• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Opinion Clickbait Game Dev Hellpoint Dev Explains Why PS5 Is Not Backwards Compatible All The Way Back To PS1

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
424
779
325
No. Native support. It wasn't hardware emulation
I feel like you're playing semantics games here? PS2 had a chip that mimicked the PS1's hardware to allow BC. PS3 had a chip that mimicked the PS2's hardware to allow BC (before it was removed and reverted to a software emulator in later PS3 models). Thus hardware emulation.

I find it unlikely from a legal standpoint that if Sony is able allow BC on their hardware solutions that they wouldn't be able to do the same with software emulators.
 
Jan 16, 2020
4,549
16,505
765
I feel like you're playing semantics games here? PS2 had a chip that mimicked the PS1's hardware to allow BC. PS3 had a chip that mimicked the PS2's hardware to allow BC (before it was removed and reverted to a software emulator in later PS3 models). Thus hardware emulation.

I find it unlikely from a legal standpoint that if Sony is able allow BC on their hardware solutions that they wouldn't be able to do the same with software emulators.

It's not semantics. It wasn't mimicking the hardware. They had the actual processors inside.

Yes the later PS3 model had to do software emulation since they removed the main processor. The PS2 contained actual PS1 hardware, and the PS3 contained PS2 hardware.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Self

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
424
779
325
It's not semantics. It wasn't mimicking the hardware. They had the actual processors inside.

Yes the later PS3 model had to do software emulation since they removed the main processor. The PS2 contained actual PS1 hardware, and the PS3 contained PS2 hardware.

It wasn't the "actual" hardware inside, it would be ridiculous to believe that Sony just crammed PS2 parts into the PS3. It was a redesigned chip that performed the functions of PS2's CPU/GPU. In other words, hardware emulation. Yes, you are trying to play semantics, and failing.

Back to the point, from a legal standpoint, I don't see any reason Sony shouldn't be able to create a process, whether hardware or software, that allows them to give backwards compatibility from PS5 to all previous generations. The only plausible explanation for them not doing so is not wanting to invest the resources into it and from a business standpoint not believing that it's worth the investment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alabtrosMyster

Andodalf

Member
Oct 20, 2013
5,633
8,367
885
23
Earth
btw .. microsoft force anyone who want to release their game in the xb1 to allow them to make the software forwardcompatible with any of
their future consoles .. i guess not many third party companies are happy about this .. sony on the other hand didnt make such an agreement ..
ms really cared about bc since the early days of the xb1 .. i estimate xsx will run 98 % of the xb1 games day 1 .. ps4 will run 30-40 % of games .. due
to hardware and third party licensing problems

MS doesn't "force" anything, It's just how their SDK works. It's how they were able to have so many games take full advantage of the CUs of the X to run better whereas PS4 Pros boost mode just used the higher clocks and not CUs. It's an elegant solution that doesn't make any impact on devs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Temp0
Jan 16, 2020
4,549
16,505
765
It wasn't the "actual" hardware inside, it would be ridiculous to believe that Sony just crammed PS2 parts into the PS3. It was a redesigned chip that performed the functions of PS2's CPU/GPU. In other words, hardware emulation. Yes, you are trying to play semantics, and failing.

Back to the point, from a legal standpoint, I don't see any reason Sony shouldn't be able to create a process, whether hardware or software, that allows them to give backwards compatibility from PS5 to all previous generations. The only plausible explanation for them not doing so is not wanting to invest the resources into it and from a business standpoint not believing that it's worth the investment.

That's literally what they did. That's one of the reasons why the PS3 was so expensive. They put the emotion engine inside the PS3

Look it up.

The license issue is getting them back on the market, i.e. the playStation store or retail
 
Last edited:

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
424
779
325
That's literally what they did. That's one of the reasons why the PS3 was so expensive. They put the emotion engine inside the PS3

Look it up.

