PS3 will NOT enhance PS2 or PS1 Graphics.

[Zoglog]

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3154561

According to Harrison, unlike how the PS2 would enhance PS1 games with texture smoothing and what not, the PS3 will offer no such visual enhancements (including resolution enhancements) for the previous generation titles. "They are as exactly as they were," said Harrison, who claims Sony preferred to rather deliver them in their original state.

[FatBoyInside]

Quick question, then. If I connect the PS3 via HDMI to play FFXII, will it look exactly the same as my PS2 via Component Cable (using the same HDTV monitor)? Also, can I save the game files directly to the PS3 Harddrive?

[rodeojones903]

Damn.

[jkam]

"They are as exactly as they were," said Harrison, who claims Sony preferred to rather deliver them in their original state.

Didn't Sony tell us at one point that everything would be enhanced for better resolutions, widescreen, yada yada yada? So the PS2 can smooth textures for PS1 games but the PS3 can't? Gotta love em.

[javeryh]

So does no enhancements mean that if I play Psychonauts on my PS3 it will still suck?

[Ugamer_X]

This, however, could probably be added later through a firmware update.

[Dr Mario Kart]

This, however, could probably be added later through a firmware update.

Could be, yes. But really, do you think that they would?

[Ugamer_X]

Could be, yes. But really, do you think that they would?
No.

Edit: But, I always like to hope for the best.

[fieldkillah]

Does this honestly surprise anyone?

[epobirs]

Rather disappointing after the precedent set by first the PS2's enhancement of PS1 games, and more recently, the Xbox 360's enhancement of Xbox games.

I'd gotten so used to using the PS2 for playing PS1 games that it was occasionally shocking to see how bad the games looked running on the original hardware. And those enhancements are much more subtle than what could be offered by the PS3.

This makes me wonder if they're running into a lot of difficulty with the PS3 as an emulation host. Those enhancements are a major mitigating factor for the incompleteness of the Xbox 360's range of Xbox games supported. Would anyone object greatly if the enhancement for emulated games on the PS3 were handled on an individual basis, with different games supporting different levels of upgrades and those being update online as more testing is completed.

If you've never compared a game like Omega Boost from the PS1 to the way it looks running under emulation on the Dreamcast, well, let me tell you the difference was amazing. Surely the PS3 can manage what the Bleem! team (really just one fulltime programmer) did with no official support five years ago.

It isn't as if Sony would find itself losing sales in any great amount to ten year old CDs. Rather, Sony should view this as a way to further drive sales of old games by download. A download sale of Omega Boost in 2007 for $10 would be extremely profitable compared to an entirely new game.

I think this is a serious mistake or failing on their part.

[icruise]

Are you really saying that Sony should have imitated the 360's backwards compatibility model? Pretty much everybody agrees that the BC on the 360 sucks. Partially because there are so many games that aren't compatible, and partially because it's buggy.

[Ivanhoe]

no big deal to me.
Ive never noticed a difference playing ps1 games on the ps2 anyways.

[PenguinMaster]

Are you really saying that Sony should have imitated the 360's backwards compatibility model? Pretty much everybody agrees that the BC on the 360 sucks. Partially because there are so many games that aren't compatible, and partially because it's buggy.

Regardless of not being able to run a lot of games, I much rather have 360's backwards compatibility anytime. Xbox games look such much better running in 720p on 360.

no big deal to me.
Ive never noticed a difference playing ps1 games on the ps2 anyways.

You have to manually change the settings to enhance it everytime, but it really doesn't make that much of a difference and quite a few games have problems with it.

[epobirs]

Are you really saying that Sony should have imitated the 360's backwards compatibility model? Pretty much everybody agrees that the BC on the 360 sucks. Partially because there are so many games that aren't compatible, and partially because it's buggy.

Some people say that. Ignorant people. Ignorance is a treatable condition, though. Some are just stupid and a dead loss. Stick around and see if you fall in the treatable category.

Sony is already imitating the Xbox 360's approach. Unlike the PS2, which had a nearly complete implementation of the PS1 silicon serving double duty as an I/O chip, the PS3 is doing all of this via software emulation.

Sound familiar?

(There were some rumors a while back of Sony, indesperation, resorting to embedding the PS2 chipset within the PS3 but there has not been anything at all from any respectable source to support this.)

