PS3 80GB US backwards compatibility checker online
by Alexander Sliwinski 
{ Sep 8th 2007 at 2:30PM }
A quick search in the database shows cracks in the foundation already:
- God of War -- 60GB: "No major problems for this title." 80GB: "During various FMV sequences throughout the title, the audio plays overlapped by static audio distortion."
- Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater -- 60GB: "No major problems for this title." 80GB: "During various FMV sequences throughout the title, the audio plays overlapped by static audio distortion." & "Throughout gameplay, the title performs at a significantly slower than normal performance speed."
- Final Fantasy X -- 60GB: "No major problems for this title." 80GB: "At various points throughout the Opening FMA sequence, the graphics jitter."
- Destroy All Humans -- 60GB: "No major problems for this title." 80GB: "At specific points during gameplay, character weapons do not function as intended."
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Neebs @ Sep 8th 2007 2:38PM
"At specific points during gameplay, character weapons do not function as intended."
I don't understand, usually it's technical sound and graphics problems that have issues in emulation. Specific points weapons just stop?
ssuk @ Sep 8th 2007 3:22PM
It's to be expected. As when code is executed, it gets streamed into the CPU for it to preform tasks, since the software doesn't emulate the PS2's CPU 100% perfectly, or even REMOTELY close to what the Emotion Chip offered, there will be several errors when executing code.
The audio and video defects are most likely due to the way the emulation is handeled as well, not having true support for Playstation video formats or audio formats. Middleware sound and video formats should be unaffected, so if you see a CRI Middleware ADX/SFD logo on the back of a PS2 box or before the game starts up, you're more likely to have seemless video playback.
These are major flaws on Sony's part. A logical explination would be that either the software emulation eats a LOT more CPU power from the Cell Processor as it's poorly coded and bloat-ware, or soft-clocks the Cell not taking into account it's got to preform more tasks than when the console would be a PS2 stand-alone, there are advantages to that as it means for truer game experiance for games which are highly supported, but means games which aren't supported so much get slow down from the CPU-emu cocking up.
There are worse falws with the software emulation though; especially since they've yet to actually fix the fact that most non-English EU titles have very poor emulation on the EU PS3s where their English counterparts get off with minor glitches. I have NO idea why that's the case, as they should be basically the same codebase... But whatever.
Slaziman @ Sep 8th 2007 6:24PM
It's probably got something to do with the PAL-NTSC difference.
ssuk @ Sep 8th 2007 8:05PM
I was refering to PAL, not NTSC to PAL... There are English speaking teritories in Europe, you know... Like, England?
But anyway, you can look this up for yourself here: http://faq.eu.playstation.com/bc/bcGames.htm
Example: Kingdom Hearts my PAL EN copy has serial number: SCES-50967 and has 2/3 bars for compatability, two versions of this game (either German, French, Spanish or Itallian) have 3 bars for compatability while two do one WORSE than 2 bars only reaching a meisly 1 bar for compatability.
The games should be 90% the same source code... Why does one somehow function better than the other? They're all PAL 50Hz... They're all the same game, just with different languages. The mind boggles...
(Also, for some fun, check how well Killzone plays on the PS3... 1 bar. Ouch for a 1st party title.)
Slaziman @ Sep 8th 2007 8:30PM
I didn't read carefully and never thought differing territories would affect the game, sorry. THAT is REALLY weird though, wuddafuk could've caused it...?
Burnt Meatloaf @ Sep 9th 2007 8:11PM
Since Sony owns the IP for the EE chip, I'm surprised the emulation isn't better. At first I was thinking that programmers were using stupid code or undocumented instructions, but if compatibility is this flakey, there has to be more to it than that. Maybe Sony didn't really plan to take out the PS2 chip this early and the emulator is really in very early phase.
Microsoft is in a whole different boat than Sony over this issue, since MS has to reverse-engineer the whole thing, which is incredibly difficult. Sony has a lot of advantages by comparison.
Emulation speed depends on how mature the emulator is. It's easy to emulate certain things, but doing it fast is another issue.
Speaking of which, will the PS4 have PS3 compatibility? I find that almost impossible that will be feasible given how the Cell chip is designed. Sony really didn't plan ahead. I don't think they ever have.
blooh @ Sep 8th 2007 2:39PM
or just keep/buy a ps2, they're cheap
FM @ Sep 8th 2007 3:37PM
Indeed
felixlighter @ Sep 8th 2007 3:58PM
That's an option but I would much rather do away with the PS2 to free up space. I also get Disc Read Errors occasionally and I have to dismantle the console and clean the laser. I'm hoping when they drop the price of the 80 gig console a few 60 gig consoles are still on the shelves and the store drop the price on those $50 or so.
ukickmydog @ Sep 8th 2007 5:12PM
mini ps2 ftw?