No, it isn't. This is what's inside the PS2. Note the emotion engine and nVidia's Graphics Synthesis chip above it.






This is the inside of the PS3 60gb. Note the chip highlighted in blue. Note how it says "EE - GS". This is the redesigned chip to emulate the PS2's EE and GS chips.

 
Jan 16, 2020
4,549
16,505
765
No, it isn't. This is what's inside the PS2. Note the emotion engine and nVidia's Graphics Synthesis chip above it.






This is the inside of the PS3 60gb. Note the chip highlighted in blue. Note how it says "EE - GS". This is the redesigned chip to emulate the PS2's EE and GS chips.


?

That is literally the emotion engine chip

Are you daft?
 

leo-j

Member
Jun 27, 2018
671
858
350
i think they need to get the ps1 games back. Like they had a good thing going with ps1 and psp emulation on vita.
 

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
424
779
325
?

That is literally the emotion engine chip

Are you daft?

No, it's not. It's a redesigned chip that performs the functions of both the Emotion Engine and the Graphics Synthesis chips to provide hardware emulation of the PS2. Or in otherwords, exactly what I said here:

It wasn't the "actual" hardware inside, it would be ridiculous to believe that Sony just crammed PS2 parts into the PS3. It was a redesigned chip that performed the functions of PS2's CPU/GPU. In other words, hardware emulation. Yes, you are trying to play semantics, and failing.

Back to the point, from a legal standpoint, I don't see any reason Sony shouldn't be able to create a process, whether hardware or software, that allows them to give backwards compatibility from PS5 to all previous generations. The only plausible explanation for them not doing so is not wanting to invest the resources into it and from a business standpoint not believing that it's worth the investment.
 
Last edited:

Temp0

Banned
Apr 27, 2020
88
190
220
But that doesn’t explain why no game at all is going to be released.
And... there is PSnow that has those titles, why is this not an issue there? I mean even for SONY owned games it shouldn’t be an issue, or not?
 
Jan 16, 2020
4,549
16,505
765
No, it's not. It's both the Emotional Engine and Graphics Synthesis chips redesigned into a new single chip that provides accurate hardware emulation of PS2 games. In other words, exactly what I said here:

Okay

So now you're backtracking on your claim that it would be crazy if they crammed PS2 hardware into the PS3?

Which is what they did. Just because they merged both chips into one doesn't change the fact its PS2 hardware
 

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
424
779
325
Okay

So now you're backtracking on your claim that it would be crazy if they crammed PS2 hardware into the PS3?

Which is what they did. Just because they merged both chips into one doesn't change the fact its PS2 hardware
No, I said it would be crazy if they put PS2 parts into the PS3 in response to your claim that they put the "actual processors" inside the PS3. Like I've said, it wasn't the "actual processors" it is a new chip that was designed at 2006 fabrication standards that combined the functionality of both the CPU and GPU into one chip.
 
Last edited:
Jan 16, 2020
4,549
16,505
765
No, I said it would be crazy if they put PS2 parts into the PS3 in your response to your claim that they put the "actual processors" inside the PS3. Like I've said, it wasn't the "actual processors" it is a new chip that was designed at 2006 fabrication standards that combined the functionality of both the CPU and GPU into one chip.

It is the actual processor

Being redesigned to fit into the PS3 doesn't change that

They're using the EE + GS to emulate the EE + GS

Do you not realize how stupid that sounds?
 

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
424
779
325
No. Native support. It wasn't hardware emulation

That's literally what they did. That's one of the reasons why the PS3 was so expensive. They put the emotion engine inside the PS3

Look it up.

It's not semantics. It wasn't mimicking the hardware. They had the actual processors inside.


30 mins later...
They're using the EE + GS to emulate the EE + GS

I'll take this as an admission of defeat
 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: DarkMage619

Kokoloko85

Member
Sep 26, 2019
2,972
3,635
395
Licenses.... well other companies deal with it.
discs... fuck the discs let me download the games like PS3, PSP, PS Vita.....

