U.S. next to lose PS3 backward compatibility?

man this sucks...

but I guess sony had to come up with software powered bc before long...I mean, no one could really expect ps2 hardware chips to be on the ps3 forever...

"Considering the Wii is essentially a modified Gamecube I could see how it would be easier to implement BC versus a Xbox 360 and a PS3 playing older Xbox and PS2 games respectively."

You are wrong.

Nintendo was the only company that did it correctly. Nintendo just added a GC into the Wii system, that's why there are two drives.

The PS3 could have a backwards compatibility of 1% but as long as all my games work on it I don't care what the rate is. Much like the issues with the PS2 backwards compatibility; I didn't own any of the games that did not work and thus did not care because it was 100% on my library of games.

In other words, it is only a problem if the problem affects you.

Actually David, the Wii console is a heavily boosted Gamecube chipset. That's why it is fully bc. It is as easy to program for as the original GC, because it uses the same chipset, just faster.

So,ill trooper,it's trolling to ask where the Sony fanboys are when they used to throw the "PS3 is 100% BC" garbage in the 360 owners face? I didnt say the PS3 wasnt as BC as the 360,but 99.9999% BC isnt 100%

Trolling would be much more outrageous and insulting if I was doing so.

At least the Wii's got full backward compatibility. That's because it's still a Gamecube. And to all the backcrawling Sony fanboys, maybe Sony should have done the same thing.

are you lot thick? (360/ninty fanboys)
the american and japanese PS3's ARE 98% BC!
there is no proof as to what the list of available games via the emulation VS the chipset is YET!
stop wailing negative fanboyism, its not big and its definately not clever!
As has been remarked before ,sony have a team in the UK working on the emulation software alone...
jesus, even if its only currently 50% of games thats over a 1000 supported...and NOT 3 (im looking at you M$)
they will bring the most requested upto speed via firmware updates (and most interestingly as mentioned previously, emulation allows for upscaling and added effects...sony want to get this scaling issue sorted pronto)
bloody hell,give you negatives an inch an you'll surley take a mile...

gotta love the 260's whopping 297 bc game list.............lol.....ms sheep

Sod Sony! This UK gamer has cancelled his pre-order. We already pay more than everyone else, and now we get even less!?

It doesn't matter if the Wii had a PS3 Chip or a 360 chip, there is still a GC biult into the system and that's what makes it BC.

Backwards compatibility is very important to me. I still buy PS1 games... I dig through the PS1 games at used game stores and on EBay, looking for elusive gems and obscure cult classics. Great gameplay never goes obsolete. If the PS3 is not 100% backwards compatible, and it doesn’t emulate the obscure PS1 and PS2 cult classics, then I’ll have to keep my PS2 around and hope it doesn’t die. That’ll suck.

I've said it before... Sony doesn't care about the US Market...sure they'll take our money...but they've never shown the least bit of care of concern about us. We never get the extra materials with games...we NEVER get games until a year or more after the Japan release (COME ON.... OVER A YEAR TO TRANSLATE A STUPID FINAL FANTASY GAME). Hopefully Americans will wake up and see that they aren't treating us fairly and slap them back across the face with our wallets. Lets not allow this to happen....say no to Sony...say no to the PS3....so much easier to say no to that over priced Waffle Iron if there's hardly any backwards play. So long Sony...I knew you not!

"Where are all the Sony fanboys who threw the BC setup of the 360 in the Xbox owner's face?"

They own a PS3 already, which has 99% BC already.
360 plays less than a third of my XBOX games, doesnt even import my save games. PS3 plays all my games, and lets me import my save games. I haven't used my 360 for BC at all, except to try Halo2 the day I bought the 360 and it crashed before I finished level 1.

Kutagari quote

"the PS3 will feature backwards compatibility with PS and PS2 games from day one. I'm emphasizing this because, from what I hear, there are some platforms that haven't been able to completely do this. It's costly in terms of hardware, but we'd rather [invest] firmly on compatibility from the beginning, rather than to have issues later on"

but whats new right?

"It doesn't matter if the Wii had a PS3 Chip or a 360 chip, there is still a GC biult into the system and that's what makes it BC"

No, it doesn't have a GC built in to it, IT IS A GC, only slightly faster. That's like saying 360 has a 360 built in.

seedaripper- you sound like an idiot defending Sony
Sometimes the truth hurts buddy, suck it up.
Sony is blowing it and they probably won't look back to gamers. The only people that will by the PS3 is Blu-Ray people, and they definitely couldn't give a shit about BC.

On BC side note, I just started digging in to Metal Gear Solid 1&2 for the cube(via the wii). Is it really worth listening to the crappy acting?

Extinction- Don't be mad that you dropped all that dough for nothing. And really, stop being mad that Nintendo is number 1.
Read it and weep suckas. Sonyboys have had this coming. Its time to jump ship guys.

these threads will be oh so hilarious come December 2007.

i'm laughing already, actually.