Bloo @ Sep 8th 2007 2:40PM
FF X, MGS3, and GoW should have worked right away. That is totally unacceptable for 80GB owners. Luckily I have tge 60GB...
Egster @ Sep 8th 2007 4:57PM
The problem is that often fixing something for one title they break a whole bunch of others.
If you still want to play years old PS2 games, keep your PS2 or get a 60GB version.
DrXym @ Sep 9th 2007 3:25AM
I've played God of War all the way through on a PAL PS3. I can't say I've noticed any issue with it. I *think* but I'm not sure that the fire texture in the startup screen looks a bit blocky but otherwise it's just fine. The only issues I've seen in the games I own are minor texture or sound glitches. Some games like RE4 also had issues which have since been fixed - in 1.60 it had lots of texture glitches but it plays fine now.
I know people are going to point to this list and say hah! But in general the software BC is just fine. Not as good as hardware BC but in general it works okay.
Psaakyrn @ Sep 9th 2007 8:52PM
DrXym, I'm going to have to mark you down for not realizing that we're talking about the 80GB PS3.
whymog @ Sep 8th 2007 2:46PM
I've been on the fence about this. Does backwards compatibility really matter all that much to the average PS3 owner who also has a PS2? Probably not, but there's this general feeling of unease I get whenever I buy Sony hardware based on how my well-cared for PS1 and PS2 both broke down and, even after repairs, stopped working again within a year each.
I wish Sony would just pull it together so I don't have to worry so much. I want to want a PS3.
Jake @ Sep 8th 2007 2:48PM
I don't consider PS3 BC issues to be a big deal. I buy systems to play next gen games, not last gen games. With that said, I still consider the 60Gb a better value anyways. Granted I don't like Motorstorm which really makes my opinion biased.
Matt B @ Sep 8th 2007 2:50PM
Software emulation will continue to improve in future firmware updates.
sheppy @ Sep 8th 2007 3:04PM
But they're not the exact same. One has the EE+GS combo chip, the other just has the GS. Majority of the glitches will stem directly from games that use the EE in very specific ways. However, in Europe, where the GS only version took lead, Sony quickly got the stats over 98%. Which is admirable considering my 360 can tell me Guilty Gear X2 Reloaded is in the drive, but refuses to play it. Also, keep in mind that what Sony reports as glitches, Microsoft makes no mention of. In other words, Sony mentions when texture swapping glitches appear in the game whereas Halo 2 works on 360, not completely, but well enough to be a checkpoint.
DWells55 @ Sep 8th 2007 5:32PM
Sheppy, here's a list by Microsoft with all the known issues with backwards compatible games on the 360:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/backwardcompatibilitysupportissues.htm
sheppy @ Sep 8th 2007 6:46PM
Consider me corrected then.
why not the LS2/LS7? @ Sep 8th 2007 8:28PM
Well, seeing as MS finally has a BC problems list, I figured I should check out to see since they don't list the problem I used to have with Forza, which was the frame rate would drop to 6 fps going downhill in the esses at Road Atlanta.
It did say there was an update when I booted it. So figured something had changed.
But I can't really tell. It locks up after a few minutes of play. This is the same 360 that used to play it. And I played 20 minutes of table tennis after, so it doesn't seem to be hardware.
So I'm going to have to state that I feel that MS isn't telling the whole story on backward compatibility. It just seems like they don't even care.
why not the LS2/LS7? @ Sep 9th 2007 12:07AM
I want to apologize up there, I assumed that because Forza was crashing, it was due to a bad BC update. Turns out I was wrong.
I tried to play Table Tennis again and my 360 died with the RRoD. My 2nd one to die.
So those lockups in Forza are probably due to Microsoft's complete incompetence with hardware, and not necessarily a reflection of the state of BC software on it.
Sorry about that.
James @ Sep 8th 2007 2:52PM
I consider it a big deal. I bought a PS2, hooked it up via composite to my LCD TV = looks like rubbish. Sold it in the newspaper a few days later. Since there is no VGA or DVI (that isn't stupidly priced) cable for the PS2 then I'm up shit creek.
I never had a PS2 and would like to play some of the big hitters.
