Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
PlayStation (Games)

PS3's Back-Compat Loss Explained, Analyzed 266

The news came down last week that future low-end PS3s won't have any backwards compatibility features, and that surprised a lot of onlookers. In response, Sony UK's Ray Maguire has attempted to clarify their logic. Essentially, in Sony's view, the money spent on back-compat features is better spent on developing new games or reducing the price of the console. "When PS3 first launched, Sony felt that backwards compatibility was an important feature as there were relatively few games for the new system, Maguire explained. 'So it was a big decision," he said of facility's removal, 'and we know it is a very emotive subject as lots of people think that backwards compatibility is high on the agenda and yet few really use it.'" For more on this, Joystiq has a few words on the implications of Sony's decision, while Kotaku says the 40GB unit will be arriving in the US on Nov. 2nd. For those of you who already own PS3s: would you have purchased a unit if it didn't have BC? If you don't have one yet, does the removal of BC make you less likely to buy one?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

PS3's Back-Compat Loss Explained, Analyzed

Comments Filter:
  • by Aladrin ( 926209 ) on Monday October 08, 2007 @01:55PM (#20901351)
    Yes, there is. There are actually 2 chips in there. The EU PS3 that only does software PS2 emulation actually still has a second chip in there still. The new PS3 removes that chip as well, and they apparently have no plans to try to emulate it.

    That doesn't mean they can't change their minds, but years of unofficial emulators has show how much work it is to emulate a chip with good speed, especially when the architecture is different. IIRC, you need 10x the CPU power to emulate a different architecture at full speed.
  • Re:but... (Score:5, Informative)

    by tuffy ( 10202 ) on Monday October 08, 2007 @01:57PM (#20901387) Homepage Journal
    It wasn't done completely at the software level; the PS3 could emulate the CPU (somewhat), but still needed the PS2's graphics chip. Now that the graphics chip is being removed, backwards compatibility is no longer possible. The PS3 simply doesn't have enough power to emulate the entire PS2 anywhere near real time.
  • by Ecuador ( 740021 ) on Monday October 08, 2007 @01:58PM (#20901389) Homepage
    The current US versions have the CPU and Graphics card of the PS2 in the box (reported to cost SONY $27 total a year ago), while the original EU models had only the Graphics in hardware and emulated the CPU. Now they are removing that too.
    I will not comment on these facts, as I will be called a troll again ;)
  • Re:Beh. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Babbster ( 107076 ) <aaronbabb@NoSPaM.gmail.com> on Monday October 08, 2007 @02:02PM (#20901477) Homepage

    (unlike many xbox games on the 360...then again, the 360 uses software emulation)

    For the record, so does the 80GB PS3, soon to be the only backwards-compatible PS3 available at retail.
  • by buzzzz ( 767841 ) on Monday October 08, 2007 @03:47PM (#20902927)
    While I agree with you on the PSP, Sony's reasoning is quite obvious - they want to control usage of their products like every other company. However I have to say Sony has done more than ANY other gaming company to support open platforms without hurting itself. PS3 has standard hard drives, wireless, USB peripherals, Bluetooth etc. MS and Nintendo have completely locked in systems.

    On the Sony Online Store I complete disagree with you. Maybe it is because I am a late comer to XBox Live (I bought one with Halo 3 last weekend) but I hate how MS has done online except for gamer points. I don't want to pay to use live, I hate their points system (why don't they just use real money?), I hate the way the interface is done. I love how simple the Sony Store is. Except that they don't have as many games yet, but for online store that is changing fast.

    Frankly, I think people who have been used to Xbox Live hate the way PSN is different. I however, having started out on PSN, hate the XBox Live.

    In all, as long as they can deliver on good games, I think Sony has made good bets with the PS3 as well as the PSN.

    On the topic of this thread, I am certain they will offer two SKU's : one with and one w/o BC eventually on all markets to satisfy everyone.
  • by analog_line ( 465182 ) on Monday October 08, 2007 @05:32PM (#20904087)
    ...because:

    1. I have a ton of PS2 (and PS1 for that matter) games that I both continue to play, have not finished, and am waiting for the price to drop down far enough on, so I can snap them up. The only saving grace of the PS3 as I saw it was consolidating 3 boxes down into one, and that's pretty much nonexistant now.

