Just when u though Sony couldnt do any worse...

magick

Euro PS3 to play fewer old games

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6390657.stm

The European version of Sony's PlayStation 3 (PS3) console will not play as many old games as American and Japanese models, Sony has announced.

1huge1

What are they doing at all
nintendo spies must have infiltrated their board room

projectmayhem

it's using software emulation rather then hardware emulation, hence less bc. it'll be a lot better then the 360's, but having a 360 myself, i only care about halo and maybe one or two other select titles on it.

i know ps2 has a huge catalogue that people will want to dip into, but if demand is there i'm sure sony will follow microsoft's "here's an update" route to satisfying people

in other words, it's not actually that big a deal imo.

wayne040576

They haven't provided a list of old games that will be compatible with this new model. They'll probably wait until the thing goes on sale before they publish one. Making hardware changes at this stage of the the product's life is a bad sign. They must be really feeling the cost of ps3. The new new model will also have a cheaper chassis than the US\ japan versions.

TheAlmightyArse

Of course it's a big deal. The PS2 has a huge library of games, and people have lots of different, obscure favourites, especially compared to the XBox. Who's to say when, if ever, Sony deign to add emulation for the PS2 games I'd like to play in the future? Software emulation is tricky and unreliable. The only advantage to anyone here is a reduced cost to Sony, which we won't see. And remember, this is on a machine we're already being charged more for, and which we're getting later. (Oh, but then I forgot, we enjoy that sort of thing, don't we? :rolleyes: )

Retr0gamer

wayne040576 wrote:

The new new model will also have a cheaper chassis than the US\ japan versions.

Is that the smell of malfunctioning dodgy blue ray drives I sense and the tingle of the anger at a disc read error message?

Dont be at yourself

The Japanese PS3: The cheapest. Plays all your region 2 dvds. Plays all those great games on the PSOne & PS2 that never got western releases, with excellent PS2 support. Plays Japanese & American Blu-Ray dvds. Plays every PS3 game.

Why would you buy a European one ahead of it?

Wertz

^ because if it goes tits up sony most likely won't entertain the warranty?

I'm sorry but no backward compatability is a big issue, when it was promised as a selling point way back when; AFAIR it was promised to be hardware not s/w emulation too.
I believe we were also told we'd have upscaled playback of both PS2 and (some) PS1 games...
Marketing blurb the lot of it.

Doesn't matter to me at this stage...I'll hold onto my trusty PS2 and just play any next gen titles that take my fancy on the 360

yawnstretch

I've sold my ps2 in expectation of the PS3. I still have all my ps2 games. The way Sony treat Europe is a joke.

Thank God for my 360 is all I can say.

jesus_thats_gre

Who cares to be honest. Keep your old PS2 if it is such a big deal. If you PS2 ever dies, you will have absolutely no problem sourcing one for next to nothing.

Retr0gamer

I've already got 8 consoles in front of the tv, 4 of which are on the floor, along with dvd players and a hifi. I'd rather I didn't have something else on the floor.

monkeyfudge

Retr0gamer wrote:

I've already got 8 consoles in front of the tv, 4 of which are on the floor, along with dvd players and a hifi. I'd rather I didn't have something else on the floor.

I'm the same. I didn't used to think backwards computability was such a big deal, but with so many consoles out it's actually an important feature now. Especially as the last gen of consoles are still pretty active.

Rabies

At least they are bundling the latest James Bond movie with it. Get to see what this blue ray is all about (as long as you have a hd tv).

Mr.StRiPe

projectmayhem wrote:

it's using software emulation rather then hardware emulation, hence less bc. it'll be a lot better then the 360's, but having a 360 myself, i only care about halo and maybe one or two other select titles on it.

How do you come do this conclusion?

quad_red

Mr.StRiPe wrote:

How do you come do this conclusion?

I was just about to ask the same question. Without any other information bar Sony admitting that PS2 compatability will be limited (and if Sony admit to limited then it's gotta be really limited)...

how can you have any idea how good the emulation will be? Even with hardware emulation, PS3's were having problems with PS2 games in Japan and the US.

Cuddlesworth

projectmayhem wrote:

it's using software emulation rather then hardware emulation, hence less bc. it'll be a lot better then the 360's, but having a 360 myself, i only care about halo and maybe one or two other select titles on it.

i know ps2 has a huge catalogue that people will want to dip into, but if demand is there i'm sure sony will follow microsoft's "here's an update" route to satisfying people

in other words, it's not actually that big a deal imo.

