PS3 Backwards Compatibility Emulated?

[Vandenh]

Joystiq (http://www.joystiq.com/2006/04/24/playstation-3-not-100-backwards-compatible/) is reporting that the PS3 will run PS2/PS1 games using emulation just like the 360. This could also mean that not all games will run.

If the sources are correct, then the PlayStation 3's backwards compatibility is not as certain as it once was. Software emulation is the same trick being used by the Xbox 360 to play original Xbox title, and Microsoft is still trying to get its back catalogue to function properly (as of today, our beloved Psychonauts is still not playable on our shiny 360 consoles). The source claims that "a surprising number of PS2 titles are already working on PS3 prototype hardware." Sony must get the majority of its back catalogue compatible with the new PlayStation or they will lose one of their key speaking points.
In fact it almost guarantees that some games, that use special hardware tricks, might be in trouble.

[51|RandoM]

In fact it almost guarantees that some games, that use special hardware tricks, might be in trouble.

...or it guarantees that Sony will have to make the effort to emulate all of the 'special hardware tricks'. Which, imho, is the likelier option. I think they'll put in the effort to make sure their backwards compatibility is more extensive than that of the xbox/xbox360.

[Morratut]

Software emulation isn't the best but it does the job.

It all depends on how committed Sony is.

[Borys]

It guarantees NOTHING and you know it. Time will tell.

[bapenguin]

I think they'll put in the effort to make sure their backwards compatibility is more extensive than that of the xbox/xbox360.

Well...that's not very difficult. *ba-dum-ching*

[NonSoft]

Software emulation isn't the best but it does the job.

It all depends on how committed Sony is.

In terms of compatibility it isn't the best, but it does allow for more graphical improvements.

[bone_matrix]

Now, BC was never a selling point for me for any system I purchased with it. I never had a PS1, so it did allow me to check out some old school games on my PS2, but I wouldn't have been at a loss without it.

Having said that, I am dissappointed in the 360's BC. Not because I really really want to use it (some games would be fun in hidef), but because they said I WOULD be able to use it. Its like a lost feature now, and I'm a small bit upset.

If Sony goes this route, I wish them luck, and hope they do better than MS did. Although I still probably won't play older games on the PS3.

[Vandenh]

...or it guarantees that Sony will have to make the effort to emulate all of the 'special hardware tricks'. Which, imho, is the likelier option.

I guess you guys really don't understand the realities of software development and especially emulation. Self modifying code (people who use it should be shot anyway) is a very well known problem of emulation and there are many more. Depending on the tricks developers used (and I am not saying many of them did) it will be VERY hard. Especially on PS2 were developers have evolved a lot during last few years I am sure there are a lot of weird hacks to optimize performance. I have no experience with developing on PS2 but I have developed on a couple of different hardware architectures and 100% emulation is always very difficult (sometimes clock cycle speeds cannot be 100% synchronized between CPUs).

Anyway.. that comment is true for any emulation. I didn't say how many games would be in trouble but you can bet that, just like on the 360, some of them will not run. You can take that as your sig!

Having said that, I am dissappointed in the 360's BC. Not because I really really want to use it (some games would be fun in hidef), but because they said I WOULD be able to use it. Its like a lost feature now, and I'm a small bit upset.

I am dissappointed as well. I have some games I want to play but don't want 2 machines sitting under my TV. MS have the added problem that they do not have the right to some algoritms on the nVidia GPU (a fact that also helped in the dumping of nVidia). So Sony will probably have better emulation out of the box...

[F3nyx]

Self modifying code (people who use it should be shot anyway) is a very well known problem of emulation and there are many more. Depending on the tricks developers used (and I am not saying many of them did) it will be VERY hard.No way... developers use self-modifying code in commercial software? I thought that was purely a novelty.

[fitbabits]

If true, this is a very interesting development.

[peeweejd]

it almost guarantees that some games, that use special hardware tricks, might be in trouble.

you mean no emotion engine games and vector units!!! :eek: :mad: :(

[Goronmon]

Gotta love the "So and so company could be in trouble if some unfounded rumor turns out to be true!"

