some games and it wasn't included with the console - that's at least certain at the beginning, and possibly (Allard was trying not to rule anything out) for the life of the device.
Most of the above, by the way, wasn't aimed at the parent but to the doomsayers elsewhere in this discussion.
I don't know about you, but for me that list seems HIGHLY biased to the american market. Why the hell would the rest of the world worry that much about a NFL game to justify it being the SECOND PLACE on that list??
I suspect the reasoning is that Madden, every year, is either the #1 or #2 top-selling game in the US market, if not the world. That seems pretty important, whether or not the Japanese like the game.
Oh, and in case you weren't aware, the US gaming market is much larger than that in either Japan or Europe. All the talk about how Japanese consumption defines the success of a console is based on a) the fact that every console designed and/or produced by a US company since the Nintendo has sucked compared to its competitors and b) just plain old fallacy. For example, the Saturn, a console made by a Japanese company, did pretty well in Japan yet tanked everywhere else. The end result of that was creating a situation where Sega ran out of money to compete.
It might ALSO be worth noting that the list is generated based on the US launch titles. There are titles being developed that, so far, are only planned for release in Japan. There are Japanese RPGs, soccer games and others being developed specifically for Japanese Xbox 360 customers.
Short version: Your criticism is based on little but thin air.
Well, it's actually true that there's more FF in "modern" (meaning PS2/GC/Xbox) terms as well with FF: Crystal Chronicles squeaking that franchise into the lead. So, I'll be happy to withdraw that particular sentence.:)
I agree about the Planetside ads, both for being inappropriate to setting and, as I mentioned, being placed in a pay-for-play game. I have a hard time believing that SOE is strapped for cash running Planetside, especially with the multi-game deal that should help quite a bit in subsidizing it.
As for the SWAT ads, I haven't played the game but the linked images were indeed badly placed in terms of integration into their surroundings. If you're going to place ads in realistic interiors, it wouldn't be hard at all to do. For example, in a garage you might find posters advertising auto makers, or even posters/calendars featuring bikini-clad women advertising for magazines (Maxim, FHM) or soft drinks (it would be stereotyping gearheads as being horndogs, but it would at least be familiar). In a convenience store, the ad options boggle the mind - candy, soda, ice cream, snack chips, etc. Even something like an office building could be easily, and comfortably, "adified" by including the logos of investment houses and the like - as if going into their actual offices.
Unfortunately, the system they're using doesn't seem to match up ads with locations, either visually (color/style appropriate) or contextually (location appropriate). I suspect this is partly because Massive doesn't have enough clients to make this feasible, assuming they would care at all. In any case, yes, the two examples in this story are both exactly what I wouldn't want in the games I play.
You have somewhat of a point, but I don't think it's that bad. It would be one thing if Final Fantasy, World of Warcraft, etc. were money-losers and NEEDED advertising, but they're not. Using movies as an example (as you did above), Lord of the Rings still got made despite not having product placement, as have many other historical/scifi/fantasy films.
Of course, it's easy enough to point out that we already DO have more Madden than Fallout, and more GTA than Final Fantasy. I don't see that changing anytime soon, ads or not...
First off, I'll say that sticking advertising into a game with a monthly fee is just dead wrong and I'd cancel my subscription if a game I was playing did it. So, the Planetside example is right out.
As for advertising in other games, I have mixed feelings. For example, I would have no problem at all with a big Coke billboard showing up while I'm tooling around town in a GTA game. It's supposed to be based in a reality similar to our own, so if a company doing this kind of game can make a few bucks by selling ad space, more power to them. Using GTA as the example again, though, real commercials (that couldn't be turned off) on the in-game radio stations would stop me from buying the game. That kind of ad would be overly distracting for me.
As long as ads are unobtrusive (background) and organic to the game setting (no "The monks of Qeynos drinks Coke, why don't you?"), I think they're fine. It certainly doesn't bother me when I play a golf game and I choose the Ping golf clubs, nor does it put me out of sorts to drive a Chevy in a racing game. But if I'm exploring space, there'd better be a damn good continuity reason to be flying between stars and see a giant, flashing Nike logo...
