PS3's rumored backcompat solution: a PS2 inside
by Christopher Grant 
{ Jun 5th 2006 at 4:55PM }
"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]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Player1 @ Jun 5th 2006 5:00PM
What would be nice, is if the latest PS2 actually played all PS2 games. I guess that's a lot to ask for Sony.
Wideruled @ Jun 5th 2006 5:01PM
Shouldnt that be an = sign?
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.
dose1 @ Jun 5th 2006 5:01PM
sweet, I just hope its not total ass BC like the 360.
Dark jedi Matu @ Jun 5th 2006 5:01PM
it would suck from a pricing standpoint but I think it's the best way to go. I think Backwards compatibility is great for making an easy solution for people that want to revist those games of old and giving gamers something to play when the (inevitable) drought creeps upon us after launch.
David @ Jun 5th 2006 5:04PM
Don't wana fret but I sent this in too ^^
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?
sputnik @ Jun 5th 2006 5:07PM
They don't have much choice but to do this. The PS3 lineup this fall is looking to be quite underwhelming. Far worse than the 360 lineup last Winter. The PS3 will need full Backwards compatibility even more that the 360 needed it just to save face this winter. So when folks realize...Gee there aren't any decent games for my PS3...they will at least have God of War 2.
LOL...while PS3 early adopters are playing God of War 2...others will be playing Gears of War on the 360.
SuicideNinja @ Jun 5th 2006 5:12PM
Great. More unnecessary hardware in my PS3. How totally not awesome.
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?
jp007 @ Jun 5th 2006 5:12PM
What about PS1 compatibility? If I recall correctly, the PS2 used a PS1 processor as its memory controller, and was able to utilize it for playing PS1 games as well. I wonder if this will work in a similar fashion, but it begs the question, how will PS1 games be played. Perhaps those will be emulated then?
Sense @ Jun 5th 2006 5:14PM
You got PS2 in my PS3!
funkyflea @ Jun 5th 2006 5:18PM
No it shouldn't be an = sign LOL, ps2 and ducktape doesn't equal a ps3 (although its damn close to that pos!)
xD
wii60!
Peter Godly @ Jun 5th 2006 5:20PM
I don't think anyone here is looking at the entire picture.
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.
Chance @ Jun 5th 2006 5:20PM
Even priced at $600, I imagine that Sony will be taking a sizable loss per system sold. They're truly ballancing their ambitions "on the edge of a knife." This additional chipset will surely lower the overall yield.
I hope that Sony can survive this generation. M$ 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.
SickNic @ Jun 5th 2006 5:21PM
If you take the time to read this article:
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.
Darth Pixel @ Jun 5th 2006 5:23PM
BC will be a huge benefit to PS 3. The Virtual Console is a great concept, but Sony's backcatalog is huge in comparison.
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)
Ice Raider @ Jun 5th 2006 5:25PM
What is the point of BC if you can't even transfer your old save games. If they were really smart they would add a PS memory card slot to the PS3.
bv @ Jun 5th 2006 5:26PM
We need a shirt that says "I paid sony 600 dollars and all i got was this stinking PS2"
Dark jedi Matu @ Jun 5th 2006 5:29PM
good point @ sicknic. Sony would have been better served if they just paid the suit and the licensing fees. I think it's ironic that Nintendo is pushing Zelda on the Wii, 20 bucks says that Sony pushes God of War 2 on the PS3 in similar fashion. Emulation or imbedding chips, either way God of War is guranteed playable on PS3 IMO.
SuicideNinja @ Jun 5th 2006 5:34PM
Just slap a "Powered by PS2" sticker on that BlurayStation. Add some racing stripes, a spoiler, and an enormous muffler to complete the deal! It's got 500hp...I promise!
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.
Jdoki @ Jun 5th 2006 5:40PM
When the PS2 arrived I was pretty interested in backwards compatibility - but it just doesn't seem to matter to me any more.
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.
VampireHunter Z @ Jun 5th 2006 5:44PM
Great engineering solution. Put all the old systems inside the new one in order to ensure BC. By PS5 the console will be as huge as the computer tower next to my desk.
Eliot Phillips @ Jun 5th 2006 5:56PM
jp007 is right on this one. This is exactly how the PS2 does BC. It has the single chip that was used in the PSone. The odd thing I saw was the statement that Sony may pull the chip in the future and replace it with software. I didn't know about the slimline BC issues, but I'm guessing the PS3 will have the same issues when it launches and more when they pull the chip.
jabbertrack @ Jun 5th 2006 5:57PM
I have the same BC on my 360 then since it was $400 and I can buy an XBOX for $120 and duct tape it to the top.
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.
mirobin @ Jun 5th 2006 5:57PM
Peter Godly, I don't think you are looking at the entire picture.
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.
Andy S. @ Jun 5th 2006 5:58PM
Bitch about how much you don't want backwards compatibility all you want, but it still stands that promising BC and then having to (temporarily) add hardware to make it happen is a far better way to treat your customers than Microsoft's method of promising BC, half-assing it, and then basically quitting while a large number of major titles are still not supported.
jabbertrack @ Jun 5th 2006 6:10PM
"Bitch about how much you don't want backwards compatibility all you want, but it still stands that promising BC and then having to (temporarily) add hardware to make it happen is a far better way to treat your customers than Microsoft's method of promising BC, half-assing it, and then basically quitting while a large number of major titles are still not supported."
I guess that would be your fault for assuming the "promises" included titles that you felt were "major".