I would be more worried about the fact that the ps3 was designed for hardware emulation. When did they decide to make it software for the Eu only, and how much are they spending on it? Considering that they cut out the hardware emulation to drop costs, why waste all that money saved on wages for emulation support coders. This seems like a long and windy slope of crap support and broken promises for the Eu users.

steviec

krazy_8s wrote:

I would be more worried about the fact that the ps3 was designed for hardware emulation. When did they decide to make it software for the Eu only, and how much are they spending on it? Considering that they cut out the hardware emulation to drop costs, why waste all that money saved on wages for emulation support coders. This seems like a long and windy slope of crap support and broken promises for the Eu users.

It wasn't designed for hardware emulation - moving to software emulation was always planned once they got it working right, I read about that many months ago. The EU is getting it first because it seems to coincide nicely with their EU launch, everyone else will be getting it soon enough.

As to how good it is, only time will tell.

projectmayhem

krazy_8s wrote:

I would be more worried about the fact that the ps3 was designed for hardware emulation. When did they decide to make it software for the Eu only, and how much are they spending on it? Considering that they cut out the hardware emulation to drop costs, why waste all that money saved on wages for emulation support coders. This seems like a long and windy slope of crap support and broken promises for the Eu users.

ps3 wasn't designed for hardware emulation at all. the fact that they shoved a ps2 chip in says it all. they did that because the software emulation wasn't finished, to the extent that the hardware emulation didn't upscale games properly, and looked like complete trash. americans are waiting for us to get our ps3's so that they get an update with better emulation software for them.

Mr.StRiPe wrote:

How do you come do this conclusion?

because sony has spent a year trying to get the emulation right on a software level. they were forced out of the gate with ps3 too early to have proper software emulation, so they stuck a ps2 chip in american/japanese models of the machine.

TheAlmightyArse

projectmayhem wrote:

americans are waiting for us to get our ps3's so that they get an update with better emulation software for them.

When has software emulation ever been better than playing on the hardware the game was designed for? Apart from, say, MAME, which lets you play without putting money in.

projectmayhem wrote:

because sony has spent a year trying to get the emulation right on a software level.

"Limited compatibility" doesn't sound quite right to me.

projectmayhem wrote:

they were forced out of the gate with ps3 too early to have proper software emulation, so they stuck a ps2 chip in american/japanese models of the machine.

Launching a full year after the competition is hardly the actions of someone being forced out of the gate. And it doesn't change the fact that sticking a PS2 chip in makes for far better backwards compatibitlity; ie future models of the PS3 (including the ones we're being charged a hell of a lot mored for) will in fact be worse than those at launch in the US and Japan.

quad_red

projectmayhem wrote:

they were forced out of the gate with ps3 too early to have proper software emulation, so they stuck a ps2 chip in american/japanese models of the machine.

Yeah. But 'limited compatability' means they still aren't ready - nor, by the looks of it, will they make much of an effort to improve the situation in future.

But whereas they throw Japan and the US a bone they just tell Europe to put up and shut up.

humanji

Just saw another article about this on GameSpot:

GameSpot wrote:

An anonymous Sony spokesperson has told Web site Three Speech that the difference in the new models of the PlayStation 3--which will be sold in Europe, Australasia, Africa, and the Middle East--is that the Emotion Engine has been removed.

The Emotion Engine/Graphics Emulator was used in the original PS3s, which went on sale in the US and Japan in November, to emulate PlayStation 2 titles. The graphics chip has been retained in the European version of the console, but the Emotion Engine has been removed.

The spokesperson said, "This has an impact on the number of PS2 titles that will be backwards compatible." They added that the company would be continuing to "assess" the compatibility of PS2 titles before the launch date of March 23. The spokesperson also reiterated the previous statement to say that, "Rather than concentrate on PS2 backwards compatibility, in the future, company resources will be increasingly focused on developing new games and entertainment features exclusively for PS3, truly taking advantage of this exciting technology."

However, it is still unclear as to what percentage of PS2 games will be affected, or to what extent Sony intends to make extra games compatible via updates. The company has previously said that, "the backwards compatibility is not going to be as good as the US and Japan models," and that the new style system will only play a of PS2 titles.

