Consoles and the multiple version issue

[rickonker]

This is something Sony in particular seems to do and it really pisses me off. I hope they get owned this round.

One of the key benefits of consoles over PC gaming is having only a single version of a console. Sony violates this regularly. The other companies may replace some of their components or something similar, but generally there are no differences in features caused by this.

Versions for each console (correct me if I'm wrong here)

Saturn - 1
N64 - 1 (different colors don't add or remove features)
PS1 - 2

Dreamcast - 1
Gamecube - 1
Xbox - 1
PS2 - 3

Wii - 1
Xbox 360 - 1 (aside from included accessories, which are separate from the console, the only difference between core and premium is the chrome finish)
PS3 - 2 (and this is just at launch)

I don't think I've seen much about this kind of thing in the media, so my concern is that if somebody other than Sony decides that doing this is a good idea, they won't hesitate because it seems like nobody will really notice or care anyway.

Actually I'm a little surprised Microsoft hasn't already done this. I bet they would if they were in the lead.

I guess you could say it doesn't really matter that much and the differences aren't that big, but I think this is a slippery slope. Already you can't play that FF game with the slim PS2 because it can't use the hard drive or something. Is there anyone that thinks that different versions for consoles is actually a good idea? Probably the number one benefit of consoles over PCs is that every game for your console is just supposed to work, exactly like it would on every other console of the same model. Multiple versions end up destroying this.

[wubb]

What are the 3 versions of the PS2? And what features are different between the 2 PS1 versions? Are there PS1 games that don't work on one of the forms?

It doesn't bother me, mainly because it's how Sony has been able to crack the $100 price point with the PS1 and how they probably will crack that barrier with the PS2 as well. A main reason behind Sony's redesigns have been to decrease production costs. (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that.)

The HDD is used by so few games I know I'd never bother getting one anyway. How many games are actually unplayable on the slim PS2? Is it just the one?

Interesting point of discussion, but if we're only talking about a very few games that won't work on the different versions, I don't see much of a problem.

I read (somewhere...) that MS did look at creating a redesigned Xbox, but with the HDD it made it harder to slim down and they just didn't think the money was there to do one.

Nintendo has done this with the top loader redesign of the NES. And there were quite a few versions of the Atari 2600. Heavy sixer (with wood grain), the all black plastic one, several others IIRC.

[Kaijufan]

Well the N64 did have a memory extension that added an extra 4MB of RAM, but as far as I know it was never bundled with the system. Still, some games required the extra RAM.

[rickonker]

What are the 3 versions of the PS2? And what features are different between the 2 PS1 versions? Are there PS1 games that don't work on one of the forms?
The 3 PS2 versions are the original, the slim PS2, and the PSX. The PSone doesn't have the serial port. I think all the games work though.


It doesn't bother me, mainly because it's how Sony has been able to crack the $100 price point with the PS1 and how they probably will crack that barrier with the PS2 as well. A main reason behind Sony's redesigns have been to decrease production costs. (Someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that.)

I'm all for this, but I don't think they should change the features to do it.

The HDD is used by so few games I know I'd never bother getting one anyway. How many games are actually unplayable on the slim PS2? Is it just the one? I'm not sure, but I think it may be just the one. Again I know this is not really a huge problem now, but it sets a bad precedent.

I read (somewhere...) that MS did look at creating a redesigned Xbox, but with the HDD it made it harder to slim down and they just didn't think the money was there to do one.

The Xbox was basically a PC, and MS didn't have as much control over the hardware as Sony does with the PS2. But again I don't think the features should be changed when the newer versions of consoles are released.

[rickonker]

Well the N64 did have a memory extension that added an extra 4MB of RAM, but as far as I know it was never bundled with the system. Still, some games required the extra RAM.

This is true, and I actually thought of this when I started the thread. It's kind of similar to the Xbox 360's hard drive. I don't think any of the games actually require the hard drive, but you probably need one to download XBLA games.

My thinking on this is that requiring an extra accessory for some games is a lot better than having multiple versions of a console, even though it can seem like a ripoff. The basic hardware is the same, and any console owner can "convert" or upgrade whenever they want. Compare this to getting a slim PS2 and never being able to play that game even if you bought the hard drive.

[wubb]

The top loader NES doesn't have the AV ports (I think) so it did remove a feature. (Pretty minor though, although that might depend a bit on your perspective.)

