When the original 60GB PlayStation 3 launched, it had one feature above everything else that I valued: backwards compatibility. At the time, I had a PS2 library of about 50 games (it's now about 60) and a PS1 collection of about 40 games. I often go back to a lot of old classics to play them again, and I really didn't like the idea of keeping both a PS2 and a PS3 hooked up all the time. However, even though I still have that same 60GB machine, I know this PS3 won't last forever (I might even want that 160GB console that comes out this holiday season), and when I make the replacement, I'll also have to get another PS2. No big deal, considering it'll probably only cost about $100 when I have to do it, but why has Sony entirely abandoned the idea?

It's obvious that with every new PS3 over the past couple of years, b/c has been getting phased out. Now, the only PS3s that are available lack any PS2 compatibility at all – even though they can still play PS1 games – and I find this viewpoint somewhat irritating. Sony has gone on record several times, stating their dismissal of the feature as unnecessary and unimportant as this generation rolls on, but does that philosophy translate in the long run? Go with me on this- if the PS3 does indeed have a 10-year lifespan as Sony continually claims it will have, the system will have a gargantuan library; even larger than the PS2's, which features several thousand titles. And I simply refuse to believe that gamers won't have any interest in PS3 classics when the PS4 comes out. That goes against all logic. Have veteran gamers just tossed away their old systems and old games, saying to themselves, "eh, I'll never play that again?" Hell no. Some might, but many don't.

Now, it seems to me the graphics synthesizer chip, the thing that allowed for 99% PS2 b/c in the original 60GB PS3, was an overly expensive endeavor. Sony got rid of it immediately with the next PS3 iteration, and ever since, they've been using software emulation just like Microsoft. Therefore, perhaps it's more a question of cost. But looking down the road, this whole situation appears – to me, at least – like it could easily spiral out of control. Here I go, to get my PS4…have to keep my PS3 or buy another one if I want to play my PS3 games. …need a place for my PS2, too. Than there's the PS5…what do I do now? Dedicate my entire entertainment center to four different PlayStation consoles? Of course, I am well aware that the further away we get from old systems, the less likely anyone will want to play those old games. But I don't know anyone who doesn't want to get a little nostalgic every now and again with the SNES, or even with older systems like the Atari 2600 or Colecovision.

We gotta keep those systems around, you know? But as time goes on, how are we going to keep everything around? I don't believe it to be impossible for backwards compatibility to exist on the PS3 or on future PlayStation consoles, and I think it's something Sony needs to reevaluate. The appeal would increase greatly, especially for those consumers who have been loyal to Sony and their products for many years. To all the gamers who really only play online, or who only have time to play the latest stuff, and who never bother to build an actual collection, this is a non-issue. I realize that. But when you combine the fact that Microsoft's consoles will apparently never be backwards compatible with Sony's new b/c aversion, you get a situation that vexes me. I'm already picturing a lot more time spent behind my TV, switching wires about on a daily basis…and I'm not liking that picture.

Subscribe
Notify of
69 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Riku994
Riku994
12 years ago

I totally agree with you, I still have my PS2 BC compatible PS3, and I'm hoping it'll last as long as my original PS2 did, which I got in 200, and it STILL works, all though it can't be ps1 games and hasn't been able to for about 3 years now…But I still enjoy it.

Qubex
Qubex
12 years ago

Riku994, 200… that is a mighty long time 🙂

Q!

"aLL RoAds LeAd ToO hOMe"

baseballdude_
baseballdude_
12 years ago

I'm definitely in agreeance. I love my 80gb PS3, but I was super bummed when I found out I had to keep my PS2.

MirrorSoul
MirrorSoul
12 years ago

Hello Nice ta meet ya Mr.Admin…sry jus never seen u on here lol

baseballdude_
baseballdude_
12 years ago

Howdy. I'm the guy who works behind the scenes. 🙂 I drop in every once in a while though.

MirrorSoul
MirrorSoul
12 years ago

While i do agree that the whole b/c aversion is coming to be quite tedious Ben I will say that with the new age of gamers being raised those born after 94 in my opinion are too dedicated to "O this has the latest graphics!!" or the more common "My PS3 kicks ur 360's A**". In this time I say gamers ar becomming less and less Nostalgic and appreciating the older games. They are now jus looking for whats new and cool. They will never be able to truly marvel at games the way we have (Playing legends of Dragoon and FF7 and then 6-7 years later truly Gawking the advancements in games such as FF10 and BLACK).The past generations will mean nothing too them in there eyes.I MISS MY PS2 PLAYBACK THOUGH……WAIT I BOUGHT A 60 AT LAUNCH YAY!!! lol


Last edited by MirrorSoul on 10/16/2008 9:18:58 PM

FLYING_APE
FLYING_APE
12 years ago

im 17 and i totally agree with you man i love those games. FIGHT THE FAGS. Also PSX can you PLZ get these girly advertisements out of the site. ive got YOUPORN for dis sh*t


Last edited by FLYING_APE on 10/17/2008 5:12:28 AM

John Shoemaker
John Shoemaker
12 years ago

My 60 gig PS3 is the best investment thus far in this generation. I enjoy going back and playing older games. Especially when newer sequels are coming out for the PS3.
I understand the cost behind the graphics chips being expensive. Then why not do the emulators? Are they scared pirates might use this against them somehow? Or do they just want us to focus on the now and forget about then?
I don't like the fact that they are not including this, it doesn't seem right to me. And I hope that my 60gig doesn't crap out because I'm not sure what I will do. Although I will be replacing that HDD in the near future.