They also confirmed that the quality of images of PS2 games on the PS3 had been fixed, and that the necessary updates would be incorporated into the European launch models.

Retr0gamer

Well f*ck you very much Sony spokesperson.

Mr.StRiPe

projectmayhem wrote:

because sony has spent a year trying to get the emulation right on a software level. they were forced out of the gate with ps3 too early to have proper software emulation, so they stuck a ps2 chip in american/japanese models of the machine.

Over the last year sony haven't got much right! this coupled with the fact that the PS2 was a nightmare to program for. This meant that developers had to use all kinds of tweaks to get their code to run efficiently on it so a generic emulation solution in the PS3 would be some challenge!

Even the slim line PS2's couldn't run all the games for this reason and that was a sony hardware solution!

Wertz

Sony spokesperson wrote:

"Rather than concentrate on PS2 backwards compatibility, in the future, company resources will be increasingly focused on developing new games and entertainment features exclusively for PS3, truly taking advantage of this exciting technology."

Translation:

"Rather than waste limited development budgets catering for software that's already been bought and paid for over the last 7 years, we intend to just screw the installed base of fans and customers and try to get them to buy newly developed software to bolster the huge losses we're making, truly taking advantage of anyone we can."

projectmayhem

Mr.StRiPe wrote:

Over the last year sony haven't got much right! this coupled with the fact that the PS2 was a nightmare to program for. This meant that developers had to use all kinds of tweaks to get their code to run efficiently on it so a generic emulation solution in the PS3 would be some challenge!

i notice a lot of new members ruining the vibe of educated opinion round here.

fact is, ps2 wasn't a complete nightmare to program for. otherwise there would be no point bothering in the early stages.

as for the tricks and tweaks, welcome to console development buddy. it's how it goes. why do you think it's such a b1tch for microsoft to make the 360 play all the xbox games?

Wertz

projectmayhem wrote:

i notice a lot of new members ruining the vibe of educated opinion round here.

The poster you're quoting appears to have been registered with boards since july 1999....hardly that new really.

As for "ruining the vibe of educated opinion"; posters are entitled to post an opinion, be they new or established....nothing says it has to an educated opinion....if it's wrong then it'll be shot down by the more educated posters on here.
Sorry for off topic

astrofool

PS2 WAS a complete nightmare to program for, particularly the memory setup (and that's coming from developers I work with who used to be in the games industry).

1huge1

projectmayhem wrote:

i notice a lot of new members ruining the vibe of educated opinion round here.

fact is, ps2 wasn't a complete nightmare to program for. otherwise there would be no point bothering in the early stages.

as for the tricks and tweaks, welcome to console development buddy. it's how it goes. why do you think it's such a b1tch for microsoft to make the 360 play all the xbox games?

no he is right the ps2 was very hard to develop for, look at the quality of a lot of the earlier games... the reason the developers stuck with it was because of the massive customer base sony made with the ps1

TheAlmightyArse

projectmayhem wrote:

why do you think it's such a b1tch for microsoft to make the 360 play all the xbox games?

Because they plumped for software emulation, WHICH IS PRECISELY THE POINT.

thelordofcheese

projectmayhem wrote:

fact is, ps2 wasn't a complete nightmare to program for. otherwise there would be no point bothering in the early stages.

Woah there tex, the Ps2 is a cnut to program for. Sweet jebus it breaks my brain just thinking about it.
Thanks to the retarded ass backwards setup of the chips, and the reliance on the bus speed to compensate for this, getting the ps2 to do anything halfway decent takes alot of time, effort and some very dark arts indeed.

And as other people have pointed out, given the massive user base of the Ps1, sticking it out with the Ps2 was probably considered a safe bet by most publishers.

projectmayhem

Wertz wrote:

The poster you're quoting appears to have been registered with boards since july 1999....hardly that new really.