Who even needs real news? ;)

[Chalex]

They announced this at last E3, why is everyone acting all shocked now?

The quote isn't even negative, it says that they have more games working now than thay had expected (at least that's what I took from "a surprising number of PS2 titles are already working on PS3 prototype hardware.")

[Vandenh]

It certainly is not negative and it is news because it means that no (or at least not a lot) PS2 hardware will be included in PS3 (thus reducing cost).

[AntB]

Doesn't every new PS2 game that came out lately that excelled graphically, use some sort of hacks to get shit up and running?

God of War, Shadow of the Collusus, RE4...

I'm sure the PS2 developers had to use hacks left and right to keep the PS2 up with the times.

[TRiLoGY]

I've loved having backwards compatability with the PS2, I still sometimes play some of my old PS1 Games (Final Fantasy, Tombraider, Parapa the Rappa etc..) :)

[NoName]

And here I was thinking I could replace my dieing PS2 with a PS3 and still be able to play my old games. I guess I should look into one of those price dropped PS2s O.o

[agentgray]

Hahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahaha

sigh sigh

haha haha haha haha haha haha haha

When will any of game companies learn and listen to their customers. Better get that $130 PS2 now if you were holding out (which I don't know why because the thing has been out <Squints>for-ev-ver</Squints>).

[Ajguy]

I'm really trying to hold my tongue here. Aw screw it!

This is what I love. MS's backwards compatibility turns out the way it does and everyone condemns MS. Now it looks like Sony may have the same trouble and "it's not a big deal" or "well I'm sure they'll do it better." Woe befall us all if Shadow of the Collusus has sound issues or God of War suffers slowdown.

Also, to say MS failed to deliver on their promise is completely false. They said they would have some games running on the 360. Well guess what, I can play Halo2, Ninja Gaiden, Crimson Skies, Fable, Knights of the Old Republic, and more on my 360. Sound like what they said to me. Now Sony had already promised full backwards compatibility with PS1 and PS2. If that turns out to not be the case, guess who failed to deliver?

[51|RandoM]

I'm really trying to hold my tongue here. Aw screw it!

This is what I love. MS's backwards compatibility turns out the way it does and everyone condemns MS. Now it looks like Sony may have the same trouble and "it's not a big deal" or "well I'm sure they'll do it better."


A. Microsoft promised, failed, and was vilified.
B. Sony hasn't failed yet, can't blame anybody for being cautiously optimistic. As far as vilification goes, don't you think we should wait for the facts?

The two situations might eventually be the same, but they certainly aren't at the moment, perhaps that is the real reason you perceive a different response?

[Ajguy]

I still maintain MS, did not fail. They never promised full BW, just partial, and that is exactly what we got.
Also, I consider Sony promising a Spring launch then waiting until spring to announce the delay a failure. Could just be me.

[fitbabits]

I still maintain MS, did not fail. They never promised full BW, just partial, and that is exactly what we got.
Also, I consider Sony promising a Spring launch then waiting until spring to announce the delay a failure. Could just be me.
Actually, Microsoft did state that 100% backwards compatability was their goal. Whether one views that as a promise or not is open to interpretation.

[gzsfrk]

A. Microsoft promised, failed, and was vilified.
B. Sony hasn't failed yet, can't blame anybody for being cautiously optimistic. As far as vilification goes, don't you think we should wait for the facts?

The two situations might eventually be the same, but they certainly aren't at the moment, perhaps that is the real reason you perceive a different response?

Actually, MS was harangued quite brutally as soon as it was announced that the 360s BC would be limited--which they did long before the console ever launched. The disparity is that now that it looks like there's a strong possibility that PS3 will not be 100% BC with PS2, there seems to be a lot of poo-pooing of the idea that it could be negative for Sony. (Particularly by you, 51|R).

[Borys]

I'm really trying to hold my tongue here. Aw screw it!

