26 replies to this topic

[Atari Hacker]

The Ps2 has been out for about 11 years now, and I want to know if you still consider it a modern console currently.

In my opinion, I think that it is. They still make ps2 slims (okay, I might not be 100% sure on that, but I did recently get one.) and they are making new games for it (just look on their website, and also, I just saw NHL 2012 at Gamestop the other day) and the last thing is that sony said they would keep it in support as long as people are buying it.

Now, what do you think?

[keilbaca]

It is a modern system until they stop making games for the system, that's how I see it at least. Once game production stops (excluding homebrew games), it gets put into the classic category.

Edited by keilbaca, Wed Dec 28, 2011 2:11 PM.

[SoulBlazer]

Are there still PS2 games planned for release for North America, though? If it's down to Japan only I'd argue that it's no longer a modern system and belongs in classic gaming. Same for the GBA.

[Emehr]

Depends on your definition of eras and generations. I define them by gameplay. We had the arcade-style gameplay era (Atari VCS, Intellivision, Vectrex, 5200, etc. up to before the NES came out), the platform era (NES, Genesis, SuperNES, Turbografx, etc.), and the 3D free-roaming era (PlayStation, N64, PS2, Dreamcast). Since we are still playing 3D free-roaming games, I'd classify it under modern.

[jhd]

From a retail perspective, this system is only marginally still current generation.

Wal-Mart has a few new titles in stock (mostly just sports games and a few Sing Star titles) and EB Games has about the same stock. Everywhere else has either dumped all of their PS 2 stock, or it is sitting on the discount racks gathering dust.

I would push for the PS 2 to have Classic status based simply on the difficulty/impossibility of finding new games for the system. The same argument can be made for the Gamecube and the original Xbox.

[godslabrat]

At this point, the new games being made for the PS2 place it a half-notch above "dead sysrtem with active homebrew community" status. Yeah, they're new titles, but we're talking less than six a year, being cranked out by third-string programmers, with a sticker price of $20 or less. For a console to be commercially viable this long after release is an aberration, and I think we can say it's commercially dead, even if a few unimportant titles continue to trickle out.

Seeing as we're already looking at the PS2's replacement to be replaced, I don't see any criteria by which to call the PS2 "modern".

[Ransom]

Does a console that is no longer produced automatically become "classic"? Is that all that the word "classic" means in this context?

To me, it always meant something more.

[Atariboy]

The console is still being manufactured, accessories are still being manufactured, it's still widely stocked by retailers that carry videogames, it still sees a decent bit of reprints, and it even gets the occasional new release (Although I think we're down to just EA Sports releases in North America these days).

It's certainly not a classic gaming console since its commercial life hasn't even been concluded yet.

[save2600]

Yes, the PS2 is a modern console.

[DemonoidTentacle]

My vote goes to modern.

[godslabrat]

Atariboy, on Wed Dec 28, 2011 6:25 PM, said:

The console is still being manufactured, accessories are still being manufactured, it's still widely stocked by retailers that carry videogames, it still sees a decent bit of reprints, and it even gets the occasional new release (Although I think we're down to just EA Sports releases in North America these days).

It's certainly not a classic gaming console since its commercial life hasn't even been concluded yet.

You could make the argument that the 2600 and NES are still being manufactured.

[TwinChargers]

godslabrat, on Thu Dec 29, 2011 9:40 AM, said:

Atariboy, on Wed Dec 28, 2011 6:25 PM, said:

The console is still being manufactured, accessories are still being manufactured, it's still widely stocked by retailers that carry videogames, it still sees a decent bit of reprints, and it even gets the occasional new release (Although I think we're down to just EA Sports releases in North America these days).

It's certainly not a classic gaming console since its commercial life hasn't even been concluded yet.

You could make the argument that the 2600 and NES are still being manufactured.