I can see your point about not removing a feature that prevents you from being able to play a game. But it looks like the only example of that is the slim PS2 not being able to play the single PS2 game that requires the HDD. (Unless we are forgetting some.) I'm sure it couldn't be nearly as small if they left room for the HDD port and frankly I'd rather have it really small and sleek than larger with room for the HDD that is practically unused.

[Ivanhoe]

I think its a good idea if its done in a way where the games will still be able to work the system on either version.

xbox360's 2 versions suck imo. It limits the haves and have nots of the HDD and devs have to take that into consideration when making games that not every 360 has a HDD even though they are upgradable it still doesnt change the fact that people will still have 360s with no HDD.


Sony on the other hand did the best thing giving users choices between extras or no extras. either way all systems have a least a 20gig HDD which gives devs lots to work with in regards of how they want there games to work with the HDD.

Im looking forward to a Slim psthree version in 5 years.

[rickonker]

The top loader NES doesn't have the AV ports (I think) so it did remove a feature. (Pretty minor though, although that might depend a bit on your perspective.)By my criteria I think this would be a different version.

I can see your point about not removing a feature that prevents you from being able to play a game. But it looks like the only example of that is the slim PS2 not being able to play the single PS2 game that requires the HDD. (Unless we are forgetting some.) I'm sure it couldn't be nearly as small if they left room for the HDD port and frankly I'd rather have it really small and sleek than larger with room for the HDD that is practically unused.

I think you're right, but IMO they shouldn't have even been in that situation. If they'd used a USB port for every hard drive, it wouldn't have been a problem. Maybe when they first designed the PS2 they thought that would be too expensive or something, but it's still poor planning on their part.

xbox360's 2 versions suck imo. It limits the haves and have nots of the HDD and devs have to take that into consideration when making games that not every 360 has a HDD even though they are upgradable it still doesnt change the fact that people will still have 360s with no HDD.

I totally agree that every 360 should have had a hard drive, like the first Xbox. But the way it is now is better than the alternative, which is to have two versions of the 360, one with the HD and one without, that couldn't be converted into the other.

[A Happy Panda]

Im looking forward to a Slim psthree version in 5 years.

Instead of a full-on grill, will it just become a griddle?

[dpatel]

I don't mind the smaller versions of both PS1 and PS2. In fact, I look forward to their smaller iteration of the PS3. I do have to agree that the two versions of the PS3 and 360 suck though.

The two versions of the 360 aren't too bad, since everything is upgradeable. However, it seems that developers are more willing to make use of the HDD if it is standard. For instance, PS3 games are already giving gamers the option of reducing load times by installing onto the HDD. This would be easily possible on the 360, since the developers just have to make sure the game checks whether or not the HDD is present before asking the option, but, for some reason, no games support this option (at least I think they don't).

The two SKUs for the PS3 was a terrible idea too. I am thankful they didn't completely blow it, by adding a HDMI port to the core version. However, I hate the fact that certain things aren't upgradeable on the PS3 core. Although, I would imagine that, through USB ports, you could still be able to use the extra features.

I really hope this gen is the last of the 'dual-SKU' approach.

[rickonker]

The two SKUs for the PS3 was a terrible idea too. I am thankful they didn't completely blow it, by adding a HDMI port to the core version. However, I hate the fact that certain things aren't upgradeable on the PS3 core. Although, I would imagine that, through USB ports, you could still be able to use the extra features.

I was thinking about the HDMI thing too. I think they only added that in at the last minute, but yeah that would have been really bad. It seemed like they only changed it after the uproar from people like us, which is why I talked about the lack of media reaction when this kind of thing happens sometimes.

[dpatel]

I was thinking about the HDMI thing too. I think they only added that in at the last minute, but yeah that would have been really bad. It seemed like they only changed it after the uproar from people like us, which is why I talked about the lack of media reaction when this kind of thing happens sometimes.

Yea. it was announced last minute at TGS. Most likely in regards to the uproar. The HDMI was the biggest thing, since it is the only thing that can't be added on. I don't think wi-fi, memory card reader, and bigger hard drives are 'officially' available, but I do know that usb wi-fi, usb memory card readers, and larger hard drives exist. I know people have been successful with substituting any 2.5" HDD, but am not sure about adding the other two on, using non-PS3 accessories.

[wubb]

I really hope this gen is the last of the 'dual-SKU' approach.

Totally agree. I can't wait for the 3 SKU PS4 launch!

[dpatel]

Totally agree. I can't wait for the 3 SKU PS4 launch!

