PS3 backwards compatible? Ha!

Vendetta · Post by **Vendetta** » 2006-11-14 06:19pm

Genii Lodus wrote: I was really meaning Gamecube compatibility specifically. The Wii isn't powerful enough to emulate that through software, therefore it may have some compatibility problems. I don't think it will since I share your confidence in Nintendo's competency.

The CPU and GPU of the Wii are apparently very similar to their Gamecube counterparts. The CPU is a modified PowerPC750CL (the GC's was a PPC750CXe, the CL was a development from the CXe).

Internally, it's a very similar beast, just clocked faster and with more memory.

The only thing that the Wii changes is, I think, the ability to use progressive scan more widely. (firstparty GC titles all support progressive, but you need a component cable for it, and they're rarer than god's tits.)

Vendetta · Post by **Vendetta** » 2006-11-14 06:28pm

Praxis wrote:Well, the PS3 was originally supposed to upscale PS1 and PS2 games to 1080p. That feature was cut, apparently.

Which is sad. The ability to upscale those games that do work on the 360 is very very nice. Some games look absolutely wonderful with a resolution boost.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2006-11-14 08:39pm

RThurmont wrote:Remember, even if the PS3 were a total flop (and the data suggests that it isn't, by any means),

How can you evaluate the success or failure of a product within one week of its launch in one market if it's supposed to go out to the world?

that's just one part of Sony's overall business. Failure of one SBU does not usually signal a corporate Armageddon. Sega, a much smaller company than Sony, was able to survive the market failure of its console hardware business, and while Nintendo is making a stab at a comeback with the Wii, their hardware operation has been rather moribund of late.

Nonetheless, Sony's gaming division lost nearly 2 billion dollars this year. Not even a company like Sony can just shrug that off, and they're counting on future performance to make up for these losses. With the apparent failure of the PSP, Sony's gaming division is dependent upon the PS3's performance. Further, numerous other aspects of Sony's corporate strategy are reliant on the PS3's success (eg. chip manufacturing, Blu-Ray DVD's). If the PS3 fails, then Sony is looking at heavy losses not just in their gaming division but also in their movie divisions and manufacturing areas.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2006-11-14 09:04pm

There is real PS2 hardware in the console, how could they possibly screw it up? Aside from that, why no upscaling? They've had all that extra time from the launch delay to work on it.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2006-11-15 03:17am

Genii Lodus wrote:
That would be the one. Although I only had a lecture on this a few weeks ago I forget the number of processors used by the PS2 but it is quite a few. Not sure if all of them are physically included on the PS3 or if some of the simpler ones are being emulated, I'd imagine so. It might be an error in the emulation, I don't know why I'm making excuses for Sony so I'll stop.

I belive the entire core of the PS2 is being done on chip.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2006-11-15 03:27am

Genii Lodus wrote:
General Zod wrote:Considering that Nintendo already has their virtual console ready for launch, which will effectively be emulating older Nintendo titles, it's laughable to compare Nintendo's attempts at backwards compatability to Sony's blunders. Since Nintendo seems to be doing things, yanno, non stupidly.
I was really meaning Gamecube compatibility specifically. The Wii isn't powerful enough to emulate that through software, therefore it may have some compatibility problems. I don't think it will since I share your confidence in Nintendo's competency.

The GameCube doesn't have to emulate anything; it's using faster versions of the GameCube hardware, plus extra RAM. Native compatability.

Only N64, SNES, NES, Genesis and Turbografx games must be emulated.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2006-11-15 03:30am

RThurmont wrote:and while Nintendo is making a stab at a comeback with the Wii, their hardware operation has been rather moribund of late.

Doesn't matter though; unlike Sony and Microsoft, the GameCube sold for a profit from launch day. It only sold for a loss for one quarter (when the price first dropped to $99), and other than that sold for a profit its entire life span.

On top of that, in terms of global marketshare the XBox and GameCube are only two percentage points apart, and since the GameCube sold for a profit and sold mostly first part games, while the XBox sold for a whopping loss and sold mostly third party games and Halo, Nintendo didn't do too bad at all.

Nintendo came out of the GameCube with more money than they started with; thus, no damage done.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2006-11-15 03:45am

Hamel wrote:There is real PS2 hardware in the console, how could they possibly screw it up? Aside from that, why no upscaling? They've had all that extra time from the launch delay to work on it.

According to Sony, there are some software issues that will be fixed by a patch. The fact that they do have the physical PSX/PS2 hardware does add credibility to this statement. There isn't any reason they shouldn't be able to fix this problem swiftly, but it's still quite a bit of egg on their face.