65 posts, regardless of the time you're a member, is not a "veteran" tbh...

astrofool wrote:

PS2 WAS a complete nightmare to program for, particularly the memory setup (and that's coming from developers I work with who used to be in the games industry).

the memory setup in the ps3 is probably far worse, the difference being there's more of it.

thelordofcheese wrote:

Woah there tex, the Ps2 is a cnut to program for. Sweet jebus it breaks my brain just thinking about it.
Thanks to the retarded ass backwards setup of the chips, and the reliance on the bus speed to compensate for this, getting the ps2 to do anything halfway decent takes alot of time, effort and some very dark arts indeed.

you're saying this without thinking of what it was sitting next to. most consoles are a complete and utter biatch when sat next to a PC (or 360, which is basically a PC setup), but anyone with programming knowledge behind them knows that in order to keep up you have to adapt. the reason it's a b1tch to program for is that it doesn't use the friendly PC-type stuff everyone's used to, and its methods are very different.

if the same hardware was there under a Windows OS then you'd hear a lot less moaning from devs...

satchmo

projectmayhem wrote:

the memory setup in the ps3 is probably far worse, the difference being there's more of it.

Are you just making stuff up now?! And you talk about "ruining the vibe of educated opinion round here", whatever that means...

The fact that there's more memory on the PS3 doesn't make one bit of difference when it comes to managing it. So you've a bigger addressable area, big deal! The PS3 memory is actually relatively easy to set up, even taking into account the DMA engines and the SPU's local stores. The trouble comes from Sony insisting that they need 64MB of XDR memory and 32MB of VRAM just for the operating system - that's what really hurts memory-wise.

if the same hardware was there under a Windows OS then you'd hear a lot less moaning from devs...

If that was to happen, the only reason would be because Microsoft write good documentation and great tools, both of which make development easier. If the same hardware was there, slapping a Windows OS on it isn't going to make it magically easier to program efficiently - you still need to take the hardware architecture into account very carefully, and the more OS abstraction there (after a certain point), the harder that is to do.

Developing for a moving target like the PC is actually more difficult than the absolute specs of a console; once you're up to 30hz on a console (or whatever your target framerate) you're golden - on the PC you still have to be worried about the typical gamer machine at release date and target that, possibly years beforehand. And that's not to mention the huge variety in peripherals and devices that the game needs to be tested with, different driver versions etc etc... At least with a console you know that when it works on the machine on your desk, it's going to work exactly the same on every other console out there.

Developing for multiple platforms definitely makes things much harder. But if I was told that I had to develop for just a single platform, I probably wouldn't pick the PC.

thelordofcheese

projectmayhem wrote:

you're saying this without thinking of what it was sitting next to. most consoles are a complete and utter biatch when sat next to a PC (or 360, which is basically a PC setup), but anyone with programming knowledge behind them knows that in order to keep up you have to adapt. the reason it's a b1tch to program for is that it doesn't use the friendly PC-type stuff everyone's used to, and its methods are very different.

if the same hardware was there under a Windows OS then you'd hear a lot less moaning from devs...

Consoles are a different beast to PC's, but even amongst consoles the Ps2 is especially difficult to code for.
And as has been already pointed out, PC coding is somewhat easier thanks to the DirectX API which does a great job of interfacing with whatever graphics card is under the hood.

Were sony to put the same hardware under there they'd have to supply some sort of decent API to deal with it if they didn't want devs 'moaning'.

LookingFor

Cheer up, it may not be as bad as you expect - over 1,000 PS2 titles will be BC on launch day, with more added in the future:

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=23148

That's nearly half of the PAL library BC from the start. A lot better than I'd have thought given the 360 experience with software BC.

Assuming that 1,000 covers the more popular titles, many people may not even notice that BC is more limited on their PS3 versus an earlier Japanese or US model.

Mr.StRiPe

projectmayhem wrote:

65 posts, regardless of the time you're a member, is not a "veteran" tbh...

So 5000+ posts of naive fanboyism and making stuff up is what counts?! Which forum do you moderate to ensure this “vibe of educated opinion”?

satchmo wrote:

Are you just making stuff up now?! And you talk about "ruining the vibe of educated opinion round here", whatever that means...

Does satchmo’s 1,175 posts qualify him as "veteran" in your view?

projectmayhem wrote:

fact is, ps2 wasn't a complete nightmare to program for. otherwise there would be no point bothering in the early stages.

5,223 posts

Mr.StRiPe wrote:

the PS2 was a nightmare to program for

65 posts

astrofool wrote:

PS2 WAS a complete nightmare to program for, particularly the memory setup (and that's coming from developers I work with who used to be in the games industry).