MirrorSoul
MirrorSoul
12 years ago

I think your right for the most part they wana focus on now instead of then. Besides they are still losing money on the PS3 and the PS2 take like 40-50 dollars to produce so they really are trying to make up the dividen of thier PS3 loses buy continuing the PS2 and not allowing B/C. If they did the PS2 would die and thier quick cash reimbursment for the PS3 manufacturing will take a dive and endanger the system. Sorry to drag on its just my theory on it.

crapreviews
crapreviews
12 years ago

eh not sure what to say about this. Im 30 so i was around for all the first systems. to be honest the only real game i could say that i would still want to play from back in the day is FF 7. Other than that game i see no others that truly would want to make me play something so old when i have so many new games to play.

orangpelupa
orangpelupa
12 years ago

sony abandon BC is because sony want more cost-efficient ps3.

and my ps2 already cant read dvd games… it still can read ps1 cd and ps2 cd, but cant read dvd at all duh

@john
emulator wont be able to be used to run pirated games on ps3. the hypervisor still there protecting ps3 system calls

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
12 years ago

MirrorSoul: Baseballdude there just got his PS3, I think. So I'm guessing he might have more to say in the future. 😉

MirrorSoul
MirrorSoul
12 years ago

Lol thats great!! But ben take a look at the reply i said to John Shoemaker do u think thats what Sony is doin besides not letting there last gen miracle child die

baseballdude_
baseballdude_
12 years ago

Yup, I got it a couple weeks ago now and am loving it (at least when I find the time to play it, lol).

Swerve
Swerve
12 years ago

my 60 gig just got the yellow light on socom launch

LightShow
LightShow
12 years ago

k, aside from last gen (Xbox, Cube, PS2) is there any game system that you cant get an Emulator for? Any Roms or Isos?

While the security on last gen console might just be out of our reach currently, anything older has been cracked. Time continues, and by the time the PS4 is released, there will be a viable PS2 emu for the computer. Its a definite pattern, and with everything on disc now, you wont necessarily even have to go the (arguably) illegal method of downloading ROMs off the internet.

If i get nostalgic i pull up a Genesis EMU and the rom i need, and play on a wired 360 controller. A keyboard is a perfectly viable solution for most consoles.

Point: all these consoles won't necessarily be necessary because of the availability of computer EMUs, almost all for free. the picky can play on their tvs, but the rest? its a perfecty good solution.

AceTatsujin
AceTatsujin
12 years ago

I don't agree with this article one bit. Sony should NOT have included BC for PS2 (or even PS1 for the matter) and should have focused on cutting the damn price. 4 UBS would be nice. We don't need those SD-or-whatever cards. Blue-tooth is a plus, Blu-ray is a must, WiFi is a must, Optical and HDMI and whatever other connection is a must with the 1GB ethernet. Those are the only things that should have been included. You want to play PS2 games? No problem, buy a PS2. PS3 coud have came out CHEAPIER if it wasn't for the SD card slots and the PS2 BC. It's the price that people look at, the MAJORITY of people (casual and what not. Hardcore, at the most, are excluded since price doesn't bother them).

PS4 should include Blu-ray (should easily have PS3 BC), Blu-tooth, modified CELL, better GPU with some god damn AA, include the HDMI, optical, and 1GB ethernet (or higher), 3-4 USBS and for the format, we need something cheapier. Honestly if PS4 costs anymore than 400 US dollars its another loss to Sony. If they could notch it down to 300 US dollars its a win for next generation. Yes I'm complaining about sales. But what I'm complaining about, most people DON'T need all that crap. PS2 should be done with PS4. Seriously, think of the price if they include everything. PS4 would probably not sell so much and people will complain even more.

Future > Present. Is how it should be rather than trying to combine everything and make it play everything from past to present to future. Just present and future. PS3 and PS4.

I'm happy with my PS3, its 60 GB and the right choice. But I barely use PS2 games, barely use SD cards … barely do anything. Replacement for SD cards? Let us intergrate with external HDD's = problem solved!

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
12 years ago

You are assuming that b/c cost a great deal more than people think, but I don't believe that's the case. And just because they include such a feature doesn't mean they have to skimp on forward-thinking features.

