PS2 classics= Sony BS us about software emulation?

wwe101

wwe101

CAGiversary!
Feedback
11 (100%)
Everyone was always hoping for ps2 emulation in future firmware updates, but sony said it is not possible. Are PS2 classics proof that it was possible and the only reason they didn't release it was to make profit off reselling PS2 games on PSN?
 
Not really. It's well-known that the PS2 classics have to be "re-built" to work on PS3. I believe the turnaround time for God of War 1 & 2 was 15 weeks.
 
The fact that they had a PS3 model(80gb) that had software emulation for PS2 games means they could've worked on it a lil more and made it available for everybody later on.

But then how would they make money from the PS2 classics section of the PS Store if they gave it out free to everybody?:roll:

I'm still of the mindset that they could've implemented at least software BC, but that their bottom line said they had a gold mine on their hands by re-releasing old games as download only classics.

But here's an interesting lil tidbit from a few years ago, where Sony had filed a patent for an add-on for the PS3 that would bring back full BC.

http://www.1up.com/news/sony-patents--backwards-compatibility-attachment

Original article from SiliconEra:

http://www.siliconera.com/2010/09/1...nsole-to-previous-generation-console-adapter/
 
I'm not making any accusation or anything, I'm just saying that the newest PS2 classic Psychonauts would have been even more awesome with some trophies.
 
[quote name='acenck']I'm not making any accusation or anything, I'm just saying that the newest PS2 classic Psychonauts would have been even more awesome with some trophies.[/QUOTE]
Have the other PS2 'classics' been getting trophies added to them though? If so, then that's kinda stupid. How can they be a classic game when they're adding something new to it that only started this gen?:roll:
 
[quote name='IAmTheCheapestGamer']The fact that they had a PS3 model(80gb) that had software emulation for PS2 games means they could've worked on it a lil more and made it available for everybody later on.

But then how would they make money from the PS2 classics section of the PS Store if they gave it out free to everybody?:roll:

I'm still of the mindset that they could've implemented at least software BC, but that their bottom line said they had a gold mine on their hands by re-releasing old games as download only classics.

But here's an interesting lil tidbit from a few years ago, where Sony had filed a patent for an add-on for the PS3 that would bring back full BC.

http://www.1up.com/news/sony-patents--backwards-compatibility-attachment

Original article from SiliconEra:

http://www.siliconera.com/2010/09/1...nsole-to-previous-generation-console-adapter/[/QUOTE]
It wasn't full software emulation. They used two of the PS2's chips (Emotion Engine and Graphics Synthesizer) for the first BC models, then took out one of them for the second BC model.

http://www.digitalartsonline.co.uk/news/?NewsID=7335
 
I didn't say it was full software emulation though.:razz: Although I kind of wondered how they did that emulation since I had heard it wasn't very good.

I still wonder if the earlier 40gb models that were produced just after they stopped making the 20/60gb ones still used the same mobo and maybe still had the spots for the PS2 chips on the boards.
 
Given the amount of time between when they removed BC and when PS2 Classics started showing up on PSN, in addition to how slowly they're being released, I think it's a little paranoid and silly to think that they removed it just to sell games online instead.

Much like the OG Xbox BC on the 360, each game has to be tweaked for the emulator to work properly, or else they could just implement full software BC.

However, once the emulator has been written and the game is working in full software mode, there's no reason the PS3 couldn't use that code to then run the PS2 game off of the original PS2 disc if you had it. THAT is the difference, I think - the 360 allowed you to download the update that would allow you to play the disc, but never really provided XBL versions of OG games.

Can't really blame them for wanting to make some cash off of old games, it wouldn't be very cost-effective to go to the trouble of making a game functional and then just doing that work for free. Plus, the games are reasonably priced, $10 is about what you might expect to pay for a used copy, and this way the developer/publisher gets a share.
 
But that's the thing though. If you already have the disc versions, then that means you already bought those games. So paying again to be able to play them is double dipping on the developers part imo.
 
[quote name='SynGamer']Not really. It's well-known that the PS2 classics have to be "re-built" to work on PS3. I believe the turnaround time for God of War 1 & 2 was 15 weeks.[/QUOTE]

And benefited graphically from it. Also fixed framerate issues in Shadow Of The Colossus.
 
Fixing the issues that may have been present in the prior physical versions is about the only thing that might convince me to grab any of the PS2 classics. But if they upgrade the graphics or add anything(like trophies) to them, then to me that DQ's them from being classics, since none of those added things were in the original versions.
 
[quote name='IAmTheCheapestGamer']Fixing the issues that may have been present in the prior physical versions is about the only thing that might convince me to grab any of the PS2 classics. But if they upgrade the graphics or add anything(like trophies) to them, then to me that DQ's them from being classics, since none of those added things were in the original versions.[/QUOTE]

People are confusing the HD remakes of the PS2 games with the PS2 classics in the PSN store. The PS2 classics have nothing added to them, they are just the original versions of the games.

