Seems like PS2 BC will be gone forever soon

[Carl B]

It's not about ditching B/C or not ditching it; it's simply about offering it within a certain economic envelope. The XBox B/C efforts on 360 were essentially one guy; whatever the result, that sort of expenditure is tolerable. For PS on the PS2, the consideration was truly nominal. For PS2 on PS3, it's become much more serious. Now, stating again that I do believe software-only is being worked on, whether it ultimately pans out or not, I think that B/C will be back with us on PS4... if as Shifty said it's a Cell/NVidia extension. By then I would imagine PS2 be emulated as well, if it hasn't been already by that time.

Again I say this as a big fan of backwards-compatibility... I actually do put an older game in now and then! But at the same time I have to recognize that it's not Sony "forgetting" about their fans, and rather them making decisions when their back is very much against the wall... and the outcomes of those decisions are never 100% pretty whichever way they fall.

 

[Jack_Tripper]

Ya, but none of this is a new debate or at all suprising:

1. Backwards compatability hurts games sales - especially at the offset of a consoles life. Want proof - what was the number one played Xbox Live game at least a year after the xbox360 console was released? I'm not naive enough to think that fact would go unnoticed as unsold copies of (admittidly shit) games sat on store shelves

Look at the Ps3 - the attach rate for the console sold in the first year was absymal - I think that's in no small part to there being a VERY limited number of decent titles out - but I can't imagine that there weren't a number of people who were just playing God of War 2 for the first time on their PS3?


2. Point number one being made- I'm a huge advocate of B/C. Why is it so important? Because new games don't necessarily mean good games. I refer back to the launch of the PS3, where everything released (excluding maybe R:FOM) was subpar and underwhealming to say the least - and the backwards compatability made a good arguement as to why to go ahead and buy the console eary:
A. Great Library of existing software
B. Ability to pretty up some of those games (limited, but even upscaling some of those
games to 720p did make them look nicer)
C. Have blu-ray

Take A and B away, and you were left with C and the promise that good games would be coming soon (which, to their credit has come to pass finally). I'm not discounting this same mentality when the xbox360 launched, I think the two are comporable in terms of launch positioning (although MS's backwards compatability is still complete shit).

3. I like the idea of software compatability more than the execution - though, performance woes aside, I'm not sure that anyone has ANY justification for NOT including software backwards compatability where possible (ahem...sony). Was there (and I'm genuinely asking here) some hardware modification that made their software compatability go away??? If not, it's a shitty marketing decision to remove a large library of games that we all own from the last generation just so they can push the new shitty line of ports (some gems like Uncharted, Ratchet and Heavenly Sword excluded obviously)

Jack

 

[Carl B]

...but I can't imagine that there weren't a number of people who were just playing God of War 2 for the first time on their PS3?

Right but Sony doesn't mind that particular scenario, since God of War 2 for them is more profitable than your buying something like 'Ridge Racer' anyway. PS3 game sales aren't over-archingly better than PS2 game sales in terms of their contribution to the SCE bottom-line. Down that road of thinking would be cognitive illusions such as the idea that Sony wants to kill PS2 sales in favor of PS3 sales or some other such thing; they are all part of the same machine.

I like the idea of software compatability more than the execution - though, performance woes aside, I'm not sure that anyone has ANY justification for NOT including software backwards compatability where possible (ahem...sony). Was there (and I'm genuinely asking here) some hardware modification that made their software compatability go away???

I'm slightly confused by what you're asking here, but I'll simply point out that the PS3 has never had a wholly software-based emulation scheme. They had a situation recently where the EmotionEngine was emulated by the Cell, but that hybrid solution has been tossed in order to remove the last remaining legacy PS2 components (the GS and associated motherboard logic). The original US and Japanese SKUs shipped with the entirety of the important PS2 componentry, so their solutions were almost purely hardware to begin with.

 

[Dr. Nick]

I know it is a handheld but the Gameboys were bc before the PS2 and the NDS is backward compatible as well just not with the older ones and they have been selling like hot cakes for ages.

 

[Jack_Tripper]

Right but Sony doesn't mind that particular scenario, since God of War 2 for them is more profitable than your buying something like 'Ridge Racer' anyway. PS3 game sales aren't over-archingly better than PS2 game sales in terms of their contribution to the SCE bottom-line. Down that road of thinking would be cognitive illusions such as the idea that Sony wants to kill PS2 sales in favor of PS3 sales or some other such thing; they are all part of the same machine.