At least give us some kind of BC either PS1, or PS2.
Not 15 games like the ps4 store since 2013. Get the whole ibrary over or at least majortty. Like the PSP, PS VITA and PS3 had most the PS1 games... cant be that hard to get them to work on PS5 ffs
 
  • Like
Reactions: alabtrosMyster

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
424
779
325
Lol you probably think the GTX 1050 and GTX 1050 mobile are different chips too

Just take a second to process how dumb your argument is

I don't spend time thinking about bottom tier GPUs. But in general, chips that go through the same fabrication process = same chip. Different fab = different chip. Easy enough right?
 
Mar 3, 2014
2,914
838
650
I would love real bc too but I've come to terms more or less with not getting it. having OG PS3 being able to play both PS1 and PS2 games is good enough for me. something like this is fine for me right now, just having bc for every couple gen and all.
 
Jan 29, 2019
5,699
6,138
495
That would make sense of the ps3 didn't have ps1/2 bc... As for games licenses, well, those who want to sell their old games on the psn could have the option to do it again without bs trophies inclusion, barely any work would be needed. And those with an existing library could just put their disk in the machine and use them.

If licensing is an issue, even for existing media then take the MS road and get in touch with intellectual property owners when you can and get support for the games that you can... And use it as PR fodder, or as an opportunity to pad your library.
 
  • Love
Reactions: sn0man

93xfan

Member
Feb 23, 2013
3,026
2,015
765
I still can't believe that Ratchet and Clank trilogy is not available for PS4.... BC would fix that problem, but noooooo....

One of their all time best series.
Glad to see a dev talking about this.
 

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
424
779
325
I would love real bc too but I've come to terms more or less with not getting it. having OG PS3 being able to play both PS1 and PS2 games is good enough for me. something like this is fine for me right now, just having bc for every couple gen and all.
In the past I didn't mind as much but as TVs are getting thinner and sleeker and are able to handle more functionality on their own via Smart TV Apps and not need set top boxes and DVD players and everything else, I'd rather be able to unclutter my entertainment area than have to keep a 15 year old console around. Though to be fair the PS3 still looks a hell of a lot better on the shelf than that wet turd PS4.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GriffinCorp

Cato

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,396
8,456
755
Here are the problems Jutra spells out:

1. Legal stuff, especially older games in stores - do the work to get permissions/legal clearance, and sell the games you can. This is what MS does.
2. Hardware DRM - all you technically need to do is read what the game is, then download a ROM from the internet and run that - again, this is what MS does.

The PS4 *can* emulate a PS2, they just sell a small number of games instead of letting you play ones you own. Same is true of PS3, after they took out PS2 BC. But the PS3 had a full-fledged PS1 emulator, with the discs.

1, yeah. That would always be how it would work. Sell the games you can get a licence for and don't sell the games you can't.

2, There is no hardware DRM for the PS1/2 disks so that dev got that wrong. The copy protection that existed on PS1/2 was basically that the console itself refused to play disks you burnt yourself (i.e. checking if the media was CD/DVD-ROM profile or not)
and in the PS1 case it had additional signatures on the disk so that the console could identify "this is a pressed disk (plus region)" or not.
But there is absolutely zero that could be called DRM or would prevent anyone from reading and accessing the disk on a non PS1/2 console.

Now, when it comes to actual PS1/2 media. I think it would make zero sense to have BC for that.
People that own PS1/2 media in this day and age (==me) I would say already own PS1/2 consoles and would prefer to play the media on the original consoles.
So it would make so much more sense that, as you say, you buy the game and download it from the store. And as you said, they already did just that on the PS3.


There are zero technical reasons why they can't do BC. They have done it before and they already have all the emulators they need and even the shop and download infrastructure.
IMHO if they are not doing BC it must be financial reasons. Maybe they just don't see any point and they don't think it would sell enough PS1/2 game copies to be worth doing it.
(And for the big IP from those PS1/2 days, instead of adding them via BC and emulation, just do a remake of them and sell them as brand new games for 60$ a pop.)