So I pretty much need B/C and won't consider a PS3 until they give us a VGA cable and flawless PS2 playback. Till then I'll be playing PS1 games on my PSP :)
mkoracer @ Sep 8th 2007 3:12PM
Yo, you mean component right... The ones with the Green/Blue/Red for the video? Composite has the one yellow RCA for the video signal and is drastically inferior!! OMG drastically. You use component and you can get some sweet 480p PS2 goodness.
TK00 @ Sep 8th 2007 3:12PM
I bought a PS2 component cable from EB for $15.
Mitsuo @ Sep 8th 2007 2:53PM
I find it very weird how there could be differences between the two models when their the exact same just one has 20gb more space.
IAMDUDE70 @ Sep 8th 2007 2:57PM
They are NOT exactly the same. One has PS2 processors in it, while the other uses software to emulate the processors.
sheppy @ Sep 8th 2007 3:32PM
60: Emotion Engine Graphics Synthesizer combo chip.
80: Graphics Synthesizer chip solo.
HB96st @ Sep 8th 2007 3:02PM
Will the SDF Please wake up to Sony's Bullcrap!!??!!?
cc123 @ Sep 8th 2007 3:24PM
Will ever post something that's not stupid and pointless?
Doubtful.
Night Elve @ Sep 8th 2007 3:16PM
Let's not start bitching shall we? We all now that Software Backward Compatibility will improve with future Firmware releases.
ssuk @ Sep 8th 2007 3:31PM
They should have got the software emulation better than this before making a quick buck and making PS3s cheaper to produce with this new software emulation.
The software emulation has been around since March 2007 with EU release and has so far had one minor update this month, which did next to NOTHING for 99% of EU PS2 titles.
Nushio @ Sep 8th 2007 3:50PM
Microsoft said that too, look how it ended up :P
bus33boy @ Sep 9th 2007 5:58AM
you would think, but consider the trend. Sony announced 100% BC before the system launched. They launched with 90%+ BC. Now the BC games are functioning worse as they refine their hardware and software.
I don't particualrly care -- BC is a non-issue with me. I will admit, however, to being amused at the fanboys. They crowed about BC when it was a (alleged) feather) in Sony's cap, now that they are getting worse its no big deal.
cc123 @ Sep 8th 2007 3:44PM
I tried 4 games at random that weren't on either list and except for something minor in Ico that was fixed in a later firmware there were no problems.
I guess the list he picked was just very unlucky...or lucky as the case may be.
cc123 @ Sep 8th 2007 3:54PM
Wow. Someone edited my post.
muppetmeth @ Sep 8th 2007 4:43PM
God. I should have gotten the 60.
ShortFuse @ Sep 8th 2007 4:10PM
God of War and MGS3 really push the limits of the PS2 hardware. Of course these two will have speed problems. FMV playback needs improvement. With PS1 emulation, FMV was also the hardest to emulate fullspeed. I think it's a little biased detailing the only detailing the negative with the BC.
ill trooper @ Sep 8th 2007 4:16PM
I have found that while I _feel_ like I should be concerned with backwards-compatibility, I don't end up really caring that much, or even playing many older games at all on my PS3.
I felt differently about my 360 when I first got it because I was playing a lot of Ghost Recon 2 and Splinter Cell:Chaos Theory on my Xbox, and they weren't 360-compatible yet, forcing me to keep my old Xbox hooked up as well (also, few of my friends could find 360s at that point). Future updates to the 360's emulation software allowed them to work at *almost* 100% and also 'up-rezzed' the 3d poly to 720p, making them look great on the 360. We can speculate on how much Microsoft gained by making Halo2 work on the 360 as well as it did, but I'm sure it was a massive plus in the minds of many.
As for the PS3, I had stopped buying most games for the PS2 for the last year before this gen started, missing some good PS2 games, I'm sure, but the point is, I don't use my PS3 for b/c games, partly because I don't pull old games out that often, and partly because the 360 takes up most of my gaming time. I know that good games are still coming out for the PS2, and the logical conclusion is that those 'good games' are also good on a backward-compatible PS3, but it's hard to schedule it all in when you opt to buy all three systems!
Orion @ Sep 8th 2007 4:24PM
whether they can fix it in the future or not doesnt matter. i know many wii, 360, and ps3 owners online who dont even have access to dsl or better as they service hasnt come out to them (still.. lots of people have to use dial up even today). so when people see on the back of the box that any system, including this, has BC... they should get it.
im honestly sick and tired of sony and microsoft releasing consoles and for that matter games that arent performing like they are are advertised, or in some ways not complete... because they fall back on the ability to update it later.
if the product isnt complete, dont send it out. while i love my 360 , its something ive never really liked about it... and something that most people dont notice, but they should appreciate about the wii which has yet to release a game they update later or a system that didnt have FULL gc BC.