"Hardcore hardware hackers"? You mean people who can put their Xbox or PS2 into a box and send it to someone who will put in a mod chip? Or maybe you mean the people who can buy the chip and hand it to a friend with know-how who will install it? Oh, no, I've got it. YOU mean those "1337" hackers who can enter their credit card number in a web field on a site that sells pre-modded consoles!
I don't know how much piracy affects game prices - it's pretty hard to see a large effect considering how long the prices have been stable (a LONG time). That being said, it without question affects the bottom line of the companies (which are composed of people - so many on this site forget that) who make the games. If 100,000 people pirate a $40 game, that's $4 million dollars that the company didn't get for those copies. Even if we throw out half of those as people who would never have bought the game anyway, that's still a shit-ton of money (my definition of "shit-ton of money" being the equivalent of 20 $100,000/year jobs) that should have gone to the people who made and sold the product.
If nothing else, piracy could be a factor in explaining why there is such a paucity of "innovative" games and movies. Maybe if these companies had the extra millions of dollars sitting in their coffers, they could invest some of that "extra" capital in people trying to do something new and different.
PS- I'm a hypocrite since I didn't even run the right listing - what I ran was the complete EBgames catalog. HERE is the breakdown for PS2 games (with the limitations described above):
Hi. I just thought I'd bring this message from the land of reality, where things are really easy to look up. "Most" of the games sold today are actually rated "E for Everybody" and "T for Teen." A glance at the PS2 products listed at EBgames.com (though this admittedly is not scientific since it's the complete listing of all PS2 products and would include their used selection) reveals a total of 610 items rated M, 2,064 rated E, and 1,369 rated T. Even if you assumed that every M was a unique title while cutting both the E's and T's in half for duplicates, M-rated games STILL wouldn't even constitute a third of the total.
I recommend you consider applying for a job with Jack Thompson's festival of fun. I'm sure he can use some more folks who just spout off without even trying to find out the facts.
a) A brand-new console only competes with an old (relatively speaking) console in the sense that they might be on the same sales charts. It would be like talking about sales of the PSP versus the GBA SP - they're in very different leagues.
b) The PS2 is already in a ridiculous number of homes - the kinds of homes that may want to purchase an Xbox 360, assuming that the games are exciting. Why would we expect a huge upswing in the numbers of PS2s sold this late in the game?
On the other hand, Ken Kutaragi was reported to say, "Well, it would give us more time to train the magic pixies we are incorporating into our console design." Mr. Kutaragi then walked away, waving his hand in front of his face.
That last sentence was mistaken, probably due to my brain being muddled by my current irritation with Sony (I say "current" because I've enjoyed my Playstation and PS2, and I'll probably enjoy a PS3). It should say: "...or only if you want to start a pre-PS3 from scratch." After all, if you want to play a "new" old game on the PS3 a Memory Stick will work out just fine.
Oh, and I should also note an extra source of irritation towards Sony with this Memory Stick debacle. Specifically, I'm a little pissed that they couldn't find a way to include a hard drive in the console from jump. I know that it was one of the causes of the Xbox losses, but damn if it isn't one of the most convenient, consumer-friendly aspects of that console.
That's a great idea, using one Memory Stick for multiple devices. It might work, too, as long as a) you buy all Sony, a company that makes average products and sells them for a premium because once upon a time Sony had a quality line-up (my grandma, rest her soul, had an awesome little Trinitron that kept going and going), and b) you don't do "too much" with any one device ("Darn, I'd love to take some more pictures but this Memory Stick is full because of my Final Fantasy XII game saves.").
And your explanation still doesn't offer anything as to why they can't put a legacy PS1/PS2 card port in the PS3 (assuming the info here constitutes the "straight dope"). They could still have made Memory Sticks a requirement for PS3 saves - like they did with the new-format PS2 cards - while making things easier for those who, as I said earlier, want to use one of the PS3's big features.
Hey, I think Memory Sticks are better than the one-device PS1 and PS2 game cards. I was one of those hoping early on that the PS2 would use them, if only because I like it when devices I buy conform to somebody's standard. That doesn't change the fact that, out of the box, it seems the PS3 is going to be backwards compatible only in theory...or only if you play just one pre-PS3 game and leave the console on between play sessions.