Sony has an advantage in that it doesn't lack full access to the inner details of the earlier PlayStation chipsets. The lack of cooperation from Nvidia, even after licensing some of the IP involved, is a major handicap for Microsoft's efforts.

Even so, with only a little more than a year of access to the final Xbox 360 hardware, they not only have approximately 25% of the US library running, they have it running with nice enhancements. From the programmers' perspective, those enhancements are a minor task. Once you have a game running properly, scaling the game to 720p is not a big problem. Most of the functionality needed is built into the GPU already for other purposes, such as upscaling frames of video from a DVD.

Comparable functionality is in the GPU Nvidia designed for the PS3. Once you have a completed NTSC frame ready for output, scaling it up is almost effortless. The portion of the GPU that handles this isn't tied up by the rest of the emulation task, so even if the system is just barely keeping up on that front, you can still get much better resolution than running on the original hardware.

Texture handling is another area where enhancement is not heavy lifting once you have the code running satisfactorily. Whenever possible, the emulator will be designed to map a PS2 hardware operation to the GPU's equivalent hardware. This can even happen with software in the case of frequently used code, especially from widely used engines. A modern GPU has the power to perform a lot of texture operations that can greatly improved the appearance of older code so long as the functions can be invoked transparently to the older code. Countless PC games received patches for such enhancements (sometimes created by amateur modders) that used a shell approach rather than altering the code. The emulator is already such a shell. Invoking superior texturing functionality is just an extension of the shell.

The third big item is anti-aliasing. The GPUs in the 360 and PS3 can do this vastly better than the Xbox and PS2. The Xbox was no slouch for its era but the 360's GPU has some of the best anti-aliasing around in terms of minimal overhead. The PS3's RSX may have to work harder on that end but the PS2's ability was such that the gulf is still immense. Getting modern AA added to PS2 games would be a big win.

But Sony isn't doing any of this stuff that Microsoft is delivering. It has little bearing on the emulation itself. If the Xbox 360 backward compatibilty list were being limited by the enhancements, then Microsoft would only offer them for those games where they aren't a problem. It would be valuable PR-wise to add to the list and try to enhance those titles at a later update. But the task doesn't really work that way.

So what are Sony's reasons? Only two come to mind.

First, they could be having a lot of trouble with the emulation. This is a possibility on the PS2 library but if Sony cannot easily get at least 90% of the PS1 library up and running on the PS3, they have serious, serious problems. Solid PS1 emulation has been a reality for years on PCs that cannot hold a candle to the PS3 power. And those were projects carried out by volunteers with no support from Sony. In fact, Sony would make every effort to block them from succeeding.

Second, Sony doesn't trust the PS3 games to sell well if old PS1 and PS2 games, which people already own or can get cheaply used, look too good on the new machine.

Either way, Sony is failing to meet the competition's challenge.

As I mentioned above, this sort of enhancement to PS1 games running under emulation on the Dreamcast was demonstrated years ago by Bleem! at E3. Plenty of people on this site have seen Bleemcast running. The Dreamcast is a machine finalized in late 1998 and launched in 1999. THe idea that the PS3 could not match it in performing this task is laughable. In fact, it should be feasible to produce a Dreamcast emulator for the PS3 that in turn could be made to run Bleemcast to show PS1 games greatly enhanced.

But Sony isn't going to do it. It seems improbable the PS3 lacks the ability. So apparently Sony just doesn't want to compete with its own past platforms' libraries while Microsoft is completely untroubled by the same prospect.

[furyk]

Wow that was a long post. My guess is that with all of the millions of other things that Sony's PS3 does, upscailing older games is probably one of the least important things for it to do. Let's be honest, beyond ten titles or so, most people didn't use the PS2 to play their PS1 games once the PS2 had an established library. I think the same thing will happen with the PS3. I also believe that the fact that PS1 games will be downloadable will ultimately cause the hardcore Sony audience to download them because they'll be able to easily plop it on to their PSP for on the go gaming (since the hardcore Sony audience probably has a PSP), and they'll be able to keep all of their games in one centralized location (because the hardcore Sony audience is notorious for buying and rebuying the same games over and over again). Har har, take that Sony fanboys....

*scuddles off to play Super Mario Brothers World Land Sunshine 64 DS 3*

The last two and a half sentences were intentionally sardonic and laced with sarcasm. If you got that without reading this label, congratulations! You've graduated 7th grade English.

