Slashdot Mirror
Sony Releases PS3 Back-Compat Checker
With the 60GB version now 'sold out', the 80GB version of the PlayStation 3 is quickly going to be the only option for consumers in stores. Besides the hard-drive size, though, the two systems have another fundamental difference: the 80GB unit handles backwards compatibility with software and not hardware. What games work on the two console versions is now a bit trickier. To aid in your comprehension, Joystiq notes, Sony has released a handy online game checker to let you know how your library will fare. Over at Curmudgeon Gamer, they have an examination of a game library looking at both a PS1 collection of titles and a group of games from the PS2 era. Assuming this random sampling to be in any way indicative, it looks like there isn't much difference between software and hardware compatibility for PS1 games ... but PS2 games might not have an easy time of it.
Why does the more expensive PS3 use Software for emulation instead of hardware? It's clear that the software is worse than hardware, yet the hardware emulation machines were cheaper. Is there a site that explains this at all?
If the sales figures I've seen are any indication, they don't have much to fear about the PS3 cutting into the PS2 sales. IIRC the PS2 is still outselling the PS3 by a wide margin. Besides, it doesn't make much sense to try to shore up sales on last years model by crippling your more expensive new model. Besides, like many conspiracy theories is acompletely logical explanation that make more sense: Doing the emulation in hardware is more expensive than doing it in software, so to save manufacturing costs on PS3s they dropped the hardware emulation support from the newer versions in favor of software emulation. Console hardware is revised all of the time to save on manufacturing costs (the PS2 has what, almost 20 revisions now?) and this is no different.
I read the internet for the articles.
The PS2 games will have a hard time of it all the way till the day that they stop manufacturing PS2s, then the software will magically work. I think Sony noticed the PS2 sales dropped lower than they originally anticipated, so they killed the 60gb PS3 in order to control the emulation abilities. Congratulations... that is the dumbest thing I've read today.
The software emu rate success is pretty high. It doesn't hobble the non hardware versions much. In a random sampling of my library of 50+ ps2 games I have yet to hit one where the software emu wasn't good. No glitchiness yet.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
If Sony could choose between PS2 and PS3 sales right now, they'd take the PS3 sales in a heartbeat. Right now they've got the ever-elusive, vapor-like position of being the console with the least number of sales so far but the most supposed "potential." The PS2 will be dominant for maybe another year, and if the PS3 hasn't done better by then, you could see Sony in some serious pains.
In other words, I disagree.
As the above posters have mentioned, Sony removed the hardware emulation to cut costs on the unit and added another 20GB to make you feel like you got something in exchange. The problem (or not depending on how you look at it) is that they increased the price by $100 for 20GB...yea thats not what I would call an "acceptable" cost trade-off. Thus they made the 60GB look much more lucrative for those who care about the backwards compatibility, die-hards, or to those looking for a better deal. In turn the 80GB looks like you get something for the extra $100 to the ill-informed.
Which is precisely why the 60GB model is a better deal. It possesses both hardware and software emulation, thus insuring near 100% backwards compatibility and the ability to scale-up games that work with the software emulation. And it's $100 cheaper then the 80GB version. Of course this is all an attempt to clear the 60GB model out of the warehouses, so they can push their cheaper to manufacture 80GB. Which should receive a price drop by about $100 or so sometime shortly after the 60GB model is entirely sold out. At least it should, it would be very stupid of Sony not too.
And thats the best explanation I can give of Sony's current actions, hope it helps.
"Now you know, and knowing is half the battle!"
Wow. That's right up there with "Nintendo hates money and market share so they're holding back the supply of Wiis" for retarded console conspiracy theories.
The enemies of Democracy are
Apparently, it has been Sony's plan all along to drop the hardware solution for backwards compatibility after some time. Facts follow:
When the PS3 was launched in PAL regions, it was launched without the hardware solution already. At that time, emulation was even worse than now, but has people said, it has been improving. There are still lots of problems though from what I've heard.
Now that they've improved software emulation a bit, they're ready to force it down the throats of American customers too. They stopped manufacturing the 60 GB units, and from now on will only produce 80 GB PS3 without software emulation, which will reduce their huge losses due to selling hardware at a loss.
They have said in their latest financial report conference that they expect to reach profitability in hardware sales later rather than sooner.
More likely than not, the new 80 GB PS3 is cheaper to produce than the soon-to-be-discontinued 60 GB one, because they cut out the PS2 chips, and, in terms of hard drives, 80 GB might even be cheaper than 60 GB, due to 80 GB being a very common disk capacity for laptops (note that the PS3 hard-drive is 2.5 inches, meaning the variety used in laptops).
I hope the above wasn't too confusing, feel free to ask any questions you might have...
The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
"The PS2 games will have a hard time of it all the way till the day that they stop manufacturing PS2s, then the software will magically work."