There's no evidence that b/c hindered the PS2 one bit, and as the technology gets better, I refuse to believe it'd hinder the PS3 in the long run, either.

Qubex
Qubex
12 years ago

Damn, AceTatsujin, you make some strong points. If Sony had skipped B/C altogether they could have invested the extra funds in "stronger" hardware… such as MORE MEMORY. The CELL RSX combination is very very powerful, even the option of Linux – using the PS3 as a 64bit home computer…

The problem that has always hurt it is memory, hence the mediocre textures etc on some titles. I have always felt, the PS3 could do so much, but it has been hobbled somewhat… it seems intentionally! Who agrees?

Q!

"aLL RoAds LeAd ToO hOMe"


Last edited by Qubex on 10/16/2008 9:51:23 PM

Daedusian
Daedusian
12 years ago

I'm happy enough w/ my old 80 gig. It might not run all of the PS2/PS1 library, but it does run all of the greatest hits, which is all I care about and own. Well most, I don't own any PS1 games, but I'm thinking about getting FF7 from ebay or somewhere cheap…

AceTatsujin
AceTatsujin
12 years ago

because the old CEO (who retired) wanted to put every freaking thing in the PS3 and look at the price tag, and the other things and WTH is a 256 DDR3 Memory? Get a DDR2 and upgrade it to 512 and why are we jumping from 16 pixelpipe graphic card (PS2) to 24? 360 has 48!! and 2x AA feature and if I'm correct we don't have that. We just got some brute power from the CELL and if developers use one of the SPE's correctly they can increase the output of the graphics in a game like KILLZONE2 and Heavenly Sword and other games I haven't mentioned.

I know Sony is doing the right thing of investing money in their first party. We need First party RPG developers, TWO of them at the very least. They should produce a game every 1.5 or 2 years for us. This is what we desparately need. SE currently is being threatened by Level 5 (White Knight Chronicles' features are amazing, period) and SE is taking such a long ass time and they're after money. I mean I can't blame them, but we need our own RPG catogery for us. Sony opened up "meeting rooms" for first and second party developers to meet up and encourged them to talk about their games and to give tips and hints and codes to each other to improve their games which is a big plus.

I'm complaining. We're laggin behind. PS3 came out with a waste of games (most of them, not all of them). We pissed off developers with the CELL's archticture (spelling?). I read that PS4 whispers saying they're going to modify CELL and make it faster, smarter, with 10 SPE's and easier to create games on it so if thats true then we solved one problem.

Our online is such a disaster sometimes. I cannot play certain games. And honestly, i want you guys to hear me out … We need PUBLIC CHAT ROOMS. We have private and friendly chat rooms which is nice, but PUBLIC is a must! And with Public, we need like mini-games like Chess or Monopoly (PS style, IE Kratos, SOCOM players, our first party characters, Sackboy and sackgirl!) and couple of card games. I mean has Sony ever thought of that? Chat rooms can be limited to 16 or 20 or 30 PS users per chat room and they should be filtered and spread across different games. Chat rooms for GoW III, chat rooms for Wipeout HD, chatrooms for Burnout Paradise and the server should notice that if there aren't many people in that area (for chat rooms) then it should cut down on those chat rooms, if more people join then it should create or hell. We should create our own. I don't know. I'm just sniffing some stuff I talked to my brother about. I know HOME is going to be there, but honestly public chat rooms is a big plus. What if some people want to just chat rather than to play "virtual" characters? I don't know how to send this to someone in Sony to look after it and if one of you can then just send it to them.

The one awesome thing I loved back in the past in 2000 is AOL chat rooms, those KICKED ASS! You go in, talk to random people, jab jokes around. There's chat rooms for role playing, for games, for clothing or for general chats about AOL. It was fast, efficient, easy and nice.

PS3 just kicked off with bad games. Is the PS4 gonna do the same thing? I hope they come out with strong games and they keep releasing 2-3 exclusive games every 6 to 10 months. It's nice that we picked up after two years … I don't know, I'm just ranting so much. I'm not happy with some things. Sony still has so much space to improve on. If they're really talking about players being connected, then start with simple stuff and let players get connected.

Ben, I agree. Once PS4 comes out they have to get a Blu-ray player in there and PS3 B/C, but PS2 should not be B/C IF it is going to increase the price! If the price tag is gonna hit another 500 or 600 US dollars for PS4 then fewer people will buy it, no one wants this, too expensive, developers see not enough systems selling and they tend to lean towards other platforms, then Sony needs to fix this mistake again, the cycle goes back on and after 2-3 years we pick up. PS4 is like around what, 2011 or something? or 2012? I hope next generation consoles don't come out till 2012. I haven't experienced so many good games on the PS3 man, yes we did get some good games but I mean we need constant games coming every month or two … at least 1-3 GOOD games, not some half-assed games that we have been getting (namely Haze, and Lair and few others I'm not gonna mention) … we get crappy ports, we're being blamed on, spit on, laughed at and so on and forth. I love my PS3, but for the past year or so its been very rough … I don't want that experience again with the PS4.

