No Backwards Compatibility - One of the many signs of industry greed?
- Thread starter Racecarlock
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It is true though, the PS3 hardware has room for the PS2 hardware, and it's not exactly hard to have ps2 software on there either...DracoSuave said:
If its so hard, then why do the older models have backward compatibility? Whats the logic in that? "Oh god, our consoles have gotten so good, that we'll have to ying-yang the balance, and remove an awesome feature, to make way for another awesome feature."
Doesn't Microsoft only put up games that are BC on disc?Racecarlock said:
It's definitely not extortion. Gouging yes, but extortion, no.
How are you going to send that message? Literally buy nothing to support them?
Not a flame, just curious.
Neither are games that can be beaten in fifteen minutes. Do you want to be paying 60 dollars for fifteen minutes of content?shadowmagus said:
all PS3s are backwards compatible with PS1
show me another console that is backwards compatible 2 generations down
but to the topic
having backwards compatibility means an extra workload in making a console and also makes it pricier and all future applications must be compatible as well
now you tell me why would i as a producer invest time and money for something that will rob me of even more income possibilities
just because a handful of gamers stop bitching?
certainly not viable
show me another console that is backwards compatible 2 generations down
but to the topic
having backwards compatibility means an extra workload in making a console and also makes it pricier and all future applications must be compatible as well
now you tell me why would i as a producer invest time and money for something that will rob me of even more income possibilities
just because a handful of gamers stop bitching?
certainly not viable
The problem with this is that the hardware you're trying to emulate has evolved in compexity. Having a PS2 emulate a PS1 was onyl easy because it had a PS1 core processor in it. So to emulate the processor, you just co-opted that processor to do the work. However, on top of this, you need to emulate the BIOS, which previous systems did not have. Not too tough, but it's made emulation of the PS1 a LOT more problematic on computer than, say, a Super Nintendo.Still Life said:
With the PS2 itself tho, the Emotion Engine is NOT a simple chip you can emulate so easily. It's a combination of a CPU, two GPUs, a slew of IO processors, and two math chips dedicated to vector math.
That's NOT easy for any system to emulate, because it's far more complex than an x86 processor. As for the PS3, it's a central processing unit that runs 7 sub-processing units, one of which runs the OS.
The chips don't even THINK the same... the ps2 is really just a CPU with a very powerful math chip and some graphics cards built in... whereas the ps3 is a septuple-core system that just does not work the same way.
Emulation between radically different hardware sets is not as easy as emulation between same OS to OS (apple) or same instruction set to instruction set (Windows).
Well what i did (Being the genius i am) I bought a PS3 and kept my PS2 and games, so if i wanna play say...DMC3 I dont need to rage, i chance the AV input over and BOOM there we go.
Is that so difficult?
Is that so difficult?
It isn't hard to slap an emotion engine into a ps3, it just costs money.Robert Ewing said:
The problem with that is the emotion engine doesn't DO anything else. It's not the same situation as the PS2, because the PS1 architecture was integral to sound processing as well as other functions. It's similar to how the Genesis used the Sega Master System processor as it's sound processor.
Also, and this must never be forgotten, the BC on ps3s SUCKED. It's not the situation that it was good and they decided to stop making it...
It SUCKED and they decided to stop making it. Wrap your brains around that. Please. There's a lot of unrealistic nonsense in this thread and a lot of wishing for crap that doesn't work right. Think. Please.
Backwards compatibility isn't a huge issue...YET.
But come on folks. Our PS2s aren't going to last much longer. And by next generation, there needs to be something in place that allows us to play our old games when there aren't really any consoles left on which to play them. And not just a handful that we have to pay for again.
But come on folks. Our PS2s aren't going to last much longer. And by next generation, there needs to be something in place that allows us to play our old games when there aren't really any consoles left on which to play them. And not just a handful that we have to pay for again.
I'm sorry, did Sony come into your house and take a hammer to your PS2 or something?Racecarlock said:
You know, there are some things that a lot of people seem to forget these days. Like the fact that the PS2 was the first home console to really be backwards compatible (I know, technically you could say it was the Master System/Genesis, but BC didn't become popular until the PS2). So we basically lived without it for the better part of 20 years with no one ever complaining or saying companies were trying to gauge them, even when remakes/re-releases actually came out.