I also can't stand when people complain about lack of backwards compatibility. You all had the opportunity to buy a PS3 that had PS2 B/C and you chose not to because it was too expensive. That was your decision.
 
[quote name='IAmTheCheapestGamer']But that's the thing though. If you already have the disc versions, then that means you already bought those games. So paying again to be able to play them is double dipping on the developers part imo.[/QUOTE]

That's only if you bought the game new. I think cheap digital re-releases are totally fine and if the developers make more cash because people willingly re-purchase a game, who cares? Publishers re-release games with slightly updated content or ho-hum ports all the time. I think Resident Evil 2 has been released no fewer than six times since the original PS1 (and that's not counting the Dual Shock re-release), all the Mario games have been out across multiple systems, and people still buy them. Owning an NES copy of SMB3 doesn't entitle you to downloading it off the VC for free, and if someone is willing to re-buy it, that's their business.

And, if you have the disc and care that much, pop it into a PS2 and enjoy. Plus, you may recall GTAIII was delayed because they were ironing out the rights to one of the songs. That likely cost something, so there is some cost involved at least for some of the games to be re-released - it's not as simple as just tossing up an ISO with a carbon-copy emulator shell.

Again, if they were charging a ton for these games, I'd say it's a ripoff. $10 ain't bad, and is worth the convenience in my opinion. If they could get high resolutions or trophies, that would be awesome, but there isn't any deception about what you're getting when you buy a PS2 (or PS1) re-release.
 
[quote name='IAmTheCheapestGamer']But that's the thing though. If you already have the disc versions, then that means you already bought those games. So paying again to be able to play them is double dipping on the developers part imo.[/QUOTE]

If you already have the original disc, then play it on your PS2. Anyone who bought a non-BC compatible PS3 knows what they paid for. If the developer has to essentially recreate the game to work on the PS3, I don't see how that's double dipping.

[quote name='IAmTheCheapestGamer']Fixing the issues that may have been present in the prior physical versions is about the only thing that might convince me to grab any of the PS2 classics. But if they upgrade the graphics or add anything(like trophies) to them, then to me that DQ's them from being classics, since none of those added things were in the original versions.[/QUOTE]

Tomato, tomahto. Surely you aren't bitching about developers giving you further reason to purchase the PS2 classics...right? I mean, would you rather they charge $10 for the exact same game we played on our PS2s, or $10 for a game that has been bumped up to 720p (and widescreen too), has fixes that were present in the original, and trophies as a bonus?

Nah, surely you're not criticizing developers for giving us MORE for the same amount of money...
 
They don't have to recreate the games for PS2 Classics. They have to rework the emulator wrapper for each game to make sure it works correctly and the result makes it more of a PS3 game that uses the normal PS3 save system than the PS2 save system that the physical games used on the BC models.
 
[quote name='gettinmoney662']I also can't stand when people complain about lack of backwards compatibility. You all had the opportunity to buy a PS3 that had PS2 B/C and you chose not to because it was too expensive. That was your decision.[/QUOTE]
But you forget that Sony also DOUBLED their console price from last gen to this gen. If it were a nominal raise in price, like $400 for a fully BC PS3, then I might've bought one sooner. But because they felt they had to max out shit at the time and whore out Blu-Ray(albeit I am grateful for the scratch resistance, even though I handle my games gently) they jacked up the price by twice what it was last gen. No thanks.
[quote name='johnnypark']That's only if you bought the game new. I think cheap digital re-releases are totally fine and if the developers make more cash because people willingly re-purchase a game, who cares? Publishers re-release games with slightly updated content or ho-hum ports all the time. I think Resident Evil 2 has been released no fewer than six times since the original PS1 (and that's not counting the Dual Shock re-release), all the Mario games have been out across multiple systems, and people still buy them. Owning an NES copy of SMB3 doesn't entitle you to downloading it off the VC for free, and if someone is willing to re-buy it, that's their business.

And, if you have the disc and care that much, pop it into a PS2 and enjoy. Plus, you may recall GTAIII was delayed because they were ironing out the rights to one of the songs. That likely cost something, so there is some cost involved at least for some of the games to be re-released - it's not as simple as just tossing up an ISO with a carbon-copy emulator shell.

Again, if they were charging a ton for these games, I'd say it's a ripoff. $10 ain't bad, and is worth the convenience in my opinion. If they could get high resolutions or trophies, that would be awesome, but there isn't any deception about what you're getting when you buy a PS2 (or PS1) re-release.[/QUOTE]
For the most part, my dislike of these PS2 classics comes back to the fact that they're digital copies and I'm paying $10 for files I have no right to resell if I get bored of them eventually. If they put these games on collections(like some publishers have been doing), then I would pay for them, but I'm definitely not willing to pay $10 a pop for them.