My reasons why I bought the PS3 were Blu-ray, the godly games Sony promised (which didn't live up to 2006, and most of 2007 and beginning of 2008), excuse to have an HD TV (yup, never played PS3 on DTVs! screw that), and specifically for the exclusive games that were promised/coming to the PS3 .. namely, and above everything else … FF XIII and Versus. What about you guys?

Wow. I'll stop here. This is a huge post!

MirrorSoul
MirrorSoul
12 years ago

*Deep Voice* "Fatality by OverKill AceTatsujin" lol. I understand how u feel man

Deadmeat
Deadmeat
12 years ago

I will explain why software emulation on PS3 is not possible. In case of PlayStation series, the PS2's GPU(GS) is far more powerful than PS3's GPU(RSX), which was a last minute rush-job after the original GPU for PS3(GS3) got canceled due to fab funding problem.

SCEI overspent on CELL and had no money and time to complete GS3, so it activated "Plan B" and went to nVIDIA to licensed RSX for $30 million(roughly 1/10th of what Microsoft spent on Xenos) and nVIDIA delivered the part in less than 6 month by modifying its existing GF7800GTX to half bandwidth configuration. Accordingly, RSX cannot emulate a chip that's more powerful than itself, therefore PS3 cannot have BC without a physicai GS. GS itself is a $25~30 part, but SCEI removed it under a mandate from Howard Stringer, who orderd Hirai Kaz to cut losses by all means, so BC was the first feature removed.

On the other hand, Xbox 360 emulates Xbox 100% in software because it is a far more powerful piece of hardware than PS3 is. Xenos was engineered to compete with GS3, and the end result was an expensive and overheating(RROD) GPU that's far more powerful than RSX was; roughly 4 times in performance figures. Four times the vertex throughput, four times the shading power, four times the fill rate.

The conclusion is that software BC on PS3 is not technically possible, and you shouldn't expect to see this feature ever again.


Last edited by Deadmeat on 10/16/2008 10:58:04 PM

AceTatsujin
AceTatsujin
12 years ago

where did you get the source of your information? because I definitely don't read any of that, and have not read any of what you said. The last paragraph seems so off the charts.

Deadmeat
Deadmeat
12 years ago

> where did you get the source of your information? because I definitely don't read any of that, and have not read any of what you said. The last paragraph seems so off the charts.

I am a Wall Street programmer with a Master's Degree in CS. Us programmers see PS3 in a very different(unfavorable) color than general users do.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
12 years ago

360 does not properly emulate all original Xbox titles, and b/c is possible on PS3 simply because it exists and functions well most of the time. Fail.


Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 10/17/2008 6:01:27 PM

AntDC
AntDC
12 years ago

"The conclusion is that software BC on PS3 is not technically possible, and you shouldn't expect to see this feature ever again."

Hmm… strange… I could swear that the game I am currently playing on my PS3 is actually a PS2 game (Final Fantasy X).

Deadmeat
Deadmeat
12 years ago

There was an interesting comment from Jen-Hsun Huang(CEO of nVIDIA) on the subject of why nVIDIA didn't do the GPU for Xbox 360. Huang said what Microsoft asked from nVIDIA was beyond what nVIDIA could deliver in terms of its engineering resources.

Having had a rough spec of GS3(a crazy monster GPU) from its sources, Microsoft too shopped around to see if anybody would be able to deliver something comparable. nVIDIA looked at Microsoft's requirement and said no, while ATI, which was desperate for a break, took the job and committed 250 of its best engineers on Xenos project for over three years. The end result was an ultra-advanced cutting-edge GPU that was far more powerful than anything else on the market at the time of its release, a beast that would not be matched by nVIDIA's GF8800GTS in performance figures a year later at double the price.

John Shoemaker
John Shoemaker
12 years ago

Yeah, I've never heard all of that either. Good to know.
Now I wonder if Sony will use the GS3 with the modified Cell for the PS4. Or something else?


Last edited by John Shoemaker on 10/16/2008 11:32:24 PM

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
12 years ago

I find it odd that a "Wall Street programmer" would say the 360 is a "far more powerful piece of hardware" than the PS3.

Don't think for a second that I don't read programmer and developer information and you seem to be the only "superior" human on earth who sees the 360 as vastly superior hardware-wise. So cut it out…nobody is going to be impressed with that mess. Veiled fanboyism is still fanboyism.

AceTatsujin
AceTatsujin
12 years ago

It is hard. I don't believe him and he can rant all he wants. The GPU inside the 360 is better than the PS3. The PS3's CELL is far more superior than 360's Xenon Processors. In terms of performance — PS3 > 360. Graphic wise, 360 > PS3. That's how it is this generation.

