PS3 backwards compatible? Ha!

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2006-11-14 11:37am

L'inq

Touted as being backward compatible with older models, it turns out the machine can't run about 200 PS and PS2 games.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-11-14 11:39am

What's that I hear? Sony's death knell?

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-11-14 11:45am

General Zod wrote:What's that I hear? Sony's death knell?

Nah, just Sony fanboys telling you they never needed this function. Still a list would be nice just to get an idea it isn't worthless shit like Barbie funhouse.

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.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2006-11-14 11:46am

General Zod wrote:What's that I hear? Sony's death knell?

Whats this, someone who doesn't understand that Sony is a gigantic company and no single product is going to sink it?

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-11-14 11:47am

Ghost Rider wrote:
General Zod wrote:What's that I hear? Sony's death knell?
Nah, just Sony fanboys telling you they never needed this function. Still a list would be nice just to get an idea it isn't worthless shit like Barbie funhouse.

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.

In the same way obsessive Star Trek fans kept Enterprise alive, right?

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-11-14 11:48am

Ace Pace wrote:
General Zod wrote:What's that I hear? Sony's death knell?
Whats this, someone who doesn't understand that Sony is a gigantic company and no single product is going to sink it?

Well, maybe not SONY'S death knell, but at least their Playstation's.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-11-14 11:50am

General Zod wrote:
Ghost Rider wrote:
General Zod wrote:What's that I hear? Sony's death knell?
Nah, just Sony fanboys telling you they never needed this function. Still a list would be nice just to get an idea it isn't worthless shit like Barbie funhouse.

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.
In the same way obsessive Star Trek fans kept Enterprise alive, right?

Nah, the way that Star Trek Fantard kept Voyager alive. The PS2 wasn't a disappointment to them

.

To be honest, saying death kneel this early is a bit presumptious, but they are lagging and will suffer, with the possibility of either MS or Nintendo taking a good lead because of Sony's hubris.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-11-14 12:23pm

Er, does 360's backwardsness work on most Xbox games? Last I heard, it was pretty poor too.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-11-14 12:24pm

Stark wrote:Er, does 360's backwardsness work on most Xbox games? Last I heard, it was pretty poor too.

It only works for select, yes it is pretty poor. For the most part, not much to crow about.

Losonti Tokash · Post by **Losonti Tokash** » 2006-11-14 12:28pm

Stark wrote:Er, does 360's backwardsness work on most Xbox games? Last I heard, it was pretty poor too.

It too leaves much to be desired. The reason Sony is being singled out for ridicule, of course, is because the 360 did not advertise total backwards compatibility. Which as I understand it, Sony did with the PS3.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-11-14 12:30pm

Oh I'm not sticking up for Sony: they said it would be and it's not (can we say 'rushed to market'). I was actually curious if the 360 had been fixed/improved.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-11-14 12:31pm

Stark wrote:Oh I'm not sticking up for Sony: they said it would be and it's not (can we say 'rushed to market'). I was actually curious if the 360 had been fixed/improved.

Not really on the 360 front. For the most part it is looking whichever, if ever I get either, I'm still going to have to do the GC-N64 route then not.

TheMuffinKing · Post by **TheMuffinKing** » 2006-11-14 12:41pm

For the 360, games are constantly being added. Last time I checked, they were adding games every week.

I think this is a current list: http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/backwar ... eslist.htm

Sharp-kun · Post by **Sharp-kun** » 2006-11-14 12:49pm

Meh, I never planned on using the PS3 for PS2 games. Why would I, when I have my PS2 modded with a hard disc that not only is more convienient, but lets me play imports etc?

Does anyone know what games actually don't run, given the stupidly huge amount of PS and PS2 titles out there?

UCBooties · Post by **UCBooties** » 2006-11-14 01:05pm

TheMuffinKing wrote:For the 360, games are constantly being added. Last time I checked, they were adding games every week.