This is what I love. MS's backwards compatibility turns out the way it does and everyone condemns MS. Now it looks like Sony may have the same trouble and "it's not a big deal" or "well I'm sure they'll do it better." Woe befall us all if Shadow of the Collusus has sound issues or God of War suffers slowdown.

Also, to say MS failed to deliver on their promise is completely false. They said they would have some games running on the 360. Well guess what, I can play Halo2, Ninja Gaiden, Crimson Skies, Fable, Knights of the Old Republic, and more on my 360. Sound like what they said to me. Now Sony had already promised full backwards compatibility with PS1 and PS2. If that turns out to not be the case, guess who failed to deliver?

Dude, the 360 is out for 6 months while the PS3 will be out in 6 months. How can you condemn a company for something it hasn't released yet?

Better bite that tongue next time!

[gzsfrk]

Actually, they did state that 100% backwards compatability was their goal. Whether one views that as a promise or not is open to interpretation.

How do we know that it's not STILL their goal? Despite not receiving a substantive BC update for quite some time, the door is still open. (Not that I suspect for even a moment that they'll ever even reach 90%.)

Point is, MS never lied. At worst, they allowed an optimistic misconception to propagate (which is by no means completely excusable, either).

[gzsfrk]

How can you condemn a company for something it hasn't released yet?

Hi there!

You must be a friend of Borys using his account to read and post on EA. Seeing as you must be new to EvAv and gaming forums in general, here's a nametag you can wear until you become accustomed to the slanderous modus operandi of console threads.

[fitbabits]

How do we know that it's not STILL their goal? Despite not receiving a substantive BC update for quite some time, the door is still open. (Not that I suspect for even a moment that they'll ever even reach 90%.)

Point is, MS never lied. At worst, they allowed an optimistic misconception to propagate (which is by no means completely excusable, either).
I didn't suggest it wasn't still the goal of Microsoft to have 100% BC. In fact, I know that it is. As for the BC update - E3 will be where it's at.

[MosBen]

Yeah, seriously, fanboys are the worst. MS anounced rather early on that BC would be done with emulation. While 100% BC was their stated goal, anyone with half a brain should know that emulation is going to lead to problems with some titles, and it's the same here. There *will* be games that people want to play that don't work out of the box on the PS3 or even several months down the road. Furthermore, there will be games that few, if any, people want to play (the PS3's version of Barbie Horse Adventures) that will work simply because the emulation for some other game addressed it's problems, but people will bitch and bitch and bitch about why *this* game works when their favorite game doesn't.

One might ask why, if we all know that these problems will occur, or at least those of us that are reasonable, don't MS and Sony simply include legacy hardware? The answer is that, despite all the flame wars that go on online, BC is not a very important feature. No matter how many people say, "I still pull out Twisted Metal 2 and play it", the vast majority of gamers use BC as a stopgap during the time when nextgen games are sparse. I think the tipping point is probably when the "Greatest Hits" titles start coming out for the nextgen systems. As soon as there is a sizable selection of games for the 360 and PS3 that are made for the machines and are budget priced, few people will care that some game from five years ago doesn't work. People that really care about legacy gaming buy old consoles.

[Heretic Machine]

Guys, I'm pretty sure that any rational person KNEW they were going to be using software emulation this time around, as far back as last E3. That does mean that there will be games left out, and that it's gonna take a shit-load of time to make a decent library of games compatible.

You want to see the realities of software emulation? Go check out some works-in-progress on some big emulation sites like Zophar's Domain (http://www.zophar.net). I wouldn't be surprised if we got some games that don't have sound, or some that don't have the right shaders working... etc.

[Wonka]

I am not angry with MS for their BC efforts, just dissapointed that more of the online games do not work.

I am not angry with Sony either. I hope that they do better (have more coverage for their library), but I do not hold much hope that they will. They are not a software company, and the PS2 will probably be even wierder to make things BC for than the Xbox was. Sure, they own the IP, but MS licensed it so that issue should really be moot now.