BTW, MGS IV is not coming to the 360. KONAMI shot the rumor down just a while ago, again.

Deadmeat
Deadmeat
12 years ago

> I find it odd that a "Wall Street programmer" would say the 360 is a "far more powerful piece of hardware" than the PS3.

Because it simply is, for game code. You need to understand that different platforms perform differently on different code type, with each platform specifically optimized for their intended workload type. Xbox 360 was specifically optimized for game code from inception while CELL was optimized for video/audio data processing(Blame it on Toshiba for this). The end result is that Xbox 360 trashes PS3 when running game code.

> Don't think for a second that I don't read programmer and developer information

Then you must strongly dislike PS3 by now.

> and you seem to be the only "superior" human

I am not a superior human. I am however well-qualified to speak on the programmability and extractable performance of respective computing platforms, Xbox 360 and PS3 in this case.

> on earth who sees the 360 as vastly superior hardware-wise.

I am not alone.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
12 years ago

Yeah! To Meat: "You're not allowed to RENT here anymore!"


Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 10/17/2008 6:05:19 PM

Willcome2Urf
Willcome2Urf
12 years ago

I'm not a wall street programmer, so all I know is that the ps3 is an amazing piece of machinery, runs awesome, and does awesome things.

on the hardware side, it's like listening to two guys argue over whose sports car is the best. the porshe or the turbo import. designed differently, but do pretty much the same thing.

Ben, thanks for keeping fanboys in check. It's nice to hear someone like you, who's done their homework, put them in their place.

Deadmeat
Deadmeat
12 years ago

> on the hardware side, it's like listening to two guys argue over whose sports car is the best. the porshe or the turbo import. designed differently, but do pretty much the same thing.

Exactly. The analogy is that Xbox 360 is a Nissan GT-R(Engineered to turn at blazing speed), while PS3 is a 1000 HP dragster which can go a straight line faster but cannot turn. Now, which car would you choose to win an everyday street racing, a GT-R or a dragster? Your call.

Joe_III
Joe_III
12 years ago

Well, because they can make more money this way selling consoles that are dirt cheap to build and develop for while getting their new one up off the ground.
As Sony says, the PS3 might be a 10 year console, but you can almost bet that the PS4 is going to be round for at least 3 of them — 4 if the 360 is only a 5 year console.

And at least Sony admits it. If you go look at M$'s b/c list, it hasn't been updated since Nov 07! Microsoft's move to just drop the xbox for the 360 might have been a great business move to help make that 1 year lead as big as possible, but this is probably a huge shift in the market that is going to hurt consumers.

Add to that the trend DLC being a majority of remakes, updates, and ports, it makes a lot more sense for the developers too. The game industry's fight against the secondary market is on a lot of fronts, and on none of them are for our benefit.

orangpelupa
orangpelupa
12 years ago

@lightshow
yes, emu will be available on PC. but for PS2, it need ultra fast hardware.
not everyone have the money to buy fast pc with fast GPU and CPU.

yes, performance can get better by optimizing the emulation. But PS2's GS is too hard to emulate 100%.
Its because the unique architecture of GS.

GS is very fast in specialized process. if i remember correctly, GS VU is very fast. That power used in MGS2 in scene where snake jump from bridge to the ship below in the middle of heavy rain.
thats also the reason why on that scene, the MGS2 xbox verision have very low frame rate.
and if you play using PS2 emulator on PC, that scene really slow.

@acetatsu
do you not remember? the price of 80GB PS3 with partial BC is the same with 80GB PS3 with no BC.
Sony remove the BC just because sony want to make PS3 more cost-effective. and sold at the same high price.

and not everyone have the money to buy PS2 after they buy PS3. we are gamer, we buy games, games eat our money.
—> no more money to buy PS2 to play ps2 game.

like in my case, my ps2 is broken, cant read dvd game (still play ps1 and ps2 cd perfectly). i want to play Tales of The Abyss again, i also want to play Ar Tonelico 2 when its released. but after i buy x360, my money always go to buying x360 games. now i have no money to buy PS2 to play Tales of The Abyss.

@qubex
yeah, if sony give something like 512MB GDDR3 graphic ram, not that expensive 256MB XDR RAM we will see ps3 games with hi-res textures.
And if sony still using the dual GPU like in the early PS3 hardware design, ps3 will have visual a lot better than xbox 360.