Am I the only European gamer not bothered by this?

I'm getting better (but initally less compatible) emulation in software, as I get HD upscaling for PS2 and PS1 games, somthing the hardware emulation cannot provide..

I also understand WHY the PS3 costs more in Europe. All the US prices exclude sales and local taxes (as they differ by location), but the EU prices are inclusive. I also understand that EU is a more costly region for support, due to many more languages to support. In addition there are import duties to pay...

the comments is this thread are actually quite laughable

10 ppl repeating the same comments over n over

Game companies should just forget about backwards compatibility and focus on making stable, stand-alone consoles. Every new backwards compatible console that comes out turns the previous king into worthless plastic.

I No Longer buy games for my 360 (besides Halo3) because Microsoft Does not Care about me Having to Toss out my Old Game Library every 5-6 Years. I don't have the Room to Hold onto my Old Console so I expect my Console to be Backwards Compatible.
If Sony Does not get better than 95% Backwards Compatibility then It is a HUGE Mistake. I have been MUCH Happier with my PS3 because it is VERY VERY Backwards Compatible when compared to my 5% Backwards Compatible 360.

Yes Some People Play their Old Games.
Why do you think they make Classic Compilations. When someone gets a New Console they Want to Build their Next Gen Library while Playing their Current Favorites.

Sony better get 95% BC via Software, Software Emulation is Nice to Pretty up the Old Games, but a message saying my Game won't play is NOT "Pretty".
I'm glad I got my PS3 at Launch.
Don't do it Sony, Don't do it.

as a gamer, why would i buy a PS3 for $200 more than a 360, if the majority of the games are multiplatform?

as a developer, why would i spend money making exclusive games, or even bother making ports, for a $600 machine that people have no reason to buy compared to the incumbent mainstream alternative?

losing full backward compatibility, PS3 will lose yet another reason for that premium price.


.

This stinks of desperation.

Typically, the major players have only cut costs by

1) shrinking silicon (which makes the console BETTER, less electricity)
2) economy of scale.
3) shrinking the console.

This particular cost-cutting measure actually makes the console worse (though you could argue how much worse).

Sony must be hemorrhaging money badly to be doing this.

"I sure as Hell wouldn't if Nintendo said they were giving the ax to Gamecube BC."

Of course,m the GamceCube itself had 0% backwards compatibility with the previous Nintendo console. I bet that didn't bother the Ninty fanboys one bit, though.

You know whats funny,how no-one gave any credit to PS3 for its superb BC but now all the trolls are back. We still dont know what the % BC is (while the 360 is pathetic over a year later)

"This stinks of desperation"
No, your comment stinks of fanboyism. Sony said at the beginning that this chip would be replaced by emulation. Did you expect the PS3 to carry a PS2 chip forever?

"as a gamer, why would i buy a PS3 for $200 more than a 360?"
1. Far bigger library of games: even with 50%-75% BC, you would have hundreds of good games vs hardly any on xbox.
2. Better console quality: what is the value you would put towards not living with the fear of the unit breaking down?
3. Free multiplayer: over the 6-year PS3 life period USD300. Despite the supposedly "better" Live (which may well be matched over time) just 20-25% of xbox1/360 owners use it - whereas ALL PS3 owners can just go multi anytime they want.
4. "majority of the games are multiplatform": of the ones that are not, the PS3 has great variety while all the 360 has are shooters. If you like that, why but a console? Almost every one ahs a PC, where you get tons of better shooters anyway!

smik, it does stink of desperation:

1) They're charging $780 for PAL PS3 in Europe.
2) They're charging $830 for PAL PS3 in England.

3) They're giving them a PAL PS3 that is cheaper to make, and inherently inferior (no matter how much you try to spin it as being "only a little" inferior. )


If they weren't desperate, they'd be taking the PS2 chip out AFTER they got almost complete BC compatibility with software.

You're going on about how a PS3 costs $200 more than an XBox360... but a PAL PS3 (only comes in 60 GB) costs $780. An XBox360 costs $393-$525.


$780 for a crippled console, plus $80/game!

Sorry, you still appear to be a fanboy. "$780 for a crippled console". The PS3 is launching with 30 PS3 games (some great titles) and maybe 50% BC. If thats a crippled console, what do you call the 360 at launch USD525 for almost NIL good games for almost a year and almost NIL BC?

And funnily enough nobody mentions the four key advantages I mentioned - you may feel thats not worth the whole USD250, but if you say these are not worth any value, well, you dont deserve a response!!

And dont mention the cheaper version - thats truly the crippled console, no wireless, no hard disc, is someone really stupid enough to buy that?

"If they weren't desperate, they'd be taking the PS2 chip out AFTER they got almost complete BC compatibility" Dont agree, 50% BC and for most of the good games PS2 is the right point. After all, the BC will keep improving (as in 360) so you are getting 2000 PS games now and say 1500 more over the next 1-2 years - versus permanantly having a redundant, heat generating PS2 chip, which is better?