ManaByte
Gold Member
They’re going to have to make an emulator sooner rather than later because IBM won’t be producing the Cell forever and when that server hardware would need to be replaced they’d need a backup option.
-
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.
Why do Sony struggle with backwards compatibility?
- Thread starter Xplainin
- Start date
They’re going to have to make an emulator sooner rather than later because IBM won’t be producing the Cell forever and when that server hardware would need to be replaced they’d need a backup option.
DeaDPo0L84
Member
I mean, yeah, isn't that what the studios for Microsoft do as well? I'm not even sure what you're trying to say lol.
93xfan
Banned
Exactly. People think they’re helping the brand by defending lousy BC efforts. In reality, they’re telling Sony not to do better in an area many care about.
When you look at emulators on the PC, just imagine what Sony could do with at least PS1 and 2 games if they tried.
93xfan
Banned
I honestly hope this works well and with little latency. So many games I’d love to still play
captainraincoat
Banned
Paid remasters......the sure fire way to pad out your games library......slap some textures on it...up the res and frame rate and charge you $60
eyesabitdull
Banned
Why can't MS match Sony when it comes to first party games?
It's probably why they have back comp front and center, because MS is dried out when it comes to games.
It's probably why they have back comp front and center, because MS is dried out when it comes to games.
NoMoChokeSJ
Banned
anothertech
Member
Cell
thismeinteil
Member
I'd rather defend lousy B/C efforts, something that barely sells a console, than be on the side that constantly defends lousy 1st party support. "Just wait til ___, that's when they'll reveal their big guns." If only I had a nickel every time I heard that.
93xfan
Banned
what about being on neither side? More Xbox first party support is coming because people complained about It.
whether it’ll be good enough to satisfy fans, who knows, but at least people voiced their concerns and were heard.
imagine if Sony had great BC along with their 1st party games. That’d be a very strong sell.
Empire Strikes Back
Member
They have emulators of PS1 and PS2 running on the PS4. Too much trouble for them to make a PS3 emulator (but some people say they are working at one). PS5 has hardware BC with the PS4.
Why do MS has more BC games?
1. They can run 7th gen games via X360 emulation.
2. Sony doesn’t bother enough to go through the process of ressurrecting some old games from the dead. Licensing is a PITA.
For Microsoft is nice to have it, but seriously, I’ve only seem people care about BC with past 8th gen in forums like GAF e Era. FFS, I’d rather have a good experience with a remaster or remake than a bad one with an old game driven by nostalgia.
Why do MS has more BC games?
1. They can run 7th gen games via X360 emulation.
2. Sony doesn’t bother enough to go through the process of ressurrecting some old games from the dead. Licensing is a PITA.
For Microsoft is nice to have it, but seriously, I’ve only seem people care about BC with past 8th gen in forums like GAF e Era. FFS, I’d rather have a good experience with a remaster or remake than a bad one with an old game driven by nostalgia.
Last edited:
Mister Wolf
Member
Less tech savvy + they dont care as much.
Oddvintagechap
Member
I feel Sony has always treated PlayStation as a unwanted child. They never wanted to be a game company. I feel like it has changed this generation. I think they will go hard on the PS5. I expect backward compat.
Trimesh
Banned
There are two basic approaches to backwards compatibility - the easier (but more expensive) approach is to built it into the hardware. This is what Sony did with the PS2 and the early PS3 and Nintendo did with the Wii (for GC) and WiiU (for Wii) along with many of their handhelds. The other is a pure software approach - this is ultimately cheaper, but requires a lot of development effort.
Microsoft have a huge advantage as far as the second approach is concerned - firstly, the obvious one is that they are a software company and more willing to get involved in huge development projects. They also have a huge amount of experience with virtualization - and backwards compatibility of one system on another with heterogeneous architectures is basically all about creating a virtual machine that creates an execution environment that is effectively identical to the real one. Which is also at the most basic level the aim of emulation.
Martinski43
Member
They did up until PS3 slim where it was removed. Or was it removed in the 80 gb model of the fat one? Anyway Ps2 and PS3 had bc. Some models of PS3 fat had a built in Ps2 chip even, guess that’s why it was so big.
PS5 probably has enough juice in it to emulate PS3 games but it’s too much work for little gain I guess, just diminishing returns. If a slow ass Xone S can emulate X360 games it more likely could even if ‘muh cell”
PS5 probably has enough juice in it to emulate PS3 games but it’s too much work for little gain I guess, just diminishing returns. If a slow ass Xone S can emulate X360 games it more likely could even if ‘muh cell”
Last edited:
RDR2 isn't a legacy game that requires BC. unless you know something about RDR2 on next gen why are you even mentioning it?
To answer your question. Its because one needed it more. Just as Sony did full BC during the PS3 because it wanted to convert PS2 users.
Some have been complaining for 7+ years. If you think it's still a case of "it's coming because people complained" it's not. Xbox owners aren't complaining they are cheering about subscriptions. They bought studios because of their strategy change not because they listened to anyone's complaints for the past 7 years. Lets see if they even come.