@acetatsujin
err, CMIIW, PS3 is not using 256MB DDR3 memory. PS3 is using TWO ultra fast 256MB XDR RAM.
1 for system ram, 1 for graphic ram.
if, PS3 use 512MB DDR2 ram like you suggested, PS3 performance will be very bad.
if you dont believe me, just see the benchmark of GeForce 8600GT 256MB GDDR3
then see GeForce 8600GT 512MB DDR2.

the 512MB DDR2 is about 1500 3Dmarks point slower than the 256MB GDDR3 version.

as for CELL's power.
CELL is specialized in multithreading and ray tracing 3d rendering.
the current developers, still use the old rendering method.
When they shift to ray-tracing, CELL will show its true power (maybe in PS4).

as for AA
Xbox 360 can do AA for free because the eDRAM die. it also have hardware scaler. thats why you can upscale all games to 1080p.
PS3 also can do AA but with performance hit… PS3 also can upscale game with software scaler, but it will gve performance hit too.

thats why in X360 its your X360 that upscale the game to 1080p
in PS3 its your TV that upscale to 1080p (if you enable your TV upscaling feature)

@deadmeat
Yes, GS is very hard to emulate.
in general RSX is alot faster than GS. but in some special case, GS is on par or faster than RSX.
and yeah, emulating GS with RSX is almost impossible.

and Xbox 360 is NOT far more powerfull than PS3.
xbox 360 in general is on par with PS3.

and Xenos (GPU) is not far more powerfull than RSX.
Xenos is just a bit more advanced, and a bit more powerfull than RSX. not 2x more powerfull than RSX.
the big difference between RSX and Xenos is Xenos is a lot more flexible due to its unified shader.

just like PS3's CELL is a bit more powerfull than X360's Xenon.
both can do 6threads.
both have its own advantage and disadvantage.

if xbox 360 is far superior than PS3, why you can get Racedriver GRID in PS3 and Xbox 360 with minimal picture quality difference and minimal performance difference? 🙂

@Joe
MS x360 BC is updated via dash update.
this year we got 3 minor dash update and one major dash update in november 2008.

Deadmeat
Deadmeat
12 years ago

> and yeah, emulating GS with RSX is almost impossible.

Ironically, Xbox 360 can emulate GS thanks to its 278 GB/s bandwidth…

> and Xbox 360 is NOT far more powerfull than PS3.

Then why does Xbox 360 emulate a machine far more powerful than PS2 entirely in software, while PS3 can't emulate PS2???

> xbox 360 in general is on par with PS3.

I have actual performance figures leaked and here and there, and Xbox 360 is indeed 4 times as powerful as PS3 when measured in terms of CPU integer performance, Vertex setup, shader throughput, fillrate, etc.

So why did this happen? Because Xbox 360 was engineered to combat GS3, a beast that never materialized.

> if xbox 360 is far superior than PS3, why you can get Racedriver GRID in PS3 and Xbox 360 with minimal picture quality difference and minimal performance difference?

Because PS3 is the base machine for GRID, like almost all Japanese 3rd party games. When you port from an inferior machine to a superior machine, you don't notice much difference between two(DMC4, SC4, GRID, etc) even if it is a rush job. You do notice the difference when the port is from a superior machine to an inferior machine(GTA4, Lost Planet, BioShock, Far Cry 2, Half Life 2 : EP2, Rainbow 6 Vegas 2, NBA2008, etc). Developers do their job to mask the visible performance difference between two machines.

A well know case study is GTA4. Xbox 360 version([email protected]@29 FPS avg) is pushing three times as many pixels as PS3 version([email protected]@24 FPS avg) version, yet most PS3 owners only see PS3 version as being slightly blurrier and choppier than the superior Xbox 360 version.

Ping_506
Ping_506
12 years ago

the only reason sony is doing this is that they can resell you the games on PSN

Dingodial
Dingodial
12 years ago

Sony might have done this because most PS3 owners have hi-def TVs (like me) and they have already beat their PS2/PS1 games and they want to make the transition to all-hi-def games and they find no logic in playing low-def games and they would rather invest in PS3 games from now on (so they can assure themselves that their investment in a PS3 was really worth the money). I think sony should either have a software update to enable b/c or have something to download on the PS store.

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
12 years ago

Just one question-

"Then why does Xbox 360 emulate a machine far more powerful than PS2 entirely in software, while PS3 can't emulate PS2???"

Without the graphics synthesizer chip, the 80GB PS3 emulates about 80% of the PS2 library using SOFTWARE EMULATION. You said earlier this was impossible and now you're saying it again. Perhaps your terminology usage is throwing me off, but I'd love to hear an explanation.

And if you can't explain, the entire rest of your posts are completely and entirely irrelevant to this article.


Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 10/17/2008 10:15:34 AM

Deadmeat
Deadmeat
12 years ago

> Without the graphics synthesizer chip, the 80GB PS3 emulates about 80% of the PS2 library using SOFTWARE EMULATION.

You are confused.

Emotion Engine : PS2's CPU. This chip can be emulated by CELL more or less.
Graphics Synthesizer : PS2's GPU. This chip has more than twice the bandwidth(actually three times in terms of sustainable bandwidth) and cannot be emulated by RSX. A physical GS is required in PS3 to maintain BC. Only Xenos and current high-end PC videocards can emulate GS.