Jman1236 @ Jun 5th 2006 6:11PM
I thought Sony said that the PS3 will be compatible with PS2 and PS1 games? A better question is, will the $500 stripped down PS3 be able to play PS2 and/or PS1 games out of the box or will you need to upgrade it and the $600 model will have BC out of the box. Reguardless, I won't be getting a PS3 until, MSG 4 and FFXIII come out, I'm happy playing Sonic and Resident Evil 5 on my 360.
Basheron @ Jun 5th 2006 6:25PM
Actually, Microsoft heard the discontent and promised they would continue work on BC. When someone keeps in touch with their community and admits they made a bad decision, my friend, I respect that in a company.
Microsoft basically said, "Sh*t guys, we didn't know it was that important to you. We'll get back to work on it."
The New Revelation @ Jun 5th 2006 6:27PM
I was really looking forward to software emulation in the PS3 just so all the games could be rendered at higher resolutions (720p). Especially with a majority of HDTVs handling the older interlaced video signals poorly, I was really looking forward to this feature.
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.
Desertone @ Jun 5th 2006 6:28PM
So much for 720p upconversion!
SW1 @ Jun 5th 2006 6:33PM
A mini ps2 + blu ray + power source = 15 lbs of ps3 or one super super super hot ps3.
vaylen @ Jun 5th 2006 6:34PM
Andy S. hit the nail right on the head. Sony is basically adding hardware by cutting into their own profit margin to improve the BC experience, and people have a reason to complain? As far as I'm concerned, now that the price is set, Sony can add as much expensive stuff to the PS3 as they want and I won't complain.
WiiS3
Dirk Dorkelson @ Jun 5th 2006 6:39PM
Wait, the slim PS2 doesn't play all PS2 games? I was gonna buy one this week! Is there a list of games that don't play on it somewhere?
AT @ Jun 5th 2006 6:54PM
This is off subject but can anyone else NOT see comments for Engadget,,, or is it just me?
I can't contact them so I thought u guys could help
LaughingTarget @ Jun 5th 2006 6:54PM
Adding more stuff isn't necessarily a good idea. More stuff = greater chance to break = higher overall defect rate. Just like why a Silver Ghost car runs just fine today 70 years later and newer cars tend to fall apart rather easily in comparison. More stuff on the newer cars.
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.
Night Elve @ Jun 5th 2006 6:55PM
"Great. More unnecessary hardware in my PS3. How totally not awesome."
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.
Guillermo @ Jun 5th 2006 6:56PM
Is going to feel weird playing PS2 games on the PS3 without the rumble feature. I think the rumble adds a lot to the enjoyment of some games.
??? @ Jun 5th 2006 7:00PM
SONY; Get yer asses in gear and forget all the crap! Pre-orders are awaiting! If you flim-flam around much longer, the WIZZ and M$$$ are gonna grab all that precious retail shelf space in the fall and the only place you'll be able to market the thing will be in certain select shoe stores in the Bronx 30 feet up the ladder! har!
joe55 @ Jun 5th 2006 7:01PM
This makes total sense, Sony's platform programmers ain't worth a dime. I guess they figured out that by now they won't be able to make emulation work.
Guillermo @ Jun 5th 2006 7:02PM
Engadget turned off the comment until further notice.
Cody S. @ Jun 5th 2006 7:06PM
#32. -"This is off subject but can anyone else NOT see comments for Engadget,,, or is it just me?
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.
anti-fanboy @ Jun 5th 2006 7:11PM
Who cares about BC I have a PS2 and a Xbox so I do not need BC. It just a way for Sony to get his fanboys to justify a $600 system. If I want to play Halo 2 I'll bring out my Xbox and if I want to play GTA San Andreas out comes the PS2 or the Xbox. My 360 is only being used to play 360 games. Just like when I get my PS3 only PS3 games will be played on it.
J. Hays @ Jun 5th 2006 7:19PM
I haven't read all the comments, so someone might have already come up with this idea. If so, then I appologize.
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.
Night Elve @ Jun 5th 2006 7:20PM
So many haters here, people should stop bitching around with good news.
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.
Jason W @ Jun 5th 2006 7:43PM
I need to side with the PS3 fanboys on this one. While it is nice that the 360 has some great games in its backwards list (on a side note its 3 for the price of 2 week at gamestop and I just loaded up on backwards games) It would be cool to have the chip for the xbox in the 360 so all my favorite games could be played. Im more than impressed with what MS has done so far with regards to backwards compat, but if 99% were there from day one I would be more impressed if i had all of this on day one.
But Im still not over the price, so i think ill stay with the 360 for now.
SuicideNinja @ Jun 5th 2006 7:49PM
Someone asked about slim PS2 PS2 game compatibility:
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.
Grindstone @ Jun 5th 2006 7:58PM
It is intereseting to note that Sony, who set the precedent for backward compatibility, is having such issues with this feature. Kinda of ironic, really. Especially with the fanboy camps making huge deals about it, pointing fingers and making assinine remarks. What if full backward compatibility is never achieved on the PS3? Who will be the first to STFU? Perhaps we are already assuming too much for BC with the PS3.
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.)
Fan @ Jun 5th 2006 8:10PM
The chip inside is how the Ps2 handles its Ps1 BC.
Please continue your ridiculous flaming. Ill wait until they release the damn thing and then ill flame or praise were needed.
Kazi @ Jun 5th 2006 8:12PM
The DS can play GBA games because inside it packs the processor that was in the GBA and the processor for the DS. This isn't anything abnormal.
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?
skyman8081 @ Jun 5th 2006 8:19PM
@ 19. I take it you like games that actually have endings.
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.
sev4 pri1 @ Jun 5th 2006 8:31PM
Ha ha. Die in a flame of outdated/untested hardware! Burn, burn!