    2. There are now so many different versions of the PS3, I don't feel comfortable trying to figure out what exactly I'm freaking getting if I go get a refurbed/used PS3. The guy behind the counter at GameStop might tell me this is one of the ones that would play PS2 games, but do I know that for sure? Do I want to chance the day or more of frustration returning it would incur for me if the one I got turned out to be a version that wasn't what I was promised?

    I don't have any of the three next-gen consoles. The first one I get is most likely going to be a Wii (100% backwards compatible, interesting controller and gameplay, way cheaper). However there are some games coming out that are making me think about one of the more powerful consoles (since I don't feel like upgrading my PC anymore) and Sony is making it harder and harder for me to make that purchase a PS3 instead of an Xbox 360, even with the rampant hardware failures on 360s.
  • by trdrstv ( 986999 ) on Monday October 08, 2007 @05:35PM (#20904123)

    Sony has done more than ANY other gaming company to support open platforms without hurting itself. PS3 has standard hard drives, wireless, USB peripherals, Bluetooth etc. MS and Nintendo have completely locked in systems.

    Nintendo what? Perhaps you're unaware that the Wii uses: SD cards, wireless, USB peripherals, Bluetooth etc.

    On the topic of this thread, I am certain they will offer two SKU's : one with and one w/o BC eventually on all markets to satisfy everyone.

    They'll have that option until the European 60 gig sells out of stock (it was discontinued) after that the 40 gig with no BC is all Europe gets.

  • by Aladrin ( 926209 ) on Monday October 08, 2007 @07:03PM (#20904955)
    If I hadn't manage to get a used ps3 ultra-cheap, I'd agree with you. My ps2 is an -old- one and I tend to keep my consoles working for a long time. If the ps3 didn't have backwards compatibility, it wouldn't worry me too much... But it would degrade how much it's worth to me. While I would have paid $400 for a ps3 with back-compat, I think I'd only have been willing to pay $350 for one without.

    It's a pretty nice media player, but it's got some funny limitations on what it'll stream... I spent this weekend playing with settings to figure out how to make ffmpeg trancode it properly. For anyone else trying to figure it out, this is what I use in a bash script:

    ffmpeg -i "$1" -acodec libfaac -vcodec libx264 -r 23.97 -profile aac_main -level 41 "$1".mp4

    If you leave out the framerate, you'll find it doesn't play because ffmpeg wants to see the old rate as '23.98' and that's not valid, apparently. I assume you can also use other valid rates like 24, 30 and 29.97, but I haven't tried them. Or maybe you just have to set it... I dunno, and now that it works, I'm happy enough. Since I had a heck of a time figuring each little piece out, I figured I'd share.
  • by Khuffie ( 818093 ) on Monday October 08, 2007 @10:48PM (#20906859) Homepage
    What's wrong with PSN? Here, let me give you an example when it comes to system updates for the PS3 vs the 360.

    On the PS3:
    1. Turn on console
    2. Get a message that a system update is required. Doesn't take you anywhere.
    3. Try to remember where system update is. It's under 'system' in the menu.
    4. Choose whether you want to udpate from disk or server.
    5. Wait for it to download. And the updates are either HUGE, or their servers are slow, because it takes a while.
    6. Press the PS button to confirm a console restart.
    7. Read through the EULA, hit okay.
    8. Update FINALLY starts going.
    9. Restart system again.
    10. If you're lucky, you can carry on. If not, you have to plug your controller with a USB cable.

    On the 360:
    1. Boot up
    2. Get a message that an update is available. Asks you if you want to update or not.
    3. If you choose yes, you see a download progress bar, followed by an install progress bar.
    4. System reboots, you're set.

    Takes about, ooh, 10 seconds on the 360, and 5-10 minutes on the PS3. You also neglect to mention that the 360 also has quality, original IP in their store that follows certain UI standards (ALL arcade games have 'exit to arcade option' to quit, all PS3 downloadable games have their own exit option that often isn't very clear on what it will do). The 360 interface for downloadable content (the Live subscription which you have to pay for is only for playing multiplayer games, FYI) was designed from the get-go for a console. It also has options for latest updates so you don't have to go looking for them, and doesn't expect you to use your analogue stick as a mouse to find content.

"A car is just a big purse on wheels." -- Johanna Reynolds

Working...