Mr Khan @ Sep 8th 2007 4:35PM
Well, its easier for Sony to pull of full-scale soft backwards compatibility since they have the full cooperation of the old makers of their own chipsets, (Themselves and Toshiba), while Microsoft is kind of at odds with Nvidia over the XGPU, leaving them to foot it one at a time
I don't think, however, that the console itself should be wholly delayed just for backwards compatibility. The only reason Nintendo got it right is that to get 100% BC, they just have to retard the Broadway and Hollywood down to GC parameters
Orion @ Sep 8th 2007 4:45PM
i guess its more of the software part that really ticks me off though. im really tired of buying games and saying 'what the heck is wrong with this" , either in control or in a level glitch just to come to joystiq to find out theres going to be a patch released for the game because they didnt test it before packaging out... all about the fast buck.
and this still is leaving a bad taste in my mouth what sony is doing here. just becuase your not making good sales doesnt mean you get to dumb down your product. sounds like what sega did with the saturn.. the second version sucked and was much cheaper looking.
sheppy @ Sep 8th 2007 5:08PM
Orion, as much as I want to agree with you, a vast majority of the games that ship with issues are normally issues pertaining to the online portions of the game. So as the game gets fixed, the patches normally relate only to the online portions of the games. Hell, just look at all the patch updates to Motorstorm and what they fix. There are some games that ship with issues in the single player but those occassions are rare. And with over 60% of the 360 userbase with Live Gold accounts, that speaks volumes to the market they are attacking.
As for PS3 and all their firmware updates... well, I agree majority of the US does NOT have high speed, but they do have regular internet. And PS3, unlike 360, can update via a third party source. Aka, download on your computer, stick it on a flash, and upgrade through the USB ports. But considering only 30% of the PS3 userbase knows the system can play BluRay movies, you can imagine how few know about that route.
Exo @ Sep 8th 2007 4:32PM
they wernt random, tehys aid those were some of their favorites, i have all the games tehy listed.
out of the 27 ps2 games i have less then half have no problems.
all 4 ratchet and clank games wont run at full speed
Exo @ Sep 8th 2007 7:30PM
wtf my post got moved around, and now it has a crapload of spelling errors
Oreo @ Sep 8th 2007 4:56PM
I love anti Sony articles!!! YAY!!! :)
Greg @ Sep 8th 2007 5:04PM
Don't forget that you can replace the HDD at anytime to any gig size you wish. So it is the best bet to get a 60 gig w/ the hardware emu.
AdvancedCaveman @ Sep 8th 2007 5:04PM
Are there any comparison articles anywhere that compare the picture quality of PS1/2 games on the 60 & 80g models? I’m debating on which version to get because although the 60g version has more games that are backwards compatible, software emulation should mean that the old games are being displayed at higher resolutions.
I don’t understand how up-scaling works, all I know is that standard definition games look absolutely horrible on an LCD, but on the 360, the games that get backwards compatibility through emulation look ok (at least some of them). Has anyone here seen backwards compatible games running on both the 60 & 80g models? If so, how much better do software emulated games look on a LCD screen (if they look any better at all)?
Bluebrake @ Sep 8th 2007 5:43PM
There's no difference, and there's nothing fundamental about software emulation that would make it look better than hardware.
Upscaling, incidentally, is the process of stretching a low resolution image to fit a high-resolution display. No new information is really added to the image, but good upscaling software "guesses" what should be put in the extra pixel space and fills in the blanks in an intelligent way. At the very least, the PS3 upscaler blurs the image so it gets rid of the jaggies. Your TV actually has to upscale any image below its native resolution anyway, but the PS3 is likely better at the job. Both PS3 models do this.
At some point, if we get really lucky, and if Sony decides it's worth the bother, maybe we'll get an update that makes PS1/2 games actually render at HD resolutions instead of this half-assed upscaling business. That would be a system-selling feature for me. But if it happens, there's no reason the 60 gig model shouldn't be able to do it just as well as the 80 gig, since it's got all the same hardware plus a little extra.
Rask @ Sep 8th 2007 5:41PM
But.. but.. all you people were giving Microsoft shit about BC last year? Yet when Sony TAKES away near flawless BC from the PS3, people "should be playing Next Gen games anyways"???