18-Till-I-Die · Post by **18-Till-I-Die** » 2006-11-15 05:08am

Who actually buys a PS3 to play PS and PS2 games? I mean, if you HAVE games from the pervious systems you MUST have owned one or do own one, unless you threw it away every time you get a new system, like trading in a car.

I mean, if i can actually afford a PS3 (all signs point to "yeah, riiiight") then i would play PS3 games.

I do, believe it or not, own both a PS and PS2 so i've no possible need for backward compatible systems.

So frankly i dont get the concept is what i'm saying. The Revolution can play old Nintendo games? That's nice, i have an SNES and NES so...why do i need this? Resolution boost? Why? The graphics were fine the first time around, i still play Final Fight every so often...so, what's the dealeo?

Ravencrow · Post by **Ravencrow** » 2006-11-15 05:20am

18-Till-I-Die wrote:
So frankly i dont get the concept is what i'm saying. The Revolution can play old Nintendo games? That's nice, i have an SNES and NES so...why do i need this? Resolution boost? Why? The graphics were fine the first time around, i still play Final Fight every so often...so, what's the dealeo?

Probably only for the convenience of not having to change machines every time you want to play a game from a different era.

It's not a big deal, just nice to have.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2006-11-15 05:34am

It also helps keep retrogaming alive with legit support, rather than finding your old machine died years ago and the only way to play that NES or PSX game is to emulate it illegally on a PC. Sturdy as consoles can be, accidents happen and a great many people happen to like classics being played other than the year they were first released.

The only other way is remakes, but they can be hit (Resident Evil remake) or miss (Space Invaders remake).

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2006-11-15 05:34am

18-Till-I-Die wrote:So frankly i dont get the concept is what i'm saying. The Revolution can play old Nintendo games? That's nice, i have an SNES and NES so...why do i need this? Resolution boost? Why? The graphics were fine the first time around, i still play Final Fight every so often...so, what's the dealeo?

First of all, it's not the Revolution; it's the Wii. It hasn't been the Revolution since E3, seven months ago.

Second, regarding the Wii's Virtual Console, you mean to tell me that it never entered your puny brain that such a function as being able to buy, download, and play NES, SNES, N64, Genesis, and TG-16 games MIGHT be appealing to some people?

You can't conceive that it would be appealing to people that they could play games they used to play or missed out on playing the first time around?

Yet again you confirm how much of a frighteningly dense idiot you are.

And backwards compatability as an overall concept appeals to people because they can continue to play older games on newer consoles. People like that. Are you really so dense to not realise that, too?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2006-11-15 05:35am

Yarr, Spanky, I got there first and with less vitriol.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2006-11-15 05:37am

I'm just so sick of his bullshit idiocy, Vald. He just wanders into threads and blubbers crap like this all the fucking time...

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2006-11-15 05:40am

So then punch his lights out. You both live on the same continent, how hard can it be?

I, for one, hope retrogaming is kept alive now the Big 3 sees backwards compatibility as being a key feature. This probably explains the surge in classic gaming mags over the years now too, given I still play games for my old consoles and would be playing Amiga 500 games still if my Commodore hadn't died (read: been chucked by the old man).

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2006-11-15 05:45am

I don't have time, I need to go to bed. I'll let others jump on his ass when he comes back all pissy and indignant that somebody dare call him on his retardedly flawed perspective...

Again...

18-Till-I-Die · Post by **18-Till-I-Die** » 2006-11-15 05:50am

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:I'm just so sick of his bullshit idiocy, Vald. He just wanders into threads and blubbers crap like this all the fucking time...

As opposed to wandering into threads and screaming insults at the top of my lungs.

I'd love to see you try to punch my lights out too, Spanky, since i'm sure you're all of like...twelve...judging by your constant histrionics. Or maybe a whiny bitch, who knows.

Anywho, now i'll adress some folks who actually are adults and made a point.

Ravencrow wrote:Probably only for the convenience of not having to change machines every time you want to play a game from a different era.

It's not a big deal, just nice to have.

That's a true, that's a plus. I guess the sheer convenience of it can be appealing if you lost or broke some of the old machines.

Admiral Valdemar wrote:It also helps keep retrogaming alive with legit support, rather than finding your old machine died years ago and the only way to play that NES or PSX game is to emulate it illegally on a PC. Sturdy as consoles can be, accidents happen and a great many people happen to like classics being played other than the year they were first released.

The only other way is remakes, but they can be hit (Resident Evil remake) or miss (Space Invaders remake).

Well i tend to keep all my shit endlessly so, i guess i never had this issue to deal with. In that respect i guess it makes sense, though i still dont see why it would be a major selling point it would probably be quite convenient and somewhat useful.

I personally love some of the older games. Like i said, i play Final Fight every so often. I'd play more old games but i have the opposite problem, i have all the systems but i cant find where my grandma stashed all my old games.