MS have BC because they needed to convert their 360 users and stop them from switching to PS. That's the reason.
Monkeygourmet
Banned
MS has to try harder for BC because it has less new exclusive titles. Simple.
Sony doesn’t need to try hard in this area.
Another example is Nintendo, the Switch is selling so much they don’t even need to announce new titles at this stage. It is an unfortunate reality that the most desperate company for custom will appear the most ‘customer friendly’. At this stage MS are in the ‘I’ll suck your dick for a cheese burger’ phase of marketing.
Sony doesn’t need to try hard in this area.
Another example is Nintendo, the Switch is selling so much they don’t even need to announce new titles at this stage. It is an unfortunate reality that the most desperate company for custom will appear the most ‘customer friendly’. At this stage MS are in the ‘I’ll suck your dick for a cheese burger’ phase of marketing.
danielJackson
Banned
Why after 3 gens xbox still uses wrong stick placement, made for mutants?
Are they stupid or what?
Humans have symmetrical mirrored hands, not one with thumb on different distance to palm.
So what the fuck is going on MUTANTS?
(Even this would have more truth than your post)
Ps. Ps2 played ps1 games, ps3 played ps1+ps2 games.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 775630
Unconfirmed Member
They don't have the same experience in this that came from the priority Microsoft gave to this feature
1. The total number of customers that want to play unremastered PS1-PS2 games in 2020 is insignificant and not worth spending time & budget on implementing BC & testing it.
2. PS3 is too difficult to emulate in software.
3. There will be pretty decent PS4 emulation on PS5, but as they have less abstraction layers like DirectX (im order to squeeze every last bit of performance), they need to make hardware as similar as possible.
2. PS3 is too difficult to emulate in software.
3. There will be pretty decent PS4 emulation on PS5, but as they have less abstraction layers like DirectX (im order to squeeze every last bit of performance), they need to make hardware as similar as possible.
Wizz-Art
Member
If they start to respect my purchases on PS3 (physical and digital) I will start respecting their platform again. It's that simple! And they can do it but it will cost a little bit of money to add a Cell chip in the PS5. They only show me their company greed and anti-consumer policies so they won't but if they did I could at least start trusting their ecosystem again.
Last edited:
Stilton Disco
Member
Sony have 1 more generation and vastly, vastly more games to sort licencing out with.
Combine that with PS1, 2 and 3 having been designed by a lunatic, unlike Xbox's 'PC in a small box' approach to hardware, and there's simply a fuckton more issues Sony have to deal with in getting BC working even as well as Xbox has.
And let's not pretend Xbox's approach to BC is perfect.
There's an embarrassingly large number of 360 games and even more Xbox 1 games that simply aren't playable on XO, and won't be on XSS/X.
And again, that conditional and incomplete BC functionality is with a much easier task in front of them than Sony has.
Now, that's not to say Sony couldn't do more. We know they have working emulators for PS1 and 2, and there's no justification foe why that's not available to use with at least PS2 DVD's, even as a paid App, but let's not pretend Xbox are providing the gold standard or doing something Sony is just 'choosing' not to.
Combine that with PS1, 2 and 3 having been designed by a lunatic, unlike Xbox's 'PC in a small box' approach to hardware, and there's simply a fuckton more issues Sony have to deal with in getting BC working even as well as Xbox has.
And let's not pretend Xbox's approach to BC is perfect.
There's an embarrassingly large number of 360 games and even more Xbox 1 games that simply aren't playable on XO, and won't be on XSS/X.
And again, that conditional and incomplete BC functionality is with a much easier task in front of them than Sony has.
Now, that's not to say Sony couldn't do more. We know they have working emulators for PS1 and 2, and there's no justification foe why that's not available to use with at least PS2 DVD's, even as a paid App, but let's not pretend Xbox are providing the gold standard or doing something Sony is just 'choosing' not to.
Wizz-Art
Member
Oh really, I'm very curious which game(s) do you own on Xbox 360 that aren't BC? It's possible I missed some gems...
Last edited:
FunkMiller
Gold Member
Because it’s expensive, difficult, and not that many people give a shit.
Zoro7
Banned
Exactly this. Not much else to say really.
geordiemp
Member
Because Sony have direct and slim GNx API which are straight to the hardware with little FAT
MS use abstract layers in DX APIs, great for multipole hardware and good for Windows PCs. which means it is much easier to do BC. This is not free, there is a performance cost.
Lets take an exacmple - Horizon zero dawn had GpGPU procedural genertion of foilage and environment, the ps4 pro performance for open world game was very good.
Try to translate that to a Windows DX12
.....but you can just vall it lazy programming or bad developer contractor if you must. But death stranding - nope that was not doing what HZD is doing....Why do Ps5 games at 4K even this early look good with RT ? And XSX, how is that looking ?