Second, you seem to ignore the fact that the PS3 still is backwards compatible with PSX games. Why is that? Because the emulation is good enough now to make that possible. DracoSuave had an excellent point at the end of page 1 of this thread. Emulation is extremely difficult. It's made even harder when you have some weird hardware architecture like that in the PS2. Even emulating PS2 games on the PC takes a ton of horsepower, and most games still don't work. Maybe next gen it'll be there, but right now they basically have to go back and write emulators for all of those downloadable PS2 games that get released. It's just not feasible to do software emulation for the entire PS2 library yet.
And finally, I don't mind some HD re-releases, or even straight downloadable ports of lesser known titles coming out. No one is forcing you to buy them. Nobody came into your house and smashed your PS2. Do you complain that the Wii doesn't have three cartridge slots? No. I don't really see where your problem with this situation comes from. They're only gouging you if you actually give them your money for these games, and even then, only if you really think it isn't worth it. In which case I'd have to ask why you gave them your money in the first place?
simple fact is it makes the consoles more expensive to have backwards compatability and Nintendo, Soney and Microsoft all want to cut their prices, Nintendo is removing Gamecube compatability from the Wii so they can make it as cheap as possible for the last holiday season it will be their main consol (I think its expeceted to be under $100). Realy its just a case of people want cheap things and most people dont care much about backwards compatability as if you use the Nintendo example lots of people bought Wiis, while not many bought gamecubes.
Well the xbox and 360 are both different systems, different chip sets from different companies so not all the older games can work. Where as the PS3 was made by the same company, so was able to play the older games except they removed the ability to do it to save money. Probably so they can charge you money to download it online. But i think in the future, BC will no longer be around, especially when money can be made. Maybe the next MS or Sony consoles will set up a downloadable store just to sell older games to people for download. Which sucks as you are buying it twice.
But then most people rarely play there old PS1 games on a PS3. An after 5 years i doubt many people will bother playing PS2 games on there PS3 or their Xbox games on their 360.
But then most people rarely play there old PS1 games on a PS3. An after 5 years i doubt many people will bother playing PS2 games on there PS3 or their Xbox games on their 360.
Of course, Nintendo's new deal is offering less than their last deal, which still had GC functionality.coolkirb said:
Could be another element there.
And while you might use Nintendo as an example, Microsoft and (especially) Sony sold themselves on their back catalogue.
I never had a Xbox, so I really like the fact that my Xbox 360 can play some original Xbox games. That being said, BC isn't really an issue. If you really want to play Xbox games, either keep your Xbox or go buy a used one. I eventually did pick-up a used Xbox for $50, with a couple of extra controllers and 10 games. Now I can enjoy all Xbox games. I don't even play them on the Xbox 360 anymore. Some people say they have space problems. But come on now, you can stick extra stuff under your bed or couch. I don't have a PS3, but if I do buy one, I sure won't be giving up my PS2 slim. Man, that console doesn't take up any extra space at all. And for people who worry about how long their older consoles will last, pc emulators for both the Gamecube and PS2 are getting better every day.
I thought that for the most part backwards compatibility was eschewed in favor of slimming down the hardware? As far as I know, the reason my DS won't play GBC games is because there would be a lot more hardware needed to back that compatibility up. Not sure how relevant that is to disc-based consoles, though. Cartridge based ones are definitely affected by this, though.
Your problem is that you are still using a console. Get the only platform that gives you infinite backwards compatibility: PC. Until then, it's your own fault for owning bad hardware. Don't blame it on the amorphous "industry" when it is actively your choice.
Thats why I wont play new games, or at least buy them for myself...
Brother's XBOX away!
All I wanted in the PS2 era was one good modern HARD AIM shooter. Battlefield #? Modern Combat came close.
Still run out of fun without a second or third title.
The Suffering: Ties that Bind is brutal, brutal hard. Proportional health, Torque vs Demons, paramiliary and Demons with 5 - 10 autos.
Should make a thread. And not talk jibberywonkers this time.
Brother's XBOX away!
All I wanted in the PS2 era was one good modern HARD AIM shooter. Battlefield #? Modern Combat came close.
Still run out of fun without a second or third title.
The Suffering: Ties that Bind is brutal, brutal hard. Proportional health, Torque vs Demons, paramiliary and Demons with 5 - 10 autos.
Should make a thread. And not talk jibberywonkers this time.
Of course, your DS does have GBA compatibility, unless you have a newer system. Even the DS Lite slimmed down the console without trimming the GBA slot. I'm not sure it was ever about slimming things down to remove it.conflictofinterests said:
The PS3 was the same size with or without hardware compatibility. They did shrink it down later, but I don't think that was the issue. And the Wii was tiny to begin with.
With the software-based PS3 and 360 emulation, however, they don't really take up meaningful space. And they axed the one and discontinued development of the other.