Hopefully the third SKU will finally live up to all the "promises" Sony makes.

[rickonker]

I don't think wi-fi, memory card reader, and bigger hard drives are 'officially' available, but I do know that usb wi-fi, usb memory card readers, and larger hard drives exist.

I think at least some of these things need drivers, and there's no guarantee Sony will support them. I guess they will probably at least release official add-ons though. Still when I buy a console on launch day I want it to be exactly the same feature-wise as the smaller, newer version of the console somebody buys 5 years later.

[dpatel]

I think at least some of these things need drivers, and there's no guarantee Sony will support them. I guess they will probably at least release official add-ons though. Still when I buy a console on launch day I want it to be exactly the same feature-wise as the smaller, newer version of the console somebody buys 5 years later.

True. I know Sony is allowing for non-proprietary bluetooth headsets and HDDs to work with the PS3, so hopefully they will allow non-proprietary wi-fi and memory card readers too.

[rickonker]

True. I know Sony is allowing for non-proprietary bluetooth headsets and HDDs to work with the PS3, so hopefully they will allow non-proprietary wi-fi and memory card readers too.

That's a good thing, but it brings up something else - basically we're at the mercy of the manufacturer when it comes to these things. Of course in a way that's always the case, but it seems like there was almost a gentleman's agreement that you don't make more than one version of the console, you don't release a new console more than once every 5 years or so, etc... Sorry if that didn't make much sense.

[Starky27]

I know the PS1 and GC both had 2nd revisions that removed video ports from the system. The original PS1 had RCA jacks (and a parallel port), the GC had the port for the component cable. Also, if you're counting the PSX as a hardware version, you should probably count the 'GameCube' Q (albeit produced by Panasonic) and the eventual DVD playing Wii.

[rickonker]

I know the PS1 and GC both had 2nd revisions that removed video ports from the system. The original PS1 had RCA jacks (and a parallel port), the GC had the port for the component cable. Also, if you're counting the PSX as a hardware version, you should probably count the 'GameCube' Q (albeit produced by Panasonic) and the eventual DVD playing Wii.

I didn't know about the GC port. I didn't count the Q because as you said it was from Panasonic, but I guess you're right. As for the DVD-playing Wii, I was definitely going to count this, but I read recently it might actually just be a software upgrade. But yes if a new Wii is needed to play DVDs I would count that as a different version.

So I guess MS is the only current manufacturer who has definitely not had different versions of its consoles? Kind of ironic given their PC background...

[peteloaf]

There are two versions of the Sega Saturn - I don't know if there are any differences other than cosmetic (one has circle buttons on the console, one has curved rectangles) - but I think the access light was removed from one to the other. Also I noticed that you didn't include handelds, probably due to the giant mass of Gameboy revisions, but the game gear gear had two versions. The later removed compatability with the TV tuner. Also don't forget the Genesis 1, 2 (removed the headphone jack and volume control) & 3 (No expansion port for Sega CD) as well as the SNES 1 & 2 (2 appeared to only be a cosmetic change, but was incompatable with the game genie)

[WhipSmartBanky]

There are two versions of the Sega Saturn - I don't know if there are any differences other than cosmetic (one has circle buttons on the console, one has curved rectangles) - but I think the access light was removed from one to the other. Also I noticed that you didn't include handelds, probably due to the giant mass of Gameboy revisions, but the game gear gear had two versions. The later removed compatability with the TV tuner. Also don't forget the Genesis 1, 2 (removed the headphone jack and volume control) & 3 (No expansion port for Sega CD) as well as the SNES 1 & 2 (2 appeared to only be a cosmetic change, but was incompatable with the game genie)
The SNES 2 also lacked the S-Video capability that the original had.

[rickonker]

Thanks for the info, I didn't go as far back as the SNES and the Genesis because I didn't know how many versions they had.

To go into more detail about why I didn't count the Q, my basic point is that if the features of a console are changed, it's not really the same console anymore, so it shouldn't have the same name. Since the Q wasn't called a Gamecube, this was fine with me. Another example is the Wii, which is a souped up GC and plays GC games, but it's not called a Gamecube.

[shipwreck]

Thanks for the info, I didn't go as far back as the SNES and the Genesis because I didn't know how many versions they had.

To go into more detail about why I didn't count the Q, my basic point is that if the features of a console are changed, it's not really the same console anymore, so it shouldn't have the same name. Since the Q wasn't called a Gamecube, this was fine with me. Another example is the Wii, which is a souped up GC and plays GC games, but it's not called a Gamecube.

