
"Sony guts!"
IGN has a story up citing Ultra One, a Japanese monthly tech magazine whose July issue reports that the PS3 will include the unified Emotion Engine/Graphic Synthesizer combo chip that currently resides in the slim-PS2 model, thus ensuring a high level of backwards compatibility. This is a change from their claim that the PS3 would use software to emulate older games, similar to the solution the Xbox 360 (still) employs. The key points of such a decision:
- It will increase the price of each unit; as the software solution approaches 100% compatibility, they will have the option of removing the hardware to cut costs.
- The PS3 could use a software / hardware combination to have even greater backwards compatibility than the PS2 slim currently enjoys.
- Will the system handle graphical upgrades -- similar to the 360's upsampling of older games -- if they use a hardware solution?
See also:
PlayStation 3 not 100% backwards compatible?
So will or won't the Sony PlayStation 3 be backwards compatible?
[Thanks, Canadian Geese and David]












(Page 1) Reader Comments
Reply
Just saying. No wonder that thing looks like a foreman grill, maybe itll put off enough heat that i can cook off of it too.
Reply
Reply
Reply
My question was if it turns out that the ps2 hardware really costs that much more would you be willing to sacrafice that backwords compatability for a cheaper ps3?
Reply
LOL...while PS3 early adopters are playing God of War 2...others will be playing Gears of War on the 360.
Reply
I want to play PS3 games, yet I have to pay for PS2 onboard hardware, a Bluray Drive, and motion sensing in the controller now? Sony needs to stop already.
The PS2's BC is graphically glitchy and slow to boot. Play PS1 games on a PS1. Play PS2 games on a PS2.
The slim PS2 doesn't play all PS2 games. I'd say that's worse than partial BC support any day. Doesn't that make the slim PS2 the first console that won't play all of its own games?
Reply
Reply
Reply
xD
wii60!
Reply
Sony would be able to save a lot of money on engineering a software solution, which requires a decently large staff of programmers and testers devoted to testing each and every game.
That's very time consuming, and therefore very expensive. There are a lot of PS1 and PS2 games. It makes more sense just to pop in a chip that has pretty much paid for itself.
The disadvantage is that I don't think the BC games will look better than they were on a PS-2. Compare that to how Microsoft has been able to improve the look of BC games on the 360.
Reply
I hope that Sony can survive this generation. M$ seems poised to eat even more market this time around. If Sony loses the American market, all is lost. As the Sega Saturn proved, a system must be a success in BOTH territories in order to succeed.
Reply
http://taketa.livejournal.com/5325.html
It might not be possible for Sony to do this, with the Immersion appeal still waiting, they may have to pull all PS2s off the shelves. If they put PS2 technology in the PS3, they might have to pull PS3s too.
Reply
In any case, they can't get any lower than Microsoft's 35% BC rate. (even if they skip all Barbie Horse Adventures in their backcatalog)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Imagine if they put the Emotion Engine in combination with the Cell. Then we could have 4D Toy Story graphics while being jacked into the Matrix!
Sorry...Sony just brings it on themselves. Just like Microsoft does with Windows and Internet Explorer.
Reply
I played a couple of old Xbox games on my 360 recently and I just didn't care for them anymore.
For me it's always been about the gameplay, but I'd rather wait for something like Mass Effect than trudge through Knights of the Old Republic 2. I'd rather wait for Halo 3 than play Halo 2. It's not that these are bad games, it's just that I've moved on - the best place for old games is viewed through rose tinted spectacles! Perhaps in my old age I'm becoming a graphics whore! :-)
Also, I don't see why BC matters because the second hand market for consoles is pretty low. It's not even worth trying to sell my PS2 to offset some of the massive cost of the PS3, because the money I'd get for the PS2 probably wouldn't even stretch to buying me a PS3 game!
So I'd rather have a cheaper PS3 with no BC, and if I was desperate to play a PS2 title just unbox my PS2! Just as I do with my Dreamcast and all the other old consoles I have.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Hey look I still have money for 2 games or a few months worth of rentals from Gamefly for the price of a PS3!
Why do people trash on the 360's BC situation then cite the PS3 as "how to do it right" in the same breath. I just don't get it.
Reply
Employing a team of 10 guys for a year to do a software back-compat story costs you $1m. Putting a $5 chip in 10 million PS3's costs you $50m.