Go figure it out for yourself, eurogamer did a article on how bad DX11 was against Ps4 for Metro, ps4 was using a few cycles, Dx11 was using hundreds to do the same thing. It got patched, but would never match ps4 efficiency.
Last edited:
Trimesh
Banned
It's fairly clear that the desire to provide PlayStation BC was a significant aim of the PS2 design from the start - the choice of the R3000 (same processor architecture as the original PlayStation) for the IOP might have been a coincidence - but the fact that it contains an implementation of the PlayStation GTE as COP2 (which is entirely unused in PS2 mode) clearly isn't. The way that the media decoder is backwards compatable with MDEC and the SPU registers line up with the ones in the original PlayStation is likewise clearly deliberate. It's honestly a very nice implementation - most of the system is effectively replicated in hardware and it's only the PlayStation GPU (which has a fairly simple interface anyway) that ended up having to be software implemented by code running on the EE (which is otherwise unused in PlayStation mode). It was also highly compatible (at least initially - later models of the PS2 replaced the real R3K core with a software emulator called "Dekard" running on a Power PC that did an excellent job of running the IOP code, but broke PS compatibility in a number of cases). Of course, by the time those later slims came out people were likely much less interested in PS games anyway, so few people noticed.
According to a conversation I had with one of the Sony engineers, the original plan for the backwards compatibility on the PS3 was for a pure software emulator running on Cell - but as the development proceeded it became clear that this was going to take far longer than was originally anticipated. Because Sony had at this point already announced that the PS3 was going to be PS and PS2 backwards compatible they ended up putting what was basically the hardware of a slim PS2 inside the box to provide that. Later, (starting with the CECHC units), they removed the EE and the associated RAM and simulated that in software while retaining the GS for graphics rendering. Finally, in CECHG units and later they removed the feature completely and went to a software emulator that was only accessible using "PS classics" downloads and couldn't run games from physical media (presumably because this way they could limit the range of games to ones that actually worked).
Ah, this reminds me of the good ol days when a PC could literally be too powerful for a game. Playing a game in 2x speed sure was something.
geordiemp
Member
Because direct apis perform better on the newer hardware.
Why loose performance next gen on fatter abstract apis just to make older games easier to run ?
end.
Snake29
RSI Employee of the Year
That’s not completely true. Where do you think those programmers within the Xbox team come from? They don’t have cans that they just can open if they need new people. Both Sony and Microsoft need to invest in programmers. Not because Microsoft is a software house, means they automatically have the better tools for console development. PlayStation Is also a software house with tools development etc. Nothing is free for both of them, and they both need to invest in new tech, tools, people. Same as Azure that is not free to use for the Xbox department.
Last edited:
LeftThumbstick
Member
Because Sony are about the FuTuRe oF GaMinG, haven't you heard? It's literally impossible to do backwards compat while making games that take advantage of newer better hardware. Silly Xbots!
kruis
Exposing the sinister cartel of retailers who allow companies to pay for advertising space.
PC-games are device agnostic, they don't make low level calls directly to the hw but access them through standardized high level abstraction layers (Direct3D, DirectPlay, DirectStorage, DirectX, OpenGL, etc). That's the only way to run PC games on the hundreds of hundreds of millions of different PC configurations out there.
Console games can be coded down to the metal without using any hardware abstraction layers, because there's only PS1, only PS2, only PS3, only PS4. Games are specifically coded to run not on every possible hardware configuration but just ONE single config. That's why BC has to be implemented either at the HW level or through emulation.
geordiemp
Member
Nope, its the direct vs abstract apis and sony first party doing more stuff direct for better performance but its harder to transfer to different hardware.
Example - ps4pro Horozon zero dawn, procedural GPGPU generation of foilage and detail - best version by far but its complex.
Port it to a 2080ti and it runs like shit, yes it was a bad port, but the apis say hello.
So what do players want, more performance on dedicated consoles or better back compatibility, its no free lunch.
If you watch cernys road to ps5, on new geometry engine new procedural generation is mentioned. Sonys stuff will get even more dedicated, and you know it will perform like crazy.
Last edited:
SaucyJack
Member
Are you that stupid or just trolling?
Notwithstanding that Consoles are not PCs, games can run with the full power of the PS5 but it will downclock to a legacy mode IF the game can’t handle the full power. This was pretty fucking clear months ago.
geordiemp
Member
Its because most posters do not understand anything . Time stamped
HZD uses low level api and GPGPU procedural generation. Ps4 pro performs better on this game than anything else, and ps5 will be definitive version by far.
Low level api performs better but its harder to do BC. Its pretty easy to understand really.
PCs have DX, very abstract, it has to be as their are lots of PCs. XBOx does similar.
MH3M3D
Member
Sony measured how much people actually used it on the PS3 and realized its not worth the effort. Its just a vocal minority that's crying about it, the rest are too busy playing NEW games. Microsoft doesn't have the same library and IP's like Sony does, so they are trying to compete with BC.
T-Cake
Member
Similar threads
- Poll