[epobirs]

Wow that was a long post. My guess is that with all of the millions of other things that Sony's PS3 does, upscailing older games is probably one of the least important things for it to do. Let's be honest, beyond ten titles or so, most people didn't use the PS2 to play their PS1 games once the PS2 had an established library. I think the same thing will happen with the PS3. I also believe that the fact that PS1 games will be downloadable will ultimately cause the hardcore Sony audience to download them because they'll be able to easily plop it on to their PSP for on the go gaming (since the hardcore Sony audience probably has a PSP), and they'll be able to keep all of their games in one centralized location (because the hardcore Sony audience is notorious for buying and rebuying the same games over and over again). Har har, take that Sony fanboys....

*scuddles off to play Super Mario Brothers World Land Sunshine 64 DS 3*

The last two and a half sentences were intentionally sardonic and laced with sarcasm. If you got that without reading this label, congratulations! You've graduated 7th grade English.

Actually, I've played more PS1 games on my PS2 than on my PS1. I didn't get a PS1 until it had been out a couple of years, and it had plenty of competition for my time from the N64, Saturn, and numerous older machines I have.

So, I was acquiring tons of PS1 games for almost no cost because I was finding blowout sales on good titles that managed a good markup on Ebay.

When the PS2 came out it had noticeably better load times for PS1 games than the original and was the preferable way to play those titles, of which there were a huge number of highly rated items while the PS2 library was just getting started and the major markdown s had yet to occur.

I sold the PS1 cheap to my brother's kids. Gave it to them really since I don't think they ever coughed up the $50 they promised. My brother managed to kill it with a botched modchip install. Served him right as he was intent on making copies of games from Blockbuster.

I picked up a PSone for $30 for traveling and to have a backup for those deadly hot summer days when the upstairs became uninhabitable. The difference in load times was rather annoying but it ws something to do while waiting for my next contract to start.

Sony apparently does think people still value the old games. Otherwise why bother to make them playable and purchasable online? This has more to do with making the PS3 games look good than the viability of those old games.

[evanft]

Um, he's only really talking about games that will be made available through Sony's download service.

[ziutek]

When linux comes out for the ps3, we can always compile a playstation emulator and thus have enhanced playstation games with higher resolution, smoother textures, etc. Of course this isn't as ideal or pretty as having a standalone enhanced playstation emulator built into the ps3 but it's better than nothing.

[eau]

When linux comes out for the ps3, we can always compile a playstation emulator and thus have enhanced playstation games with higher resolution, smoother textures, etc. Of course this isn't as ideal or pretty as having a standalone enhanced playstation emulator built into the ps3 but it's better than nothing.
<cough> e-psx-e </cough>

What about PS2 games? :bouncy:

[icruise]

Sony is already imitating the Xbox 360's approach. Unlike the PS2, which had a nearly complete implementation of the PS1 silicon serving double duty as an I/O chip, the PS3 is doing all of this via software emulation.

Sound familiar?

(There were some rumors a while back of Sony, indesperation, resorting to embedding the PS2 chipset within the PS3 but there has not been anything at all from any respectable source to support this.)

Well apparently I read those rumors and never saw anything disproving them, because I was under the impression that BC was to be handled in hardware. This is a little disappointing.


Even so, with only a little more than a year of access to the final Xbox 360 hardware, they not only have approximately 25% of the US library running, they have it running with nice enhancements.
Ok, I only skimmed the rest of this (hint: brevity is a virtue) but 25% of games running is not something that I would brag about. Especially because comments that I have read from Microsoft seem to indicate that they aren't going to be trying very hard to get anything close to full compatibility. I've played Halo 2 on the Xbox 360 (and an HDTV) and frankly I didn't think it looked that great.

With the Xbox 360 you can only play 1/4 of the Xbox 1's library, the emulation is (from what I hear) imperfect, resulting in slowdowns or glitches in some games, and as far as I know, there is no way to transfer your saved games from your Xbox 1 to your Xbox 360, so you have to start every game from scratch. This is what I'm talking about.

At least with the PS3, Sony is trying to get 100% compatibility (or close to it) and they're providing a means to read old memory cards. Those two factors make the PS3's backwards compatibility much more valuable than the 360's to me. I personally don't care if the games look the same as they did on the original consoles. That is, in fact, how they were designed to look.