I am certain that the lack of BC is just that they don't think there is enough market for it to be worth spending time on.


I personally still buy PS1 and PS2 games regularely on ebay. But I don;t care if PS5 has BC or not. I play them on my original consoles. I think that is the case for almost everyone else too that still buys PS1/2 games in 2020.
That said, I don't celebrate the lack of BC for those that wan't it. I just understand if sony made this choice based on sales forcasts.
 
Last edited:

diffusionx

Member
Feb 25, 2006
14,563
14,686
1,800
This is the inside of the PS3 60gb. Note the chip highlighted in blue. Note how it says "EE - GS". This is the redesigned chip to emulate the PS2's EE and GS chips.

Emulation refers to using software on one hardware platform to make it behave like another one.

That chip does not emulate the EE+GS. It *is* the EE+GS. It is operating those instructions natively. It's not like PCSX2 which is taking EE+GS instructions and using software to translate them to code a modern PC can understand. Chips get combined on motherboards to save costs all the time. After a few years, Microsoft combined the 360 CPU and GPU into one chip. It doesn't mean it is emulating the chips, it's just another design of the same chips.


This is from 2003... are you saying the PS2 was then emulating the PS2? No of course not.
 
Last edited:

Cato

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,396
8,456
755
Now take a look at how far Microsoft has come with OG Xbox games.

Not far. They've managed to do a dozen or and that's it.

Now consider the fact that the PS1 and PS2 have a library multiple times larger than the OG Xbox.

Microsoft's solution is not feasible.

For MS with OG Xbox games. I think if these BC games were selling like hotcakes, MS would make sure that a lot more games were available.
Same as Sony and PS1 games to buy and download on the PS3. IF these games sold gangbusters then you would have had a lot more games available than just VagrantStory and a handful more.

They are after all there to make money. IF there is profit to be made then they will make it happen. That is as simple as it gets.
 

FranXico

Member
Dec 7, 2010
13,658
26,525
1,420
And market it as what?

"We're proud to announce 1% of our PS1 and PS2 titles are now backwards compatible with the PS5"

It's not feasible.
They could first shout "the PS5 can play PS1 and PS2 games!" like MS did for OG Xbox compatibility. Then explain in the fine print it literally is just a few select games.

I would be ok with that, because a few is better than nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sn0man

93xfan

Member
Feb 23, 2013
3,026
2,015
765
Jumping Flash 2
Metal Gear Solid
Twisted Metal 1 and 2
Jet Moro 1 and 2
Ridge Racer

etc.

I’d love to play these on PS5 with possibly some visual improvements too
 
Last edited:

Cato

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,396
8,456
755
I find it amazing that I have to spell this out.

Was this how MS did it? No, it was, "play Halo Reach and Mass Effect on your Xbox One", then later it was "play Dark Souls and Red Dead on your Xbox One", then down the road it was, "play Lost Odyssey on your Xbox One", and so forth. And every time they got PR headlines because their One got more valuable. People liked it a lot.

If anyone thinks that Sony can't offer Silent Hill 2 BC because Pimp My Ride isn't supported, or that people will be mad because while they can play Motorstorm they can't play Rogue Warrior, trust me you are wrong.

It is all about making a profit.
IF sony thinks they can make a profit by making XYZ available, then sony will make XYZ available.
IF sony does not think they can make a profit by making XYZ available, then sony will not make XYZ available.
 

Gamernyc78

Banned
Jun 11, 2018
5,805
15,305
655
It's kind of cute how people who don't have the possibility to play old games tell me how I should feel about being able to play many of them. It is absolutely worth it and I'm not alone thinking like that.