+4,899 posts

1huge1 wrote:

no he is right the ps2 was very hard to develop for, look at the quality of a lot of the earlier games...

+2,120 posts

thelordofcheese wrote:

Woah there tex, the Ps2 is a cnut to program for. Sweet jebus it breaks my brain just thinking about it.
Thanks to the retarded ass backwards setup of the chips, and the reliance on the bus speed to compensate for this, getting the ps2 to do anything halfway decent takes alot of time, effort and some very dark arts indeed.

+537 posts

That’s your 5,223 Posts against 7,621 (at the time of posting this thread!) does this mean that your “vibe of educated opinion” is wrong?

1huge1 wrote:

the reason the developers stuck with it was because of the massive customer base sony made with the ps1

thelordofcheese wrote:

And as other people have pointed out, given the massive user base of the Ps1, sticking it out with the Ps2 was probably considered a safe bet by most publishers.

This is the main reason developers “bothered” with it.

projectmayhem wrote:

welcome to console development buddy

welcome to the real world buddy!

Khalim

Yikes! :eek:

Chill out people. Breath in, relax. It's only the internets.

Trust it to Sony to cause this much trouble.

If only they passed on the savings to the consumers, then people would just go on quietly with their lives...

Moojuice

projectmayhem wrote:

i notice a lot of new members ruining the vibe of educated opinion round here.

fact is, ps2 wasn't a complete nightmare to program for. otherwise there would be no point bothering in the early stages.

as for the tricks and tweaks, welcome to console development buddy. it's how it goes. why do you think it's such a b1tch for microsoft to make the 360 play all the xbox games?

I dont see how Mr. Stripes post is an uneducated opinion. Nothing has been ruined. Its a very reasonable point of view and is on topic. Whats the problem with it?A bit of boards snobbery peeking through on your behalf ProjectMayhem? Surely quality is superior to quantity?

TBH I think this latest development from Sony is another bullet in the gun for the Playstation 3 and Sony's arrogant attitude towards its customers.

BlitzKrieg

Phil harrison has told the gaurdian that there will be a 1000 titles supported at launch.


Which is fine if its the big titles.

lets hope we dont have a repeat of the Barbies Pony adventure on the 360's backward list.

http://kotaku.com/gaming/ps3/phil-harrison-1000-ps2-games-playable-on-pal-ps3-240618.php

Retr0gamer

It could be like the xbox360 list were many of the games are listed as working but have major glitches in them due to the emulation.

tba

I dunno I still think I will hang onto my PS2, for more than one reason

projectmayhem

Mr.StRiPe wrote:

So 5000+ posts of naive fanboyism and making stuff up is what counts?! Which forum do you moderate to ensure this “vibe of educated opinion”?

i want you to go back over my posts and find the naive fanboyism. i actually think i've kept myself out of the "omg sony is teh win" thing. the only reason i post regularly in the sony forums is because i'm an ex employee, and try to keep some semblance of balance going on.

if you want me to piss off i'll be glad to.

Mr.StRiPe wrote:

That’s your 5,223 Posts against 7,621 (at the time of posting this thread!) does this mean that your “vibe of educated opinion” is wrong?

hang on, not once did i say you were wrong. i said un-educated. coming out and saying "the ps2 sucked to program for" isn't necessarily untrue, it's just taken completely out of context. you can't say it's a nightmare on its own, without comparing it to anything else. ps2 was a nightmare next to directx, but quite decent next to other openGL's. hell, even sony know that. and knew it years ago. hence buying up SNsystems in the UK to develop the ps3s (and beyond) toolkits and debug units based on psGL.

Moojuice wrote:

A bit of boards snobbery peeking through on your behalf ProjectMayhem?

hey, if you're in college a 1st year looks lesser to a 4th year. in work an old employee looks better then a newbie. i think it applies to forums too.