Backwards compatibility on the PS2 has actually gotten progressively worse since they stopped manufacturing the PS1. Witness the abysmal track record of the silver slimline. In general, backwards compatibility is the first thing cut in a console's lifetime in the name of saving manufacturing costs (DS and GBA micro didn't have GBC support, Sega Nomad and Genesis 3 didn't have SMS support, etc.).
"I think Sony noticed the PS2 sales dropped lower than they originally anticipated, so they killed the 60gb PS3 in order to control the emulation abilities."
They may not be buying PS2s, but that's because they're buying Wiis, not PS3s. Sony does not that kind of market dominance and control any more.
since the PS2, to play PS1 games on the newer systems it wa entirely a software emulation. there is no hardware emulation hence why PS1 games should play identically between the hardware and software based PS3. the hardware emulation was that the PS3 had an Emotion Engine Chip (PS2 processor) next to the Cell proc. Every system software update, it makes the software emulation better anyway so just because you cant play a PS2 game on it now doesnt mean you will never be able to. Many of us still have our PS2's anyway.
>With the 60GB version now 'sold out', the 80GB version of the PlayStation 3 is quickly going to be the only option for consumers in stores.
Kotaku/Ars Technica says otherwise
http://kotaku.com/gaming/rumor/40gb-ps3-with-spider+man-3-for-christmas-298145.php
for those too lazy to click Sony may be coming out with a 40GB system for $399 and dropping the price of the 80 gig system to $499 (and including spiderman 3 as a packin for both). Yeah it's an odd move but I've stopped trying to explain Sony's product moved logically long ago.
From what I've heard PS2 games looked horrible on the PS3 due to scaling issues, so i'm wondering that while you lose 100% backwards compatibility losing the hardware chip you could potentially gain better scaling with software emulation with updates. is this the case, or should i go and find me a 60gb?
They may not be buying PS2s, but that's because they're buying Wiis, not PS3s. Sony does not that kind of market dominance and control any more.
The jury is still out on how much of the wii's numbers overlap and exclude the PS3 potential customer base. Wii is in a completely different price bracket aimed at a different and larger market, the 360 is likely easting Sony's lunch as much or more then the wii.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
"The jury is still out on how much of the wii's numbers overlap and exclude the PS3 potential customer base."
But that's not the issue. Parent poster pointed to declining sales of the PS2 and suggested the PS3 was the cause of it, while it seems safe to say that, if any console is helping to cause the decline in PS2 sales, it's the Wii.
360 will dominate, and the Wii will do even better if they can get manufacturing online. Plus, you have Metroid that just came out, Smash Brothers coming out, and Mario Galaxy/Mario Kart (with online play) right around the corner.
I don't understand it at all
As for GTA and Exclusive? Never understood that one. I've seen gta on PC, ps1/2, dreamcast, xbox, psp, etc, when has this series ever been exclusive to anything?
All joking aside, of course the PS3 isn't able to properly emulate PS2 games. I mean, the Emotion Engine produces graphics [that] are so amazingly lifelike, for Christ's sake!
FTFA:
Sony and partner Toshiba say the new graphics processor has enough power to show humanlike motions such as facial expressions, as well as to learn, and to recognize speech. One analyst says it will merge TV and video games.
I mean, how can the PS3 compete with that?Paging Friar Occam - Please bring your razor.
I bought a PS3 in the UK a month or so ago, it came with software version 1.6 which couldn't play the few PS2 games I threw at it. Once I setup the wireless connection I was imediatly upgrade to 1.9 and my small library of PS1 and PS2 games (probably a total of 60) all play on it. I'll agree some games (GTA SA) don't look as good on the PS3 as they do on the PS2 but Sony do seem aware of that. I'm more than willing to believe Sony will fix the issue considering how many times they've released software updates for my PSP. This is only my expearence there are probably games out there which don't play but I'm betting Sony will get the emulation upto 99% before jacking it in. I just wish PS1/PS2 memory cards could be connected to my PS3.
A friend of mine brought over Singstar -- their new flagship product (they're even releasing a new PS2 colored like Singstar) -- last night. Doesn't work on the 80GB version, only the 60GB. I had to pull my PS2 out of mothball.
Kind of annoying, since the saved playbacks are like 1MB each, so the PS2 memory cards can only hold a few of them, compared with the 80GB hard drive...
well.. you can always store them on the ps3 using the ps2 mem card to transfer. pain in the ass sure but it's an option. I think it's a peripheral computability thing? or does it not run at all?
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
You do know that Sony sells a USB reader for the PS2 cards.
It doesn't run at all, just tells you to look for a system update at some point. Kind of mind boggling, really, since it's such a pre-eminent title for them.
Perhaps there was a problem whent he system came out (I honestly just don't know).
But PS2 games usually are upscales and smoothed very well. The effect is a minimal improvement, since my TV is much better too and requires the new resolution, but it is technically a significant improvement.
But to be honest, the ability to play PS2 games is way overrated. I want next gen games. If I wanted to play new games with PS2 graphics, I could always borrow my daughter's wii (not trying to be mean, but seriously PS3 owners want Gears of War type stuff).