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2006-11-15 06:37am

Just reflecting on this.

In the leadup to the 360, Microsoft strained the whole virtual machine issue with the 360 and how difficult and time consuming it would be to build each game up. They always said the backwards support wouldn't be perfect but they would try their best.

I've heard Sony harping on MANY times about how the PS3 unlike the puny Microsoft 360 would have complete backwards compatibility by having the emotion chip and supporting hardware inside the damn thing.

This kind of horrible backwards compatibility when they HAVE the hardware to work with from the ground up is simply unacceptable. Saying they'll 'patch it' puts them right back in Microsofts camp. With the exception that Microsoft isn't wasting money on extra hardware in their system and never promised anything but a 'best effort'...

Frankly I think this is just part of the continued downward spiral for Sonys PS3. They are REALLY working to alienate the hardcore gamers (as opposed to the Sony fan boys/fanatics) while the excessive price of the PS3 will frankly make it a poor choice for casual consumers compared to the Wii or even the 360...

Post by **Vympel** » 2006-11-15 06:45am

Ghost Rider wrote: As for dying....please, I've sparred with people who practically cum at the mere thought of the PS3 and regard the Wii as a hopped up Gamecube. While they won't be the vast majority, they will unfortunatly keep the PS3 alive.

Dude, PS3 aside, the Wii is a hopped a Gamecube. That's simply a fact. Look at the new Zelda game. It looks like total shit.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2006-11-15 07:30am

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Second, regarding the Wii's Virtual Console, you mean to tell me that it never entered your puny brain that such a function as being able to buy, download, and play NES, SNES, N64, Genesis, and TG-16 games MIGHT be appealing to some people?

Too bad I can do that with my computer, right now.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2006-11-15 08:02am

MKSheppard wrote:
Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Second, regarding the Wii's Virtual Console, you mean to tell me that it never entered your puny brain that such a function as being able to buy, download, and play NES, SNES, N64, Genesis, and TG-16 games MIGHT be appealing to some people?
Too bad I can do that with my computer, right now.

He makes a valid point. The popularity of 16-bit and earlier emulation is likely to make a dent in potential sales. It's still a nice revenue stream, but this isn't like the GBA; they aren't selling a version with a compelling reason to get away from emulation (portability), and the hardcore have been playing these games constantly for years already on their PCs.

Sharp-kun · Post by **Sharp-kun** » 2006-11-15 08:21am

MKSheppard wrote: Too bad I can do that with my computer, right now.

... and if you have TV-Out, on the TV no less.

Thats what I've been doing with SNES, N64, Mega Drive, Master System and PS1 games for several years.

Virtual Console isn't a big deal for me.

Vendetta · Post by **Vendetta** » 2006-11-15 10:34am

18-Till-I-Die wrote:Who actually buys a PS3 to play PS and PS2 games? I mean, if you HAVE games from the pervious systems you MUST have owned one or do own one, unless you threw it away every time you get a new system, like trading in a car.

There are a few games that would live on in my collection. I quite regularly play original Xbox games on my 360, it gives me an excuse to replay some cracking good titles.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2006-11-15 10:47am

Vympel wrote:
Ghost Rider wrote: As for dying....please, I've sparred with people who practically cum at the mere thought of the PS3 and regard the Wii as a hopped up Gamecube. While they won't be the vast majority, they will unfortunatly keep the PS3 alive.
Dude, PS3 aside, the Wii is a hopped a Gamecube. That's simply a fact. Look at the new Zelda game. It looks like total shit.

That "report" received such a reaming at PA it's not even funny. Considering their bias and yellow journalism tactics, Joystiq isn't worth the HTML it's coded in.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-11-15 10:57am

Vympel wrote:
Ghost Rider wrote: As for dying....please, I've sparred with people who practically cum at the mere thought of the PS3 and regard the Wii as a hopped up Gamecube. While they won't be the vast majority, they will unfortunatly keep the PS3 alive.
Dude, PS3 aside, the Wii is a hopped a Gamecube. That's simply a fact. Look at the new Zelda game. It looks like total shit.

And? Literally if graphics made a game, Gears of War would be selling 360s by the boat, 360 would overtake the market overnight. Ultimately I have the problem that the Wii will not, and has never had the illusion of taking the market by graphics but by games...which is a difficult proposition given the unique controller. That will be the reason the Wii doesn't achieve dominace because that thing will be hard as fuck to translate to, even if it an be used as a regular controller. It is not the standard.

And for the it looks like shit argument, I will point out what is the number one MMO looks shittier then FFXI, EQ2, and a whole host of others on the market, but has that honestly affected sales a damn?