Fair enough...bad example - but it sure as hell would have hurt them if it was Metal Gear for example.

Oh, and I get that they're part of the same family, but currently PS3 games are selling for $10 more than PS2 new game aren't they (which, total bullshit by the way - extra development cost for not-so-next gen consoles is the biggest load of crap since 2-girls 1 cup)

I'm slightly confused by what you're asking here, but I'll simply point out that the PS3 has never had a wholly software-based emulation scheme. They had a situation recently where the EmotionEngine was emulated by the Cell, but that hybrid solution has been tossed in order to remove the last remaining legacy PS2 components (the GS and associated motherboard logic). The original US and Japanese SKUs shipped with the entirety of the i[mportant PS2 componentry, so their solutions were almost purely hardware to begin with.

I was just confused as to why they transitioned from fully-hardware, to "software" with the 60gb to 80gb move and then now it's gone all together. My experience is that I have an original 60gb with the "hardware compatability" which runs CONSIDERABLY better than my wifes 80GB "software" setup (if your'e looking for a test, load up Metal Gear Solid 3 and play the swamp level to see frame rates plummet into the single digits if you were to fire a gun there on the "software box").

I guess I still don't really understand the difference between the two systems if both are hardware-reliant from a b/c standpoint - and if there's no fundamental change to the newer models (sans b/c), they why the hell is b/c being removed - unless those changes that you mentioned have already been made.

I'm still floored at the audacity of Sony to "sell" PS1 games on their store without having a mechanism to be able to "download" those games without paying and validate with a CD (Castlevania SOTN for example). It would piss me off past my limits to own a console which has been crippled not to play a game I own - and then have someone tell me that I have to pay for it AGAIN to be able to play it.

Jack

 

[Blade47167]

You mean when fans of a certain HW company used it as a cudgel to beat MS over the head because the BC in the 360 was so badly done ? Well, now BC is old news, and probably "old gen" tech, just like rumble in controllers. Wait, someone tells me that rumble in controllers is actually next-gen now, and a great feature to have. Hard to keep up with the talking points of the day...

So I take you are a fan of the other company since you felt the need to come in here and stealth troll...

Either way considering the fact that Sony was recently hiring for BC engineers I'd venture to say its not long till we see emulated BC in the 40GB.

 

[Carl B]

I was just confused as to why they transitioned from fully-hardware, to "software" with the 60gb to 80gb move and then now it's gone all together. My experience is that I have an original 60gb with the "hardware compatability" which runs CONSIDERABLY better than my wifes 80GB "software" setup (if your'e looking for a test, load up Metal Gear Solid 3 and play the swamp level to see frame rates plummet into the single digits if you were to fire a gun there on the "software box").

The 60GB Euro and the 80GB US move wasn't to software, it was to a software-hardware hybrid. It's hard to know what to right since I just wrote this exact thing above, but again the fist consoles had both the EE, the RDRAM, and the GS as part of the system. They essentially had an entire PS2 inside of there. The newer models - such as your wife's PS3 - slimmed it down to just the GS chip and some associated logic/motherboard considerations. The CPU was emulated by Cell, but the GPU was still the GS, which is why it was not ever a fully software-emulated situation.

Now, the newer 40GB systems lack the GS as well and all other remaining PS2 hardware. The "software" emulation was removed because it was never truly software to begin with; it was software/hardware and now the hardware aspect that made it work is gone. As I mentioned I wouldn't be surprised if a fully software emulation scheme was later released, but whether it is or it isn't, the need for price cuts led the decision.

 

[RobertR1]

looks like my 60gb unit will see some Ebay action later on.

 

[AzBat]

That's not prehistoric.

My ColecoVision had b/c with the Atari 2600 if you bought the expansion box.

Bottom line is (as has been bandied about by others in this thread), B/C is a nice feature, but the percevied value of it to customers is a mixed bag. In the end, the console companies will have a tough time implementing it if the cost is significant....and you can't really blame them.

Hehe, I have a working Atari 7800 at home that I play 2600 games on from time to time. The Atari 5200 had a an adapter that would do the same thing.

Tommy McClain

 

[AzBat]

So I take you are a fan of the other company since you felt the need to come in here and stealth troll...

Either way considering the fact that Sony was recently hiring for BC engineers I'd venture to say its not long till we see emulated BC in the 40GB.

But by the time they get done with it, will there be anybody left that will care?

Tommy McClain

 

[one]

looks like my 60gb unit will see some Ebay action later on.