Some ppl aren't alone in thinking the world is flat, what's the point? It's not a big, must have, gane changer feature as per stats or consensus. Those millions of non enthusiasts purchashing psv won't and don't give a shit about ps1/2 games.
 

Journey

Banned
Aug 18, 2014
2,928
2,678
620
If we're talking about PS1 and PS2 backwards compatibility then no MS doesn't have a solution.


Actually, licensing concerns was "Especially" a problem for Microsoft because the OG Xbox was running on an nVidia GPU that MS made the mistake of licensing, but not owning it, therefore creating an issue when Xbox 360 was running on an ATI/AMD GPU. A large part of their work on bringing Xbox games to 360 was dealing with this issue. Sony owns every single chip starting from PS1, so at least they don't have to deal with that hurdle, the difference is that MS started dealing with this first and over the years have overcome the problem. The truth is that Sony is starting late and is behind in the game, but I'm happy they're working on it now, thank the Lord for competition.
 
Last edited:

Cato

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,396
8,456
755
They could first shout "the PS5 can play PS1 and PS2 games!" like MS did for OG Xbox compatibility. Then explain in the fine print it literally is just a few select games.

I would be ok with that, because a few is better than nothing.

They already tried. You could buy PS1 games and download to your PS3.
You could buy PS2 games and download to your PS4.

They have the data. BC games did not sell. There is no market for it and this is why they won't spend time on it.

Do you know anyone that bought PS1 games for their PS3 or PS2 games for their PS4? No?
That is the answer to why they don't prioritize BC.
 

FranXico

Member
Dec 7, 2010
13,658
26,525
1,420
Do you know anyone that bought PS1 games for their PS3 or PS2 games for their PS4? No?
That is the answer to why they don't prioritize BC.
I bought a couple of PS2 games that I had never played before for the PS4. When they were for sale. 15 year old games have no business costing 10 or 15 euro.

It's not that old games won't sell. It's that things have to be priced and marketed appropriately.
 
Last edited:

V2Tommy

Member
Oct 19, 2017
1,404
2,004
510
Canada
I'm still laughing at people not believing there was PS2 hardware inside early PS3s. They're on the damn motherboard. Labelled.

Wait until they find out that PS2s had PS1 hardware inside them! GASP!
 
Last edited:

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
424
779
325
Actually, licensing concerns was "Especially" a problem for Microsoft because the OG Xbox was running on an nVidia GPU that MS made the mistake of licensing, but not owning it, therefore creating an issue when Xbox 360 was running on an ATI/AMD GPU. A large part of their work on bringing Xbox games to 360 was dealing with this issue. Sony owns every single chip starting from PS1, so at least they don't have to deal with that hurdle, the difference is that MS started dealing with this first and over the years have overcome the problem. The truth is that Sony is starting late and is behind in the game, but I'm happy they're working on it now, thank the Lord for competition.
Bringing OG XBox games to 360 was also tough because OG XBox's process was x86 while 360's wasn't. Both XBox One and XSX CPUs are x86 and should be able to handle the OG XBox games rather smoothly.
 

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
424
779
325
I'm still laughing at people not believing there was PS2 hardware inside early PS3s. They're on the damn motherboard. Labelled.

Wait until they find out that PS2s had PS1 hardware inside them! GASP!
As we covered, PS3 contains a chip that emulates the PS2's CPU and GPU. It does not contain the same hardware as the PS2.
 

V2Tommy

Member
Oct 19, 2017
1,404
2,004
510
Canada
As we covered, PS3 contains a chip that emulates the PS2's CPU and GPU. It does not contain the same hardware as the PS2.

No, it's a combined set of chips on the same physical die. Same as later PS2 slims had. By your logic, PS2 slims were emulating themselves in the early 2000s. Nonsense.

Check the picture and the magical 2003 date, used in the SCPH-70000 PS2 Slim model.

 
Last edited:

chitzy

Banned
Mar 8, 2020
424
779
325
No, it's a combined set of chips on the same physical die. Same as later PS2 slims had. By your logic, PS2 slims were emulating themselves in the early 2000s. Nonsense.