As for the licensing issue with GTA III, I don't even recall listening to anything outside of Chatterbox in that game, since most of the music was negligible at best. Now Vice City, on the other hand, I listened to the rock station in that game constantly.
[quote name='SynGamer']If you already have the original disc, then play it on your PS2. Anyone who bought a non-BC compatible PS3 knows what they paid for. If the developer has to essentially recreate the game to work on the PS3, I don't see how that's double dipping.[/quote]
All they needed to do was create a patch system ala 360 for PS2 games to work on PS3. Of course, they need whatever programming allows Xbox 1 games to work on 360 to be written for the PS3. If they put something like that out in an actual firmware update, I would download that in a heartbeat instead of gripe about the FW updates when they do come out and contain some nonsense for Netflix or other shit I don't use but still have to download.:roll:
Tomato, tomahto. Surely you aren't bitching about developers giving you further reason to purchase the PS2 classics...right? I mean, would you rather they charge $10 for the exact same game we played on our PS2s, or $10 for a game that has been bumped up to 720p (and widescreen too), has fixes that were present in the original, and trophies as a bonus?

Nah, surely you're not criticizing developers for giving us MORE for the same amount of money...
Click to expand...
It's called a differing opinion. I'd rather just be able to play the games I already own(which btw most of them I DID buy new) rather than be nickel and dimed for $10 digital copies that I can't resell as I mentioned above.

As for trophies, I have never and will NEVER care about them. So those being added are a huge waste, for me anyway.
 
Here's the thing though, Sony likely will NOT release an emulation patch/firmware update for the PS3 at this stage. It's clear that they've decided it's better for them to have certain games be redone to work on the PS3, with enhancements to justify charging us again. If you want to play your classics, turn on your PS2. I don't see the point in arguing something that won't change anytime soon.
 
[quote name='IAmTheCheapestGamer']But you forget that Sony also DOUBLED their console price from last gen to this gen. If it were a nominal raise in price, like $400 for a fully BC PS3, then I might've bought one sooner. [/quote]

Don't like the price or features don't buy it. I got the 80 gig (has like 90% bc compatibility) for $350 new. I've never had a problem playing one of my 40 ps2 games. I got to the point I stop checking the compatibility list because I assume the game will work.

All they needed to do was create a patch system ala 360 for PS2 games to work on PS3. Of course, they need whatever programming allows Xbox 1 games to work on 360 to be written for the PS3.
Click to expand...

It's alot harder than you think. The great 360 emulation has 51% of xbox games working on xbox 360 per wikipedia. And many of those games have bugs. It comes down to a cost benefit analysis. Many people wouldn't play PS2 games on the PS3 if they had that option, and it clearly didn't stop you from picking one up. So why spend millions on firmware that doesn't cause additional people to purchase your system? Really there are only a few "typically hard core forum users" that complain about this to no end.

It's called a differing opinion. I'd rather just be able to play the games I already own(which btw most of them I DID buy new) rather than be nickel and dimed for $10 digital copies that I can't resell as I mentioned above.
Click to expand...

Good, I'm glad that we got to the end. Play the games you own on the PS2 you own. Don't buy the digital games that would allow you to play the games on the PS3. Sometimes consoles have backwards compatibility and sometimes they don't. There is alot of work that goes into that and if you really value the old games/systems hang onto them.
 
But again, when Sony first started out in this gen, they were touting the importance of the BC on their system. They were tooting their own horn about how it was soooo important. Then just two or so years later it's stripped out of the future consoles.:roll:
 
[quote name='IAmTheCheapestGamer']But again, when Sony first started out in this gen, they were touting the importance of the BC on their system. They were tooting their own horn about how it was soooo important. Then just two or so years later it's stripped out of the future consoles.:roll:[/QUOTE]

Wait...a company changed plans years later? Blasphemy!
 
[quote name='IAmTheCheapestGamer']But again, when Sony first started out in this gen, they were touting the importance of the BC on their system. They were tooting their own horn about how it was soooo important. Then just two or so years later it's stripped out of the future consoles.:roll:[/QUOTE]

Whether you liked the price or not, Sony was bleeding red and no one was buying their system. They did everything they could to cut price because most consumers only care about price and their system started doing decent. Not PS2 levels, but decent. It just seems like a moot point at this point. I mean you want to talk about how inept the Wii internet and storage solutions are? You want to talk about how the Xbox was the most unreliable system ever created? Just seems to me like people have moved on. Those that really want to play PS2 games can either find a used PS3 that plays those games or pick up a PS2.

Sony is only going to release 10-20% of the PS2 library (at most) for sale via this method, so this is really only for classics. If you had an interest in experiencing the PS2 library this is really only going to get your feet wet.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='wwe101']Everyone was always hoping for ps2 emulation in future firmware updates, but sony said it is not possible. Are PS2 classics proof that it was possible and the only reason they didn't release it was to make profit off reselling PS2 games on PSN?[/QUOTE]
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-ps2-classics-on-ps3
^Read that article and you will see how much work it took for Sony's engineers to get backwards compatibility into the PS3.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top