I'm so confused. Why are you not counting the two different versions of GC (the one with the digital out and the one without?).

And since you're not counting the Q, you are not counting the PSX as well right?

If you are going to do this maybe you should list what versions of the systems actually correspond with those numbers in the OP.

[Kayden]

Didn't the newer PS1s also get rid of the parallel port before the PSO?

[ashram]

There are two versions of the Sega Saturn - I don't know if there are any differences other than cosmetic (one has circle buttons on the console, one has curved rectangles) - but I think the access light was removed from one to the other. Also I noticed that you didn't include handelds, probably due to the giant mass of Gameboy revisions, but the game gear gear had two versions. The later removed compatability with the TV tuner. Also don't forget the Genesis 1, 2 (removed the headphone jack and volume control) & 3 (No expansion port for Sega CD) as well as the SNES 1 & 2 (2 appeared to only be a cosmetic change, but was incompatable with the game genie)

on the saturn, besides the shape of the buttons, included a new revision motherboard...

on the ps2 front, besides the 3 obvious physical changes (4 if you include the original japanese version) it has had at least 14-15 motherboard revisions.

[shipwreck]

Didn't the newer PS1s also get rid of the parallel port before the PSO?

Yes.

[ashram]

also, forgot to add the tg-16 w/cd and the turbo duo

[rickonker]

I'm so confused. Why are you not counting the two different versions of GC (the one with the digital out and the one without?).
When I started the thread, I didn't know about the two GCs, I would count them as different versions now.
And since you're not counting the Q, you are not counting the PSX as well right?
About the PSX, it was my impression that Sony still called it a type of PS2? If that's wrong then you're right, it shouldn't count.
If you are going to do this maybe you should list what versions of the systems actually correspond with those numbers in the OP.
Ok, second try...

Versions for each console (correct me if I'm wrong here)

Saturn - 1 (or 2? Any feature differences?)
N64 - 1
PS1 - 2 (one with parallel port, one without?)

Dreamcast - 1
Gamecube - 2 (video ports removed)
Xbox - 1
PS2 - 3 (original, slim, PSX...or 2 if PSX wasn't called a PS2, or still 3 if there were other differences between originals?)

Wii - 1 (so far)
Xbox 360 - 1
PS3 - 2 (and this is just at launch)

[ashram]

When I started the thread, I didn't know about the two GCs, I would count them as different versions now.

About the PSX, it was my impression that Sony still called it a type of PS2? If that's wrong then you're right, it shouldn't count.

Ok, second try...

Versions for each console (correct me if I'm wrong here)

Saturn - 1 (or 2? Any feature differences?)
N64 - 1
PS1 - 2 (one with parallel port, one without?)

Dreamcast - 1
Gamecube - 2 (video ports removed)
Xbox - 1
PS2 - 3 (original, slim, PSX...or 2 if PSX wasn't called a PS2, or still 3 if there were other differences between originals?)

Wii - 1 (so far)
Xbox 360 - 1
PS3 - 2 (and this is just at launch)

the v9 and 10 ps2 (last revisions of the fat ps2) removed the firewire ports and added a built in ir. the original japanese launch ps2 had a pcmcia slot for an external hd.

the dreamcast had a later rev that got rid of the mil-cd format, thus not allowing pirates the ability to boot copies

and the ps1 had 3... don't forget the smaller psone redesign.

[rickonker]

the v9 and 10 ps2 (last revisions of the fat ps2) removed the firewire ports and added a built in ir. the original japanese launch ps2 had a pcmcia slot for an external hd.

the dreamcast had a later rev that got rid of the mil-cd format, thus not allowing pirates the ability to boot copies

and the ps1 had 3... don't forget the smaller psone redesign.

Ok so the PS2 now has 4 or 5 versions, depending on the PSX...

Did the Dreamcast revision remove any advertised features, or was it just to prevent piracy?

I included the PSone in the original post, but I think the only difference was the parallel port being removed. Since it was said that happened earlier, then the PSone doesn't count as a different version, so still 2 versions for the PS1...unless there were other differences?

[ashram]

I included the PSone in the original post, but I think the only difference was the parallel port being removed. Since it was said that happened earlier, then the PSone doesn't count as a different version, so still 2 versions for the PS1...unless there were other differences?
if you don't count that, then you can't count the ps2 revs.... on the ps1, the parallel port was an advertised feature.... and the psone was a total redesign altogether. so that's 3 revs.

on the dreamcast, the removal of the mil-cd format made no difference in the US, since we didn't have any mil-cd's, but they did in japan.

also, i wouldn't count the psx, as that wasn't marketed to gamers.