20/60 GB PS3 with EE GS : 95% BC.
80 GB PS3 with GS : 40~80% BC depending on how you define BC.
All current PS3 with no GS : 0% BC.

Vivi_Gamer
Vivi_Gamer
12 years ago

I got a 60 GB just before they sold out

NEWS FLASH Little Big Plannet has been delayed till Nov 14th due to a muslim being offended by a song in a level, This is no joke!


Last edited by Vivi_Gamer on 10/17/2008 10:20:03 AM

orangpelupa
orangpelupa
12 years ago

@deadmeat

> Ironically, Xbox 360 can emulate GS thanks to its 278 GB/s bandwidth…

can you tell me the source of this statementof yours?
even GF8800GTS can't emulate GS in 100%.
and i never see any "Scene release" of GS emu on Xbox 360.
———————

> Then why does Xbox 360 emulate a machine far more powerful than PS2 entirely in software, while PS3 can't emulate PS2???

Its simple. its because Xbox and Xbox 360 both use the same API. the DirectX API.
Xbox use "ordinary" pentium 3 cpu, and use "ordinary" Nvidia GPU.

thats why Xbox 360 can emulate xbox games. Xbox 360 cpu and gpu is far more powerfull than Xbox, and it still use DirectX API. (xbox 360 use DirectX similar to DirectX 10, maybe its DX9L ??)

as for PS3 cant emulate PS2, i already answered in my previous post.
PS2's GS is very fast in "some special case". its VU (vector Unit) is very fast. that damn thing is hard to emulate.

thats why PS3 need GS to emulate PS2.
PS3 NOT need EE to emulate PS2. The CELL already STRONG enough to emulate EE.
its only the GS that hard to emulate.
———————

> I have actual performance figures leaked and here and there, and Xbox 360 is indeed 4 times as powerful as PS3 when measured in terms of CPU integer performance, Vertex setup, shader throughput, fillrate, etc.
So why did this happen? Because Xbox 360 was engineered to combat GS3, a beast that never materialized.

hello? if Xbox 360 is 4times more powerful than PS3, why the hell xbox 360 graphic quality still can beat PC ??????????????!!!!!!!!!!
———————

> Because PS3 is the base machine for GRID, like almost all Japanese 3rd party games. When you port from an inferior machine to a superior machine, you don't notice much difference between two(DMC4, SC4, GRID, etc) even if it is a rush job. You do notice the difference when the port is from a superior machine to an inferior machine(GTA4, Lost Planet, BioShock, Far Cry 2, Half Life 2 : EP2, Rainbow 6 Vegas 2, NBA2008, etc). Developers do their job to mask the visible performance difference between two machines.

are you stupid… GRID is NOT FROM JAPAN. Grid is developed by CODEMASTERS, codemasters is British video game developers!!!!!!!

and you are WRONG. grid, dmc4 using PS3 as the base? are you joking?

GRID and DMC 4 use PC as their base platform.

cant you see how great is GRID's graphic in PC and DMC4 graphic in PC?????
Grid PC vs Grid console (ps3, xbox 360) is like night and day.

and capcom already said that DMC4 is being developed in pc for pc first. but released the console first (cant remember the reason).
———————

> A well know case study is GTA4. Xbox 360 version([email protected]@29 FPS avg) is pushing three times as many pixels as PS3 version([email protected]@24 FPS avg) version, yet most PS3 owners only see PS3 version as being slightly blurrier and choppier than the superior Xbox 360 version.

what? only 1280x720p 2xAA 29fps Vs [email protected]@24 FPS avg?
you said Xbox 360 is 4x more powerfull than ps3.

if your statement is true, atlease the X360 can do 1280×720 8xMSAA 60fps parallax mapping, and some AF.
———————

sorry if my words become harsh. im in a bad mood. too many assignments from collage

Deadmeat
Deadmeat
12 years ago

> can you tell me the source of this statementof yours?

Specs are published, aren't they. Heck, some Japanese dude did his own home XNA benchmark on Xbox 360 and got 230 GB/s in fillrate from Xenos, meaning there is enough bandwidth to emulate GS.

> even GF8800GTS can't emulate GS in 100%.

Software emulation is never 100% perfect.

> and i never see any "Scene release" of GS emu on Xbox 360.

Because unlicensed developers don't have access to Xbox 360 SDK??? I am not talking about deliberately crippled XNA SDK.

> Its simple. its because Xbox and Xbox 360 both use the same API.

Using same API doesn't solve the problem of lots of Xbox games bypassing DX and directly programming shaders at register level.

> Xbox use "ordinary" pentium 3 cpu, and use "ordinary" Nvidia GPU.

Which are then emulated by a PowerPC CPU and ATI GPU entirely in software.