Sony gives you 2 consoles of backward compatibility, a ton of new features, upgrades to a more standard form of memory storage with far greater capacity and a lower price, and all everyone does is whine whine whine because they can't plug in their 12-year-old memory card. Typical.
How about a one-month-old memory card? As for the "more standard" memory card with "a lower price," had Sony gone with SD I might buy that argument. Had Sony gone with the Memory Stick when they designed the PS2, I think folks might be more forgiving.
If you want to be an apologist, that's certainly your prerogative, but the truth is that Sony is trying to suck a lot more money out of people's pockets - not less. They're counting on people saying "what the heck" and spending $40 for 128MB instead of $20 for 32MB (Sony Memory Stick Duo prices at a major retailer; also worth noting that at this same retailer a 32MB SD card goes for $10 - Sony must really use advanced tech to be twice the price).
The bottom line in my eyes is that Sony could have easily included a slot for the old cards, perhaps with the option to move them over to a Memory Stick. By not doing so, they're forcing an unnecessary kludge/expense on people who want to take advantage of what is supposedly (at least when Sony fans are raving about the PS2 and PS3) one of Sony's best features.
What you say about buying Xbox games again for the Xbox 360 is just an old rumor - a lie, if I was less kind. According to the latest information available, the Xbox emulation in the 360 is planned to use the same discs already available, it will be optimized first for compatibility with the most popular games and will continue to be updated over time through Xbox Live as difficulties are worked out.
X360 backward compatibility is not going to be ideal but it's certainly not the mess you claim it to be.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I would consider GTA far more realistic in this respect. If a person dies at your feet in real life (let's not encourage real-life killing! :) ) and you walk away without emptying his pockets of cash, that money (and, hopefully, the body) is going to be long gone when you come back a month later. It's only in a dream world that bodies would lie around indefinitely, untouched...
They're using 2.5" drives.
If I could mod my own posts down as "just plain wrong," I'd do so in a minute.
For the record, though I'm a fan of the Xbox and am still looking forward to the 360, I think that shipping units without a hard drive, especially early, is indeed a mistake - to some degree I even consider it a Microsoft lie since they included the hard drive in their own Xbox 360 system specifications (another thing I felt confirmed the HD's presence in the default 360 configuration).
I hope the 360 does well (more specifically, I hope the 360 has good games) but this move is definitely a loss in the war of consumer homes and expectations.
Well, except for the fact that Microsoft saved $20 per console in licensing fees and transferred that cost into the DVD playback kit, which, in an effort to reduce their per-console losses at least a little bit, was the purpose of doing it that way.
Believe me, I'm aware of the fact that there are more videogame markets outside of Japan and the USA. The thing is, again, the list being parsed here is a list of launch titles in the United States. I don't understand why anyone would judge the list and its intended meaning on the basis of how the games will do in Japan, Australia or Zimbabwe...
As for your second quote, that's me "voicing" my frustration at folks who don't even try to think things through. This subject in particular is one that has gotten on my nerves over the years, and the fact that it ("Must make Japanese consumers happy or fail!") has become accepted as "conventional wisdom" has shortened my temper a bit. That's probably an indication that I need to step back and learn to ignore discussions such as this one, but I have little self-control.
Short version: You've got things that annoy you, and I've got things that annoy me. :)
A game doesn't need to have save points if it doesn't have a hard drive. KOTOR had a limited number of items available, they could all be held in inventory, there were a limited number of NPCs, static maps, virtually no randomness in encounters, etc. - this means that all the variables were finite (and even small, especially compared to a game like Morrowind) and could be easily indexed. The only reason Bioware went with their ridiculously huge saves was because they were too lazy (or in too much of a rush) to optimize the process. Of course, even if save points WERE necessary in that game I can't imagine anyone complaining about it because the game was VERY linear - you wouldn't run into a situation like in a Final Fantasy game where trying to get back to a save point could end in a big "game over."
And how is content download going to work? No more extra level, patches or bonus content on Live? If you can't rely on a hard drvie, where do you keep this stuff? The memomry card?