Moojuice wrote:

TBH I think this latest development from Sony is another bullet in the gun for the Playstation 3 and Sony's arrogant attitude towards its customers.

another bullet in the gun for a machine that retailers across europe are saying is the number one pre-booked item in games history. whether or not you like or dislike sony's arrogance and general lack of good handling PR in the last year or so, the experiences the machines they make provide enough enjoyment that people are willing to shell out €600 odd for a ps3, €200 odd for a PSP or €2000 odd for a bravia. why bother changing your attitude if it works so well?

maybe their arrogance, despite pissing people off, gives an air of superiority to the products. the same way finches costs more then club orange. it's not actually much better, but it feels like it.

satchmo

projectmayhem wrote:

ps2 was a nightmare next to directx, but quite decent next to other openGL's. hell, even sony know that. and knew it years ago. hence buying up SNsystems in the UK to develop the ps3s (and beyond) toolkits and debug units based on psGL

Okay this doesn't even make any sense. The PS2 doesn't use OpenGL or any other 3D API for that matter, it uses its own VU microcode to perform graphics operations, which is written in assembly - part of the reason it's difficult to program for (no matter what you compare it to). And the SN Systems software is just debugging and tuning tools... they certainly make it easier to debug and profile, but that has no effect on how easy or difficult the console is to program. Sony themselves produce the SDK that is used for actual programming.

Before you start accusing other people of being uneducated, you should really know what you're talking about yourself.

OT, Mr.StRiPe has been around here for a helluva lot longer than you, and as far as I'm concerned, the fact that he only posts when he has something useful to say makes him a better contributer to boards than someone else who might have thousands of postcount++ posts. This is a relatively interesting thread and I don't want it to get locked because of your misguided superiority complex.

projectmayhem

satchmo wrote:

Okay this doesn't even make any sense. The PS2 doesn't use OpenGL or any other 3D API for that matter, it uses its own VU microcode to perform graphics operations, which is written in assembly - part of the reason it's difficult to program for (no matter what you compare it to). And the SN Systems software is just debugging and tuning tools... they certainly make it easier to debug and profile, but that has no effect on how easy or difficult the console is to program. Sony themselves produce the SDK that is used for actual programming.

psGL is a complete 3d API (based on E.S.) for ps3, but a version WAS there for ps2. it went unused by most 3rd party devs until the last year or two of the ps2's life because it took some time, and research to get working with whatever ASM was written.

things like renderware took advantage of psGL during the ps2 lifecycle, bringing games like GTA to fruition.

as for the SN Systems comment, i didn't say they did anything other then develop debug/toolkit units. and they make a HUGE difference, in the same way XNA makes a huge difference to 360 development.

satchmo wrote:

Before you start accusing other people of being uneducated, you should really know what you're talking about yourself.

i'll try better next time sir.

satchmo wrote:

who might have thousands of postcount++ posts.

i like to think i contribute to threads, rather then post mindless "lawl" comments. but if i do, please feel free to report and have me banned.

satchmo wrote:

This is a relatively interesting thread and I don't want it to get locked because of your misguided superiority complex.

i'm not entirely sure why i'm being painted as some inane, babbling ego-maniac here, but as i said, if i am then just hit the report button and i'll be booted out of here faster then you can say "pwned".

BlitzKrieg

i like to think i contribute to threads, rather then post mindless "lawl" comments.

constantly argueing with me does not count as contributing

humanji

Geez, you guys all need a hug! Where's the love?

BlitzKrieg

in my pants

Moojuice

projectmayhem wrote:

hey, if you're in college a 1st year looks lesser to a 4th year. in work an old employee looks better then a newbie. i think it applies to forums too.

That’s a completely rubbish generalisation. Length of tenure in an organisation is no indication of intelligence or ability. Just because you made it to 4th year or have been in a company longer that someone else does not necessarily mean that they are 'lesser' (?). Many companies are riddled with employees who have been there a long time yet are bad at their job, have not learnt any new skills and are a hindrance rather than a help. Academia is worse; it’s full of morons who think that because they have been there for years or because they are a few years ahead of others it makes them better.

Ability and intelligence is what counts. Someone who posts here occasionally is in no way 'lesser' than someone who posts here constantly. It’s the quality of the posts not the quantity.

I agree with Satchmo, this is an interesting thread that is in danger of being descending into stupidity. ProjecyMayhem, I'm not questioning your intelligence I just think you are being a bit elitist and snobbish towards other posters.


Yes Sony's arrogance annoys me as does the naive attitude of their fan boys (and fan boys in general). They seem to have really lost focus with their carry on of late (rootkits, Blu-Ray issues, PS3 delays and price etc)

astrofool

You are not your postcount.

Dont be at yourself

This thread is terminally ill.