[rickonker]

if you don't count that, then you can't count the ps2 revs.... on the ps1, the parallel port was an advertised feature.... and the psone was a total redesign altogether. so that's 3 revs.
Why? The PS2 revs had different features, but from what's been said here it sounds like the final regular-sized PS1 and the PSone had exactly the same features. I agree that obviously the PSone was a revision, but if it didn't change any features I don't count it as a separate version of the console.

on the dreamcast, the removal of the mil-cd format made no difference in the US, since we didn't have any mil-cd's, but they did in japan.Ok, this definitely sounds like a different version then.

also, i wouldn't count the psx, as that wasn't marketed to gamers. If you mean Sony didn't call it a PS2, then ok I won't count the PSX. On the other hand this means Sony released more than the expected one console every 5 years or so.

Edit: So it's still looking like MS is the only console company to not change any features and not release more than one console about every 5 years. Of course they've only released 2 consoles so far, so who knows...

[epobirs]

I think you're right, but IMO they shouldn't have even been in that situation. If they'd used a USB port for every hard drive, it wouldn't have been a problem. Maybe when they first designed the PS2 they thought that would be too expensive or something, but it's still poor planning on their part.



I totally agree that every 360 should have had a hard drive, like the first Xbox. But the way it is now is better than the alternative, which is to have two versions of the 360, one with the HD and one without, that couldn't be converted into the other.

Keep in mind that the PS2 chipset spec was frozen in early 1999, well before the USB 2.0 spec was published. So a PS2 hard drive connected via USB would be constrained to USB 1.1's maximum 11 Mbps throughput. In real life the speed is much less, closer to 8 Mbps for a single load on the bus. (USB was designed for multiple active devices and doesn't aggregate its bandwidth to a single device especially well.)

This means the speed of data from the drive would be slower than the DVD. A lot slower much of the time. This would still be acceptable for having a unlimited save game capacity but useless for data caching.

People get far too worked up over the Core System. The games work just fine and get better with the simple addition of the drive. The added work for developers is trivial compared to what certain other systems impose upon them. In retrospect, while Xbox fans liked the hard drive, it was overall underutilized by developers even though it was present in every single unit. It also represented a fixed cost that was an unceasing barrier to Microsoft's need to reduce the system cost. It is little surprise they chose to make it optional. The real mistake was in using overpriced proprietary memory cards. The Core System would be far more attractive if it had a pair of SD slots.

Sony made the hard drive standard on the PS3 and permits game installing to the drive for one reason and it isn't because they were feeling charitable. The load rate on the BD-ROM drive is lousy compared to the 12X DVD drive in the Xbox 360. Without the hard drive as standard in the PS3, Sony would be facing major complaints over load times. This was CYA, not a feature upgrade.

[MadFlava]

Im looking forward to a Slim psthree version in 5 years.

lol, yeah the current PS3 is a huge... It reminds me of the black monolith in 2001 space odyssey.

[rickonker]

It reminds me of the black monolith in 2001 space odyssey.
I knew it looked familiar...

Thanks for the info epobirs. I think the main problem with the Core System is not specifically the lack of a hard drive, but the fact that you can't save games out of the box.

Does the PS3 really let you install games to the HD?? Wow, so we have different configurations, excessive power use, and HD installs. The PS3 is sounding more and more like the PC nobody wanted instead of a true console.

[Kayden]

I knew it looked familiar...

Thanks for the info epobirs. I think the main problem with the Core System is not specifically the lack of a hard drive, but the fact that you can't save games out of the box.


... ... .... :dunce: ?

[rickonker]

... ... .... :dunce: ?
epobirs's point is that the hard drive in the first Xbox was not really used much by developers, and this is why MS didn't want to include one with every 360. This is right of course, the hard drive was mainly used for almost unlimited game saves. What I'm saying is, if the Core System came with a memory card, for example, then it would be a much better deal, because then you wouldn't have to spend extra just to be able to save games.

[AngstOverlord]

The 3 PS2 versions are the original, the slim PS2, and the PSX. The PSone doesn't have the serial port. I think all the games work though.