That's pretty simple: You'll need a hard drive. Even if MS does eventually release an Xbox 360 without the hard drive, installing one after purchase will be a matter of buying it and plugging it in. Obviously, people who want to download a lot of content through XBL are going to be willing to do that.
You ALMOST have it right in that the 360 will CERTAINLY include the hard drive at launch. It's been confirmed. I'm wondering how many times Allard and company have to confirm it before people accept it.
People seem to have been so brainwashed by the speculation (not hype by MS, but wild-ass guesses by "industry analysts) over the last two years that nothing can get through the mental blocks anymore.
Allard's comments about potentially shipping an Xbox 360 sans HD are for the future, going after people who wait for price breaks and a more full game catalog before buying (like me, as a matter of fact). Hence, he wants developers to code for the possibility that a hard drive won't be on the system. That means that they have to optimize save files so that memory cards can be used (none of that "take a snapshot of memory" nonsense as Bioware did with Knights of the Old Republic). It means that they may have to include an if/then statement regarding hard drive caching and make sure that their game runs acceptably with nothing but the optical drive. What it DOESN'T mean is that the Xbox 360 is coming out with no hard drive, nor does it mean that developers have to release multiple versions of their games for compatibility purposes.
The worst-case scenario is that a few early games may absolutely require the hard drive to run. Of course, early adopters will [interestingly] not have any worries about this since they will already have the hard drive, and the hard drives will be available to anyone who wants one. This isn't an N64 situation where extra memory was required for some games and it wasn't included with the console - that's at least certain at the beginning, and possibly (Allard was trying not to rule anything out) for the life of the device.
Most of the above, by the way, wasn't aimed at the parent but to the doomsayers elsewhere in this discussion.
I suspect the reasoning is that Madden, every year, is either the #1 or #2 top-selling game in the US market, if not the world. That seems pretty important, whether or not the Japanese like the game.
Oh, and in case you weren't aware, the US gaming market is much larger than that in either Japan or Europe. All the talk about how Japanese consumption defines the success of a console is based on a) the fact that every console designed and/or produced by a US company since the Nintendo has sucked compared to its competitors and b) just plain old fallacy. For example, the Saturn, a console made by a Japanese company, did pretty well in Japan yet tanked everywhere else. The end result of that was creating a situation where Sega ran out of money to compete.
It might ALSO be worth noting that the list is generated based on the US launch titles. There are titles being developed that, so far, are only planned for release in Japan. There are Japanese RPGs, soccer games and others being developed specifically for Japanese Xbox 360 customers.
Short version: Your criticism is based on little but thin air.
Well, it's actually true that there's more FF in "modern" (meaning PS2/GC/Xbox) terms as well with FF: Crystal Chronicles squeaking that franchise into the lead. So, I'll be happy to withdraw that particular sentence. :)
As for the SWAT ads, I haven't played the game but the linked images were indeed badly placed in terms of integration into their surroundings. If you're going to place ads in realistic interiors, it wouldn't be hard at all to do. For example, in a garage you might find posters advertising auto makers, or even posters/calendars featuring bikini-clad women advertising for magazines (Maxim, FHM) or soft drinks (it would be stereotyping gearheads as being horndogs, but it would at least be familiar). In a convenience store, the ad options boggle the mind - candy, soda, ice cream, snack chips, etc. Even something like an office building could be easily, and comfortably, "adified" by including the logos of investment houses and the like - as if going into their actual offices.
Unfortunately, the system they're using doesn't seem to match up ads with locations, either visually (color/style appropriate) or contextually (location appropriate). I suspect this is partly because Massive doesn't have enough clients to make this feasible, assuming they would care at all. In any case, yes, the two examples in this story are both exactly what I wouldn't want in the games I play.
Of course, it's easy enough to point out that we already DO have more Madden than Fallout, and more GTA than Final Fantasy. I don't see that changing anytime soon, ads or not...
As for advertising in other games, I have mixed feelings. For example, I would have no problem at all with a big Coke billboard showing up while I'm tooling around town in a GTA game. It's supposed to be based in a reality similar to our own, so if a company doing this kind of game can make a few bucks by selling ad space, more power to them. Using GTA as the example again, though, real commercials (that couldn't be turned off) on the in-game radio stations would stop me from buying the game. That kind of ad would be overly distracting for me.