I think this is a current list: http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/backwar ... eslist.htm

not every week, but they do try to get a chunk of them working every couple of months.

SylasGaunt · Post by **SylasGaunt** » 2006-11-14 01:07pm

Stark wrote:Oh I'm not sticking up for Sony: they said it would be and it's not (can we say 'rushed to market'). I was actually curious if the 360 had been fixed/improved.

They're adding more games to the list of ones that are BC. Though it should be noted that backwards compatibility wasn't touted nearly as much with the 360 as it was with the PS3.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2006-11-14 01:17pm

Sharp-kun wrote:Meh, I never planned on using the PS3 for PS2 games. Why would I, when I have my PS2 modded with a hard disc that not only is more convienient, but lets me play imports etc?

Does anyone know what games actually don't run, given the stupidly huge amount of PS and PS2 titles out there?

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

Genii Lodus · Post by **Genii Lodus** » 2006-11-14 03:36pm

I'd thought the PS3 at least in the beginning, was including the integrated Emotion Engine/Graphics Synthesiser chip to aid backwards compatibility. Its possible though that they decided to go for pure emulation from the get go. I vaguely recall a statement maybe from crazy Ken Kutaragi blaming this problem on software that didn't conform to the standards and did naughty things. That however might have been about the PS -> PS2 transition.

Now let's see if the Wii can do backwards compatibility properly. In theory it should do since its processor and GPU are upclocked version of the GC ones but following this PS3 farce who knows? Its easy to right software on consoles thats a bastard to convert even on similar architectures.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-11-14 03:41pm

Genii Lodus wrote:I'd thought the PS3 at least in the beginning, was including the integrated Emotion Engine/Graphics Synthesiser chip to aid backwards compatibility. Its possible though that they decided to go for pure emulation from the get go. I vaguely recall a statement maybe from crazy Ken Kutaragi blaming this problem on software that didn't conform to the standards and did naughty things. That however might have been about the PS -> PS2 transition.

Now let's see if the Wii can do backwards compatibility properly. In theory it should do since its processor and GPU are upclocked version of the GC ones but following this PS3 farce who knows? Its easy to right software on consoles thats a bastard to convert even on similar architectures.

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.

RThurmont · Post by **RThurmont** » 2006-11-14 03:47pm

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

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2006-11-14 03:50pm

Genii Lodus wrote:I'd thought the PS3 at least in the beginning, was including the integrated Emotion Engine/Graphics Synthesiser chip to aid backwards compatibility. Its possible though that they decided to go for pure emulation from the get go. I vaguely recall a statement maybe from crazy Ken Kutaragi blaming this problem on software that didn't conform to the standards and did naughty things. That however might have been about the PS -> PS2 transition.

Click it. You mean that?

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-11-14 03:51pm

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

Didn't Sega only survive when another company bought them out? Plus, iirc, Nintendo's only having hardware sales trouble on the console section, but considering the Wii's launch just weeks away that's understandable. For their handheld section, they're still doing strongly.

Ace Pace · Post by **Ace Pace** » 2006-11-14 03:59pm

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

Everything I see has Nintendo making a profit, a nice healthy one. Thanks mostly to the DS, however, not like the Gamecube was ever a loss.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2006-11-14 04:24pm

Link

A Sony spokesperson told GameSpot, "We are aware that a select number of titles have compatibility issues but these problems will be fixed with a software upgrade that will be available in the near future."

A console having issues at launch? Say it aint so!

My biggest issue with the PS3 is that Sony is putting out an non-upgradeable 'gimp' version. Well, that and the pathetically low number of systems at launch. This backwards compatability issue means precisely dick in the long run since it sounds like Sony is on top of it. Though with Sony you never know for sure...

Genii Lodus · Post by **Genii Lodus** » 2006-11-14 05:59pm

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.

Ace Pace wrote:*snip image*

Click it. You mean that?

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.