No. The PSOne uses the revised bios set used by the PS2 and as a consequence it cannot play... well... two or three games. However, one of these games is one I OWN, so it does matter. Granted, how many people actually liked Shadow Tower? I still think it was boneheaded to mess with the bios anyhow... what was wrong with the original set?

Seriously, I tried running ST on the PS2. The results were... interesting. Very, very broken and any use of doors or teleporters had random effects or froze the thing. Granted, I like the original PS and had no issues getting another used unit... I only used the PS2 to play its games after my original unit killed itself because it hated King's Field so much.

Memory cards should be a standard pack-in for systems, I think, which lack a harddrive. Who would PLAY a modern game and not want to save progress? It'd be a gesture of goodwill to include one... has any non-HD/Cartridge-bearer ever come with a free card? ANY?

[rickonker]

No. The PSOne uses the revised bios set used by the PS2 and as a consequence it cannot play... well... two or three games. However, one of these games is one I OWN, so it does matter. Granted, how many people actually liked Shadow Tower? I still think it was boneheaded to mess with the bios anyhow... what was wrong with the original set?

Seriously, I tried running ST on the PS2. The results were... interesting. Very, very broken and any use of doors or teleporters had random effects or froze the thing. Granted, I like the original PS and had no issues getting another used unit... I only used the PS2 to play its games after my original unit killed itself because it hated King's Field so much.

Memory cards should be a standard pack-in for systems, I think, which lack a harddrive. Who would PLAY a modern game and not want to save progress? It'd be a gesture of goodwill to include one... has any non-HD/Cartridge-bearer ever come with a free card? ANY?
Wow, that sucks. So back to 3 versions for the PS1 I guess.

I don't think any systems have come with a free card...maybe the DC had a bundle? Anyway we have to give credit to the Xbox as the only console last gen to include save game functionality.

[Wolfpup]

Oh come on. This whole thing is bogus. The only recent console that's had meaningful differences is the 360. Not including the hard drive prevents developers from designing games around it for the most part. Even then, it IS upgradeable.

ANY successful system will get redesigned at some point both to keep it fresh, and to make it cheaper to produce (or to add features in some cases). The Atari VCS/2600, NES, SNES, Master System, Genesis, Turbographix, SegaCD, 3DO, Saturn, Playstation, Playstation 2, Gameboy, Gameboy Advance, Nintendo DS (and the Gamecube-at least in terms of chopping off a port) have all had fairly major revisions. That doesn't make them anything like a PC, and it doesn't stop old games from running on them.

Singling out Sony is absolutely absurd, and probably indicates a bias (or just a lack of knowledge about past game hardware).

[radjago]

Who would PLAY a modern game and not want to save progress?
Sports gamers who don't play seasons. Little kids who don't mind playing the same thing over and over or don't know any better.

[rickonker]

Oh come on. This whole thing is bogus. The only recent console that's had meaningful differences is the 360. Not including the hard drive prevents developers from designing games around it for the most part. Even then, it IS upgradeable.

ANY successful system will get redesigned at some point both to keep it fresh, and to make it cheaper to produce (or to add features in some cases). The Atari VCS/2600, NES, SNES, Master System, Genesis, Turbographix, SegaCD, 3DO, Saturn, Playstation, Playstation 2, Gameboy, Gameboy Advance, Nintendo DS (and the Gamecube-at least in terms of chopping off a port) have all had fairly major revisions. That doesn't make them anything like a PC, and it doesn't stop old games from running on them.

Singling out Sony is absolutely absurd, and probably indicates a bias (or just a lack of knowledge about past game hardware).
It's not like I'm saying Sony is the only company that does this, I'm saying they're even worse at this than the rest.

[RegalSin2020]

Well personally as a person who would like to be into Computer arcuterture this is a good thing. Then again when deciding on which one is better we all know it is the system with etc features.

Think about it the NES has so many diffrent revisions and models. The only diffrence is if these revisions hold new properties or lost old properties.

The thing is these revisions is normal and you should be thankfull for it.

ON the topic of Sony. The original Playstation had problems then they updated it during the 1996 release. Then they made the PS1 which is just the revision of the old model. Probably lost stuff like the sound or gained.

Playing backup copies on the PS2 was too easy. Having a regular PS2 to play games on is dream for a downloader. So they had to make changes and seeing how there is so many hackers and cheaters on the network games they decided to pull the plug on the HD interface but gave a Plus to the USB output. Then again this was hacked and we can play Copies.

Sony was just trying to prevent hacking and playing of copies there is no big deal. The thing you should worry about.