Check the picture and the magical 2003 date:

Got a source for the PS3 having the same chips on the same die? If so, I'll concede it's PS2 hardware.
 

itsjustJEFF

Member
Apr 12, 2018
941
1,010
425
MS has shown there is a solution to those problems.

Sony just doesn't want to do it.
The solution was to create an emulator and to go back and test old games to see if they work on their emulator. If they didn't then they've have to tweak them. These things don't just magically work. People aren't going to be happy with a glitchy version of a game, even if it's an older game. I think people forget that XBox had to make an investment into BC. They had to dedicate resources to going back and making these games BC. Sony has to make that investment, they've started with PS4 games. But, like i'm sure Xbox is doing right now, they're testing these games to make sure they work properly because as soon as one game doesn't work properly, they'll get dragged thru the mud for it.

There pros and cons to Xbox making that investment, time, money, public perception, first party production. Who knows what kind of effects focusing on BC "could" have had, but If BC because a very big deal this coming generation, then it will have been a worthwhile investment! And Sony will have no choice but take it more seriously.
 

Cato

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,396
8,456
755
I bought a couple of PS2 games that I had never played before for the PS4. When they were for sale. 15 year old games have no business costing 10 or 15 euro.

It's not that old games won't sell. It's that things have to be priced and marketed appropriately.

How much should they cost then?

10$/Euro is pretty cheap for PS1/PS2 physical games.
So, you would not be interested in PS1/2 disc BC then where you put in the PS1/2 and play it?
Most PS1/2 games worth playing cost a lot more than 10 dollars to buy physical.

Vagrant story for example starts at ~50$ (ok condition, no manual) and then just goes up from there.
This is not a super expensive title. My copy has the manual and is in good condition.
I play it from time to time on one of my PS1. I have zero desire to play a 100$ game on an emulator on a PS5.

 
Last edited:

V2Tommy

Member
Oct 19, 2017
1,404
2,004
510
Canada
Got a source for the PS3 having the same chips on the same die? If so, I'll concede it's PS2 hardware.

Sure. Here's a picture of the PS3 board:


Now reference this chip model number with the PS2 Slim chip:

[

If this isn't enough for you, nothing will be.
 
Last edited:

Zerotex

Member
Jun 3, 2019
65
46
190
Microsoft is doing great in BC, some enchanced games are looking really good, I can keep all my games in one place and I dont need to buy the same game over and over again. I bought a lot of ps3 digital games and I dont wanna keep my ps3 forever to play it... tbh I dont have a ps3 anymore so...
 

postaboy

Member
Jul 26, 2007
105
13
1,090
I bought a couple of PS2 games that I had never played before for the PS4. When they were for sale. 15 year old games have no business costing 10 or 15 euro.

It's not that old games won't sell. It's that things have to be priced and marketed appropriately.

15 year old games at $15-$20 seems fair and a lot better than paying ridiculous price for a physical copy. Games like Suikoden 2, Dark Cloud 2, Mega Man Legends 2, Xenogears, and so on used to go for $100+ on eBay and Amazon marketplace when the PS store didn’t have digital version of it. Even with the digital version along side, it still costs more for the physical today. For example you could get Suikoden 2 for $10 from the PS store or pay $175 for a physical complete copy.
 
Last edited:

Weiji

Banned
Jul 20, 2018
1,412
2,270
430
I haven’t bought a console since the fat PS3.

If Sony wants my money they’ll make backwords comparability a priority, if not, no problem. I’ve got plenty of other options.
 

Bakkus

Member
Oct 12, 2014
2,555
849
570
26
Norway
I don't care about PS1 & 2 BC because I would never want to play those hames on a huge screen due to how ugly they would look (already have a Wii + every gen before it CRT setup), but full PS3 and 4 BC is very important to me.