> Xbox 360 cpu and gpu is far more powerfull than Xbox,

Which apparently isn't the case with PS2->PS3 emulation.

> hello? if Xbox 360 is 4times more powerful than PS3, why the hell xbox 360 graphic quality still can beat PC

PS3 GPU is comparable to a GF7600GT in performance.

> are you stupid… GRID is NOT FROM JAPAN. Grid is developed by CODEMASTERS, codemasters is British video game developers!!!!!!!

I got games mixed up, sorry. BTW, GRID runs on PhyreEngine, SCEI's own game engine. It is quite disturbing that Xbox 360 runs a Sony game engine as fast as PS3 does.

> and you are WRONG. grid, dmc4 using PS3 as the base? are you joking?

DMC4 was initially a PS3 game before Capcom decided to port to Xbox 360 a few months prior to release. PS3->X360 ports work out well, X360->PS3 ports do not.

> GRID and DMC 4 use PC as their base platform.

GRID runs on an SCEI PhyreEngine. DMC4 started out as PS3 exclusive before it went multiplatform.

> and capcom already said that DMC4 is being developed in pc for pc first. but released the console first (cant remember the reason).

Console games are built on PC first, then ported to consoles for tuning and optimization. DMC4 started out as a PS3 exclusive, so it was built according to PS3's spec.

> what? only 1280x720p 2xAA 29fps Vs [email protected]@24 FPS avg?
you said Xbox 360 is 4x more powerfull than ps3.

1280x720x2 samples x 29 FPS = 53452800 pixels/s

1152x640x1 sample x 24 FPS = 17684720 pixels/s

53452800 pixels / 17684720 pixels = 3.02083 times the pixel count.

> if your statement is true

I just showed you that it was indeed true.

Joe_III
Joe_III
12 years ago

Anyone remember this picture?

http://images.vnu.net/gb/inquirer/news/2006/06/05/ps3-hardware-slow-and-broken/ps3_memory_bandwidths.jpg

Is memory bandwidth still not a problem?

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
12 years ago

That's it.

All of this is completely off-topic. Trying to prove the 360 is "more powerful" has nothing to do with anything, it's a twisting of words due to personal bias (which I am well aware of), and it's only going to lead to problems. The PS3 is a more capable machine for gaming, plain and simple; don't ANYONE listen to this guy if he's claiming otherwise.

No more posts unless it's related strictly to backwards compatibility and your opinion on it. Got it?

Deadmeat
Deadmeat
12 years ago

> All of this is completely off-topic. Trying to prove the 360 is "more powerful" has nothing to do with anything

I was simply trying to explain the editor's question of "Why was BC removed from PS3" using Xbox 360's example(Which does indeed do BC in 100% software).

> No more posts unless it's related strictly to backwards compatibility and your opinion on it. Got it?

My opinion is that it is technically impossible to bring back PS2 BC on current PS3 due to its hardware "limitations". No point in crying over it.

Joe_III
Joe_III
12 years ago

except you're wrong. All b/c is chipset emulation. There is no need for chipset compatability, just raw power and the ability to deliver it to the emulator.

360's b/c is full of fail. They couldn't even emulate Halo 1/2 properly because too much of the 360s performance was detailed to running the emulator versus the ROMs themselves. That's why you need to download a seperate emulator for each xbox game you want to play.

The PS3's worked fine. I didn't have to (or I don't remember having to) download updates for each game I loaded in there (sadly they were mostly old DW games).

Sony just abandoned b/c because it needs to keep selling PS2s until the PS3 becomes profitable. That or they're still selling so many that they don't need to bother stopping.

When those conditions are gone, they could put b/c back in with a massive software update if they wanted to. Which I assume they would, unless M$'s xbox originals idea actually works out. Then they'll keep b/c out so they can rerelease 3 year old titles on PSN because that's practically free money.

Deadmeat
Deadmeat
12 years ago

> There is no need for chipset compatability, just raw power and the ability to deliver it to the emulator.

The raw power that PS3 lacks, more specifically RSX's fillrate and bandwidth.

> 360's b/c is full of fail.

But it is still emulating a hardware far more powerful than PS2 entirely in software, something that PS3 couldn't do.

> That's why you need to download a seperate emulator for each xbox game you want to play.

There is no separate emulator for each game, just updates that add additional titles to the compatibility list.

> Sony just abandoned b/c because it needs to keep selling PS2s until the PS3 becomes profitable.

No, SCEI abandoned BC because Howard Stringer ordered Hirai Kaz to eliminate PS3 losses by all means. The quickest way to save money was the removal of GS and replacing the costly Toshiba SCC South Bridge with another cheaper chip.

> When those conditions are gone, they could put b/c back in with a massive software update if they wanted to.

PS3 does not have the power to emulate PS2.

> Which I assume they would

It's not an issue of they would or wouldn't, they can't. What you ask for is a technical impossibility.