[Wet Ninja]

Would backwards compatibility with enhancements compete with downloads of PS1 and PS2 games on the download service?

If Sony makes the emulation without enhancements, but offers the downloads with enhancements, people may choose to repurchase games on the download service rather than find them used for cheap in a game store. On the other hand, if the emulation were enhanced, it may rekindle interest in some older titles that may have been overlooked; if someone hears about a title word-of-mouth from a friend, but can't find a used copy in stores, that person may purchase the game on the download service instead.

Then again, in both scenarios, having backwards compatibility versus not having backwards compatibility is more of a factor than having backwards compatibility with enhancements versus having backwards compatibility without enhancements, so the inclusion or exclusion of enhancements may not matter at all (for these scenarios).

[Kaijufan]

It's too bad Sony wont apply anti-aliasing to PS1 and PS2 games.

[dastly75]

Nah it's alright as long as it's good in comparison to 360. That's all that matters. Right....?

[Thomas96]

so what... at least the old games play...

[Z-Saber]

But, unlike most PS2 and Xbox games, the PS1 library looks horrendous on the original hardware. At the very least, you'd think they would try to enhance the PS1 emulation. Double resolution, better filtering, faster loading, anything.

Hey, will you still be able to use the same options available to the PS2 concerning loading and filtering?

[Purkeynator]

Well piss. That was what I was looking forward too so I could retire my old launch PS2 and play my old games in higher resolution while I wait for good PS3 games to come out and drop in price.

[MadFlava]

This news sucks, as many of us with HDTV already know, the current PS2 games that don't support progressive resolutions look awful on an HDTV, even using component cables. One of the reasons I'm interested in a PS3 is to play my old library of PS2 and PS1 games on my HDTV flatpanel so they are at least in 480p resolution. Also, they still better upscale regular DVD playback to higher resolution. This news really puts a damper on PS3 for me. I feel that Sony is really botching things up at every opportunity. This latests news will make me put up my pre-ordered PS3 on ebay as soon as I get it in my hands.

[Purkeynator]

This news sucks, as many of us with HDTV already know, the current PS2 games that don't support progressive resolutions look awful on an HDTV, even using component cables. One of the reasons I'm interested in a PS3 is to play my old library of PS2 and PS1 games on my HDTV flatpanel so they are at least in 480p resolution. Also, they still better upscale regular DVD playback to higher resolution. This news really puts a damper on PS3 for me. I feel that Sony is really botching things up at every opportunity. This latests news will make me put up my pre-ordered PS3 on ebay as soon as I get it in my hands.


I agree. I think this turned the tide for me from keep to sell. My plan was to play my old games in higher resolution until PS3 games get cheaper. However now I might just hook up my ol' PS2 to my new high def TV when I get it. My old PS2 can smooth textures on PS1 games and shorten the load times. It also has quicker load times on PS2 games because I preload them to my hard drive using the HD loader. Also I can play my old games WITH rumble and not have to buy a seperate cable to use my memory cards and peripherals such as my DDR dance pads. One last benefit I have is to run my PS2 through my Yamaha reciever using component cables. My reciever can actually convert 480i signals to 480P so I can play my games in progressive scan too.

[MadFlava]

Regular PS1 and PS2 games look like ass in SD on an HDTV. And so few PS2 game support true progressive scan. The PS3 is turning out to be a joke. With such a lame launch line up, playing Final Fantasy XII upcoverted to at least 480p was going to be my salvation until better games come out. Sony is really dropping the ball considering the Xbox 360 converts BC games to 720p and upconverts regular DVDs to 480p. I'll take what ever profit I make from my PS3 ebay sell and buy at 360 this holiday season.

[Z-Saber]

You cannot upconvert 480p source material to 480p! DVDs are already 480p!

[DarkNessBear]

-No upscaling DVD
-No upscaling PSone/PS2
-No Achievement points

ALOT of little fucking things keep getting cut.

I am thinking of joining the, "I HATE PS3" band wagon to...

Although I will get it at launch. I WONT BE HAPPY!

[guyver2077]

<cough> e-psx-e </cough>

What about PS2 games? :bouncy:

<cough> pcsx2 </cough

[icruise]

They got rid of "achievement" system?