The reason I can still see it as modern is because at no point has Sony stopped manufacturing the PS2. Both Atari and Nintendo have stopped producing the 2600 and the NES. The PS2 isn't modern in the sense that it is in direct competition with the Wii, PS3 and 360, bit it is modern as in you can still purchase one brand new at a store alongside all of them yet. Once Sony stops producing the things and cuts off production, then I'd say it goes into classic territory,

[Atariboy]

godslabrat, on Thu Dec 29, 2011 9:40 AM, said:

Atariboy, on Wed Dec 28, 2011 6:25 PM, said:

The console is still being manufactured, accessories are still being manufactured, it's still widely stocked by retailers that carry videogames, it still sees a decent bit of reprints, and it even gets the occasional new release (Although I think we're down to just EA Sports releases in North America these days).

It's certainly not a classic gaming console since its commercial life hasn't even been concluded yet.

You could make the argument that the 2600 and NES are still being manufactured.

I can't walk into any videogame store in the country and buy a brand new Atari 2600 or a brand new NES. What's been produced in recent years have been Famiclones from 3rd party companies and 2600 on chip devices that don't accept 2600 cartridges.

I can walk into any store and buy a brand new Sony Playstation 2 today that plays Playstation 2 discs. It has never left the market and new games are still developed, past games are reprinted, accessories are manufactured, and PS2 material is stocked at every retailer that carries videogames.

Plus, even if it had, we're talking about what represents the last generation of gaming consoles. Personally, I think classic refers to more than just being 1 generation behind the times or being out of production. I don't think of the GCN/Xbox as classic either since they're barely cold (I could see an argument for the DC since it died so prematurely 10 years ago, although I personally think it's still a bit too soon even for that).

To me, classic refers to when a system leaves the mainstream. As the last generation of consoles, there's still millions of people regularly playing on these things. Heck, one of them is still in production as we speak. I don't see an argument for it being classic. But of course there's no accepted way of thinking here so none of us are wrong since it's 100% opinion.

Edited by Atariboy, Thu Dec 29, 2011 12:09 PM.

[cimerians]

To me if its in the stores its modern but definitely not in the technical sense so maybe the word "modern" isnt the correct word to use.

But if we need to use that word then yes, I think it is, just like the Atari 2600 was still "modern" in 1983\1984 when I bought a Colecovision. Actually the Atari 5200, Colecovision and the Intellevision were the thing to have between 83'-85 not to mention a computer like an XL or C64.
The 2600 was still in stores but nobody really cared that much anymore, at least the friends and people I hung around with.

[theloon]

I also use "can it be emulated at full speed" as a yard-stick for classic vs. modern systems. I've never seen an emulator run at a comfortable speed with the PS2.

[Ransom]

Am I the only one to whom it seems wrong that there would only be two categories -- modern and classic?

Just from the standpoint of the way most people think of things, there would have to be at least three: modern, "old", and classic. "Old" being the period after the item in question is no longer in production, but before people have grown nostalgic over it. It seems like it takes 10-30 years for most people to grow nostalgic over things.

[Emehr]

Ransom, on Thu Dec 29, 2011 1:42 PM, said:

Am I the only one to whom it seems wrong that there would only be two categories -- modern and classic?

Just from the standpoint of the way most people think of things, there would have to be at least three: modern, "old", and classic. "Old" being the period after the item in question is no longer in production, but before people have grown nostalgic over it.

Yeah, we need some definitive terms for stuff like this. "Classic" can mean two things: old or timeless. I would prefer to have it mean "timeless" but that would mess up the meaning of "classic gaming" since it would technically only include the consoles that were timeless.

Modern can also mean two things: new or recent. I think of it in terms of "recent", which is why the PS2 still feels modern to me. Not to mention that the games it plays are not much different from what is out there now.

Ransom, on Thu Dec 29, 2011 1:42 PM, said:

It seems like it takes 10-30 years for most people to grow nostalgic over things.

I think it depends on your age. Right now, in my mid-30's, I don't feel nostalgic about stuff from ten years ago because it feels like it was three years ago, or whatever. However, in 1991, when I was a teenager, "ten years ago" felt like a long time ago and was when nostalgia for Atari started setting in. So while I may not be feeling nostalgic about the PS2, maybe someone who is 16 years old is.