As long as ads are unobtrusive (background) and organic to the game setting (no "The monks of Qeynos drinks Coke, why don't you?"), I think they're fine. It certainly doesn't bother me when I play a golf game and I choose the Ping golf clubs, nor does it put me out of sorts to drive a Chevy in a racing game. But if I'm exploring space, there'd better be a damn good continuity reason to be flying between stars and see a giant, flashing Nike logo...
I don't know how much piracy affects game prices - it's pretty hard to see a large effect considering how long the prices have been stable (a LONG time). That being said, it without question affects the bottom line of the companies (which are composed of people - so many on this site forget that) who make the games. If 100,000 people pirate a $40 game, that's $4 million dollars that the company didn't get for those copies. Even if we throw out half of those as people who would never have bought the game anyway, that's still a shit-ton of money (my definition of "shit-ton of money" being the equivalent of 20 $100,000/year jobs) that should have gone to the people who made and sold the product.
If nothing else, piracy could be a factor in explaining why there is such a paucity of "innovative" games and movies. Maybe if these companies had the extra millions of dollars sitting in their coffers, they could invest some of that "extra" capital in people trying to do something new and different.
E-rated: 469
E10-rated: 11
T-rated: 433
M-rated: 203
In other words, my point still stands when I'm smart enough to look for the correct information.
I recommend you consider applying for a job with Jack Thompson's festival of fun. I'm sure he can use some more folks who just spout off without even trying to find out the facts.
b) The PS2 is already in a ridiculous number of homes - the kinds of homes that may want to purchase an Xbox 360, assuming that the games are exciting. Why would we expect a huge upswing in the numbers of PS2s sold this late in the game?
"Joe and Jane" adopted DVDs faster than any other piece of consumer electronics in history. What was your point again?
On the other hand, Ken Kutaragi was reported to say, "Well, it would give us more time to train the magic pixies we are incorporating into our console design." Mr. Kutaragi then walked away, waving his hand in front of his face.
Oh, and I should also note an extra source of irritation towards Sony with this Memory Stick debacle. Specifically, I'm a little pissed that they couldn't find a way to include a hard drive in the console from jump. I know that it was one of the causes of the Xbox losses, but damn if it isn't one of the most convenient, consumer-friendly aspects of that console.
And your explanation still doesn't offer anything as to why they can't put a legacy PS1/PS2 card port in the PS3 (assuming the info here constitutes the "straight dope"). They could still have made Memory Sticks a requirement for PS3 saves - like they did with the new-format PS2 cards - while making things easier for those who, as I said earlier, want to use one of the PS3's big features.
Hey, I think Memory Sticks are better than the one-device PS1 and PS2 game cards. I was one of those hoping early on that the PS2 would use them, if only because I like it when devices I buy conform to somebody's standard. That doesn't change the fact that, out of the box, it seems the PS3 is going to be backwards compatible only in theory...or only if you play just one pre-PS3 game and leave the console on between play sessions.
How about a one-month-old memory card? As for the "more standard" memory card with "a lower price," had Sony gone with SD I might buy that argument. Had Sony gone with the Memory Stick when they designed the PS2, I think folks might be more forgiving.
If you want to be an apologist, that's certainly your prerogative, but the truth is that Sony is trying to suck a lot more money out of people's pockets - not less. They're counting on people saying "what the heck" and spending $40 for 128MB instead of $20 for 32MB (Sony Memory Stick Duo prices at a major retailer; also worth noting that at this same retailer a 32MB SD card goes for $10 - Sony must really use advanced tech to be twice the price).
The bottom line in my eyes is that Sony could have easily included a slot for the old cards, perhaps with the option to move them over to a Memory Stick. By not doing so, they're forcing an unnecessary kludge/expense on people who want to take advantage of what is supposedly (at least when Sony fans are raving about the PS2 and PS3) one of Sony's best features.
Indeed. It's unfortunate that they have to share just the one soul...
X360 backward compatibility is not going to be ideal but it's certainly not the mess you claim it to be.