For that matter, after the recent announcement of 60/20GB discontinuation in Japan, the prices of them at Yahoo Japan Auction skyrocketed which had been falling flat before. Even retailers are jacking up the prices of remaining stock of open-priced 60GB.
http://kakaku.com/item/20504010112/
http://kakaku.com/pricehistory/20504010112/

 

[Blade47167]

But by the time they get done with it, will there be anybody left that will care?

Tommy McClain

The 100mil other PS2 owners that have yet to upgrade most likely.

 

[expletive]

The 60GB Euro and the 80GB US move wasn't to software, it was to a software-hardware hybrid. It's hard to know what to right since I just wrote this exact thing above, but again the fist consoles had both the EE, the RDRAM, and the GS as part of the system. They essentially had an entire PS2 inside of there. The newer models - such as your wife's PS3 - slimmed it down to just the GS chip and some associated logic/motherboard considerations. The CPU was emulated by Cell, but the GPU was still the GS, which is why it was not ever a fully software-emulated situation.

Now, the newer 40GB systems lack the GS as well and all other remaining PS2 hardware. The "software" emulation was removed because it was never truly software to begin with; it was software/hardware and now the hardware aspect that made it work is gone. As I mentioned I wouldn't be surprised if a fully software emulation scheme was later released, but whether it is or it isn't, the need for price cuts led the decision.

I recall reading that the issue with a full software BC solution for the PS3 was that the PS3 doesnt have the bandwidth that the PS2s EDRAM could provide and there was no amount of software that could emulate EDRAM. How accurate is that?

Overall, I think the main question here is if the lack of BC lowers the conversion rate of PS2 owners to PS3 owners, and if so, by what %? If that number is significant, and it seems Sony is betting it is not, i think its a huge mistake for Sony to squander last generations success, and not parlay it into current gen sales. I suppose they needed to get the price down for a particular SKU, that much is clear but why eradicate all options for a BC equipped PS3?

 

[Carl B]

I recall reading that the issue with a full software BC solution for the PS3 was that the PS3 doesnt have the bandwidth that the PS2s EDRAM could provide and there was no amount of software that could emulate EDRAM. How accurate is that?

It's definitely an issue.

I'd highlight Fafalada's posts in this thread as being directly informative on the GS/RSX issue though:

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=45157

 

[Johnny Awesome]

It is ironic that X360 has better backward compatibility than PS3, but I've always maintained that the feature is nice, but irrelavant for most people.

 

[Carl B]

It is ironic that X360 has better backward compatibility than PS3, but I've always maintained that the feature is nice, but irrelavant for most people.

Well let's qualify that a little though; because my PS3 has perfect B/C.

 

[NavNucST3]

I know what the situation was in the prehistoric era, I have been gaming since the NES. But this is the modern era. We were given bc to be able to play all our old games on the newer successor console. It is a very awesome feature for hardcore gamers that want to replay games or never had the previous console to begin with and want to play some of the previous gen games(like I did on the x360 with xbox games). When you take into account bc a console now had a vast library of games to play. You could revisit all those great classics without bringing out your old consoles from the closet.

I disagree with bc being the exception, when the x360 then ps3 then wii came out with bc it was looking like bc would be a standard feature on consoles from now on and now they want to take it away from us.

LOL, here I am thinking the modern era started with the NES, surely I'm not THAT old

 

[AzBat]

The 100mil other PS2 owners that have yet to upgrade most likely.

We'll see, but personally I think if and when those people do upgrade they'll be too tired of PS2 games too care. I think BC is great in premise, but all in all it's not something I see a lot of people outside the hardcore using with much frequency. In my experience I can count on one hand how many times I've used BC games on my 360. I'm sure I'm not alone.

Tommy McClain

 

[cthellis42]

Well let's qualify that a little though; because my PS3 has perfect B/C.

"If they are ditching the 80GB model, and if they aren't dropping it because they're restructuring it for a different SKU/bundle that will still have the 80GB's motherboard/chipsets (and therefore retain backwards compatibility), then PS3's from then on will have worse backwards compatibility than the 360. Unless you count PS1 games. (Lasting until they manage to bring out a software PS2 emulator, if they can.)"

Better?

 

[Carl B]

Better?

It is... but at the same time I was just reminding on the range of execution across SKUs. Obviously I think the default mindset if someone is even in this thread is to realize Johnny Awesome's comment was correct as it applies to PS3's going forward. The provision for full SW B/C notwithstanding.