Lets hope that they both start to compete to have good coverage, so that there will be a strong incentive to get as many titles running as possible.


On the subject of BC and E3, I suspect that MS has been holding out on us in this department the past few months (so that they will have something to announce at E3, because its not like they had enough consoles on the shelves until then that this would make a difference). We will see.

[gzsfrk]

Guys, I'm pretty sure that any rational person KNEW they were going to be using software emulation this time around, as far back as last E3. That does mean that there will be games left out, and that it's gonna take a shit-load of time to make a decent library of games compatible.

Exactly--if indications are to be believed, it's going to be all Sony can do to just release the PS3 this year, and software emulation is a VERY time consuming process, without even factoring in QA effort. So what, given a crunch to November, is it likely that Sony will stack the vast lion's share of its man-hour resources towards--actually getting the console out the door with some first party titles, or a 98%+ BC rate?

I think it's the same story today with Sony as it was with MS and the 360; I'm sure they'd really LOVE to launch with 100% BC and they may try to reach that goal over time, but BC is a feature that will quickly take a back seat to primary development, especially as Fall approaches.

[SweetsGreen]

My SNES didn't play NES games and my Genesis didn't play SMS games...who cares.

I've never played a ps1 game on my ps2. And I'll never play a ps2 game on my ps3.
You buy a NEW system to play NEW games, so stop whining.

[Ajguy]

Borys, I wasn't so much condemning the PS3, though I realize now it may have appeared that way. My beef is with the Sony fanboys who damn MS for it's BW compat and now that PS3 may face the same trouble either the issue is not as big a deal or non-existant. That is all.

[mister_slim]

Realistically, MS shouldn't have even bothered with BC. Hopefully Sony will have a better solution. I imagine there's rather more similarities between the PS3 and PS2 hardware than the Xboxes. Sony did say they only promise games that didn't break their guidelines would work, with is a bit of a copout.

[RandomViolence]

my Genesis didn't play SMS games...

Actually, yes it could. With THIS! (http://www.vidgame.net/SEGA/POWERBASE.htm)

[Kamalot]

Since the PS3 is supposed to play ALL PS2 and PS1 games, anything less would be a "A "surprising" number".

For all the flak they game Microsoft about backwards compatibility, they better damn well have everything working, or they'll look like a bunch of lying bastards.

[Chalex]

Actually, yes it could. With THIS! (http://www.vidgame.net/SEGA/POWERBASE.htm)Damnit, beat me to it :(

[Nessus]

See, to me the more significant issue is that Sony originally was supposed to have launched the PS3 by now. How far behind schedule are they if they don't even have details like this sorted out yet?

I don't really care about emulation very much either way, though I'd rather they not make promises they know they can't keep (goes for both Sony and MS).

[Zeal]

Yeah, emulate...

MY DICK!!!!!!!!!!! OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

[RandomViolence]

Yeah, emulate...

MY DICK!!!!!!!!!!! OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!


Go back in your hole! Don't make me regret voting for you. Oh, wait...

[Zeal]

In all honesty, Sony doesn't really have a choice in choosing between hardware and software. PS3 simply isn't based on the same hardware profile as PS2 and including the hardware necessary would make the unit cost way too much. The heat issue is already ridiculous.

All future emulation will be software driven and it isn't a big deal.

[absolut taco]

Borys, I wasn't so much condemning the PS3, though I realize now it may have appeared that way. My beef is with the Sony fanboys who damn MS for it's BW compat and now that PS3 may face the same trouble either the issue is not as big a deal or non-existant. That is all.
BW?
WTF does that stand for? BackWards? I love it when people make their own acronyms...

[Ajguy]

Meh, I didn't feel like spelling it. I'm sure someone said the same of lol :p

[RandomViolence]

Meh, I didn't feel like spelling it. I'm sure someone said the same of lol :p

One thing we like here is clear articulation of ideas. Be verbose. We would rather understand your ideas and discuss them rather than have to dismiss them because we don't know what the hell you're on about :).