All in all, "modern" and "classic" can mean different things to different people so essentially it is meaningless. Best just to enjoy it for what it is and try not to categorize.

[godslabrat]

Atariboy, on Thu Dec 29, 2011 12:04 PM, said:

I can't walk into any videogame store in the country and buy a brand new Atari 2600 or a brand new NES. What's been produced in recent years have been Famiclones from 3rd party companies and 2600 on chip devices that don't accept 2600 cartridges.

I can walk into any store and buy a brand new Sony Playstation 2 today that plays Playstation 2 discs. It has never left the market and new games are still developed, past games are reprinted, accessories are manufactured, and PS2 material is stocked at every retailer that carries videogames.

TwinChargers, on Thu Dec 29, 2011 9:55 AM, said:

The reason I can still see it as modern is because at no point has Sony stopped manufacturing the PS2. Both Atari and Nintendo have stopped producing the 2600 and the NES. The PS2 isn't modern in the sense that it is in direct competition with the Wii, PS3 and 360, bit it is modern as in you can still purchase one brand new at a store alongside all of them yet. Once Sony stops producing the things and cuts off production, then I'd say it goes into classic territory,

My point isn't that I think I'm right, you're wrong, and that the PS2 is absolutely a modern system. I'm just pointing out that even the criteria we're using is open to debate. The NES went out of production in the US in 1993/1994, but the Famicom stayed in production until 2003. Was the NES still a "modern" system in 1994? Can we count the Famicom into the equation, and if not, is it fair to exclude Japan from consideration? Sega Saturn fans are always quick to point out how their system had a longer life in Japan, and it's unfair to only judge it on its American performance.

Sure, it makes sense to say it's a modern system in that you can still buy it new, but it definitely shows its age compared to the PS3/360/Wii. There are still a host of reasons it doesn't fit in with the other three systems, despite sharing shelf space with them. Style of games, emphasis on online play, marketing strategy... I could go on.

The answer to this question is going to boil down to "how many ways do you want to split this particular hair?"

[theloon]

I personally divide it up into these periods:
Pongozoic
Odychanfvican
Triatarian
Permarioan
Crapstationous

Edited by theloon, Thu Dec 29, 2011 3:29 PM.

[Nuclear Pacman]

I think it just might be a good thing to eventually open up a new gaming forum here. I don't ever see PS2, Xbox, Gamecube or even PS1, Saturn etc... fitting into the 'classic' gaming era. Disc based, 3d systems started an entirely new era in gaming, and there's the word 'modern' doesn't necessarily constitute 'current', but I just can't wrap my head around those consoles being classic either.

[TheGameCollector]

I'd say it's not classic, but it's not modern either. It falls in between. Atari 2600 is already called an antique by some people.

I also think just because a system still has games for it, it shouldn't ever be grouped separately from the consoles that came out in the same time period. I've always felt Dreamcast belongs alongside PS2, Xbox and Gamecube in the generation section because it really wasn't a lone wolf on the market for long.

It would be just like calling the Wii U part of this generation instead of the next because the other two companies won't have new consoles yet.

[Hatta]

Everything Dreamcast and later is modern.

[Ross PK]

I don't really think I see it as modern or classic, just dated. But I still love it all the same though.

[Tickled_Pink]

It is still modern, in the same way that Core2 processors are just about modern.

They are still making them and earlier last year they were whooping most non-Nintendo consoles in Japan in terms of monthly sales. And I can see why. A mass of cheap games out there on the market to keep younger kids entertained for hours in their bedrooms.

I really need to dig mine out of the garage.

[Atari Hacker]

Tickled_Pink, on Sun Jan 1, 2012 3:35 PM, said:

I really need to dig mine out of the garage.

Wow, how long has it been there for?

Tickled_Pink, on Sun Jan 1, 2012 3:35 PM, said:

A mass of cheap games out there on the market to keep younger kids entertained for hours in their bedrooms.

That just sums everything up