Or, to put it into more perspective, you could have a team of 500 programmers working for a year and still break even if it replaces a $5 chip.
Reply
Reply
I guess that would be your fault for assuming the "promises" included titles that you felt were "major".
Reply
Reply
Microsoft basically said, "Sh*t guys, we didn't know it was that important to you. We'll get back to work on it."
Reply
It's not a deal breaker for me though, just too bad. I already have a PS2, I personally don't care about having another one in my PS3... unless it's going to re-render the graphics.
Reply
Reply
Reply
WiiS3
Reply
Reply
I can't contact them so I thought u guys could help
Reply
Using a software emulation method would greatly reduce the defects of the PS3, especially if someone sends back the unit to Sony to repair a comparitavely unimportant PS2 backwards compatibility feature. It is likely that most gamers won't even use the BC feature, so it is best to avoid sticking something in there that can fail on you.
Reply
No one is ever happy in the Gaming Scene. First the people is bitching about how PS3 will emulate games and because of that, it will not have a great backward compatibility.
And now well not official but could be a good news, because if the PS3 has the PS2 chip well the backward compatibility will be great but yet again people is bitching because they dont care now about PS2 games on the PS3 (Yeah right).
This is a crazy world.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I can't contact them so I thought u guys could help"
http://www.engadget.com/2006/06/03/comments-are-off-yep-back-soon-yep/
This is stupid. If I have games from a previous gen, I already have a console that plays them, stop bundling all your half-assed shit together sony. Do one thing and do it great.
Reply
Reply
Why do you really need BC in a PS3? Many people already have a PS2, so why just get rid of it? In my opinion, the best way to play games is on the original hardware. That is why, even though I will more than likely get a Wii, I will not be using it to play NES, SNES, N64, or other systems' games. Sure, my living room has more game systems than a what is considered "healthy", but I know that I would be playing the games perfectly on the real hardware.
Reply
I dont know whats wrong with this, i mean being able to play PS2 games in the PS3 is a good thing and is even better if it is not by an emulation method.
Because even if in the 360 the Xbox games are being emulated, well some of them dont work very well, at least my Ninja Gaiden does not work well on my 360 in certain levels of the game.
Reply
But Im still not over the price, so i think ill stay with the 360 for now.
Reply
http://ps2.ign.com/articles/659/659949p1.html
The brick PS2s are better performers, but the second version slim (v13+) and beyond have the best lasers out of all the PS2s.
The list doesn't look like a big deal, except for maybe Tekken 5 for some people.
"All new PlayStation 2 revisions from here on out, including any units that carry the SCPH-75000 model number, will have these problems."
I wouldn't worry about it too much, but it is pretty silly that a PS2 can't play some PS2 games properly.
Reply
Personally, BC is a non-issue with me. I buy next gen systems for next gen games. If I want to play older games, then I'll break out the older system, but my sense of nostalgia is kept in check with fond memories, so the urge to play old games rarely comes up. Happy memories.
In my opinion, leave BC out. If it complicates the process and increases the overall cost, cut that feature. No need to include an anchor on a next gen system. Besides, how many people are playing PS1 games on their PS2? (That is rhetorical and don't you dare answer it and retort me.)
Reply
Please continue your ridiculous flaming. Ill wait until they release the damn thing and then ill flame or praise were needed.
Reply
And reason behind BC: It allows people who didn't own the last system play games from it. I know I've enjoyed playing Astro Boy: Omega Factor FE, and FE:SS on my DS since I don't own a GBA.
So get your heads out of your asses. BC's not as important for game fanatics, but for the casual gamer it's important. And it's especially important for Sony products since they have a high fatality rate. What are you gonna play your PS2 games on when your PS2 dies to perpetual read errors?
Reply
I happen to follow the emulation community, and the fact that MS got as many games as they did working is impressive for me. The Xbox emulation community for the PC has gotten a grand total of one commercial game working. Sometimes you need a little perspective.
With this logic, I'm sure you could say the N64 emulation is horrible, since no N64 emulator can decently run the 8-year old N64 game "Star Wars: Rogue Squadron."
If the PS3 really does contain PS2 and PS1 guts, then that likely means that it will merely upscale the images to 1080p. Not render them at that resolution. Something that can't be dome with Low-Level Emulation that would be acheived with having the hardware there. The road of High-Level Emulation, which is what MS chose for the Xbox 360, will pay off better in the end, but allows for playing games better than otherwise possible.
Reply
Reply