Post by: PS3Scene on December 12, 2006, 11:55:00 PM
PSone/PS2 Games Looking Worse on PS3? Posted by XanTium | 13-12-2006 1:19 EST |
| We received this news from Slurrey: Quote
|
Post by: bcforn64 on December 12, 2006, 11:01:00 PM
Microsoft is known for shitty software and in the case of the original Xbox, hardware. It is sad that right now Sony is managing to make Microsoft look like saints.
Post by: Foe-hammer on December 12, 2006, 11:54:00 PM
Post by: Pheidias on December 13, 2006, 01:36:00 AM
And why the hell are you grasping at straws trying to make everything into some debate over who is the biggest fanboy. You should try to read his post once more, and stop trolling this forum spouting nonsense posts.
Your even worse then me
On the issue.
I have seen a lot of pictures of this phenomenon to me it almost looks like the ps3 is cleaning up the original to such a degree it brakes it and turns it into the mess it is. Compare it to when you crank up the clarity in your tv, it will mess up the picture and reveal all its flaws.
Post by: twistedsymphony on December 13, 2006, 05:27:00 AM
Sony delayed the console nearly a year, according to them: because of issues with Blu-Ray...
If that's the case then it should have given nearly every other aspect of the console an extra 8-12 months of refinement.
If you worked on the BC system and they gave you an extra YEAR to work out the bugs that product better be near flawless...
... same goes for the online service that somehow hardly any developers knew anything about
... same goes for the dashboard that can't be accessed while in a game
... same goes for the controllers that have syncing issues
... same goes for the AV encoder that can't scale and had to be updated post release to fix compatibility and other issues
... same goes for most of the first party games that are buggy and seem thrown together with the crappy reviews to show for it
... same goes for every aspect of the console...
Post by: epsilon72 on December 13, 2006, 06:27:00 AM
(especially with Okami and Final Fantasy X and XII)Atleast the color looked a little more natural with the FFX video on the PS3, but that's about it.
I haven't really played many PS2 games on the PS3, but Okami looked like it had the same problem as the ps2.
When is all of this crap going to be fixed?
Fix the controllers, and the backwards compatibility, NOW. I'm going to start complaining to Sony.
Post by: Martinchris23 on December 13, 2006, 06:34:00 AM
QUOTE(Pheidias @ Dec 13 2006, 08:43 AM) 
I have seen a lot of pictures of this phenomenon to me it almost looks like the ps3 is cleaning up the original to such a degree it brakes it and turns it into the mess it is. Compare it to when you crank up the clarity in your tv, it will mess up the picture and reveal all its flaws.
What you meant to say is that you can actually appreciate how Microsoft are getting such excellent results with their BC titles. AA and HD output which in most cases looks better on the 360 than it does on the original Xbox.
It's nothing to do with cleaning it up. It's a simple math equation. Take a 720 x 480 image and stretch it over 1920 x 1080. Without any post-processing, it'll look like crap.
Or more commonly put, it'll look like Sony.
Post by: Ninja Sniper X on December 13, 2006, 07:04:00 AM
Post by: Pheidias on December 13, 2006, 07:24:00 AM
And yes I applaud MS for their work with their BD titles, Its just a shame that so many games isn't working it all, and its not just crappy games its games like MGS:S and up until now not even psychonauts worked and there are still some 1st party titles that don't even work. I'd rather be able to play the games then buy a game and then wait until MS add it to BC and that might not even happen.
And twisted this 1 year( is it not 7 months) to fix things your doing is not very true. They might have aimed for a spring 06 release when MS decided to launched early, but I don't think they have had any extra time working on their features, if they can't even produce console how are they supposed to work on kinks?
Post by: Dirvance on December 13, 2006, 07:35:00 AM
Post by: Pheidias on December 13, 2006, 07:49:00 AM
But this has nothing to with a fault in the ps3.
If you want the games to look like they should all you need to do is plug in the cables that comes with the ps3
Edit:
damn mixed informations is a bitch, can't bother to read the whole thread and get the lowdown
http://boardsus.play...o...ding&page=1
but the snippets I've read seems to indicate its not on every tv and not on every cable, but you should read the thread yourself to get the real info.
Post by: Martinchris23 on December 13, 2006, 08:52:00 AM
QUOTE(h4xx3d @ Dec 13 2006, 03:43 PM)
Things aren't perfect yet, but at least they work.
After a 12 month delay and an extra $200 price tag, I should certainly hope so.
Do you honestly think this is acceptable for a $600 games console?? I would be real worried.
Post by: epsilon72 on December 13, 2006, 10:41:00 AM
QUOTE(Pheidias @ Dec 13 2006, 07:31 AM)
Epsilon, wow so its doing exactly what the ps2 is then.
Yeah; my ps2 is a late-model ps2 slim. I think it is a per-game thing - the games that have the problem only show this when you use component output (speaking of the ps2's artifact problem). If I use component with my ps2 and play FFX I get the exact same artifacts, but with S-Video I don't. I think I'll try it on the 1080i CRT we have to see if I get any different results...
Post by: VariableElite on December 13, 2006, 11:04:00 AM
QUOTE(h4xx3d @ Dec 13 2006, 09:43 AM)
The problem with having a playstation forum added into a long time xbox forum really has been showing a lot lately. There's far too many fanboys who just want to come in and talk shit.
I own both a ps3 and a 360. I love them both. The ps3 has some minor flaws, but it's been out for less than a month. There've been far fewer problems with the console than there were with the 360 this far into the launch. The majority of the launch 360s were broken... ie didn't work AT ALL. Some people were lucky enough to be able to play for a short time before their console died, but there were very few that didn't have to be sent back to Microsoft. Sony didn't screw up nearly as bad as M$ did. Whoopidy doo, I might have to wait awhile to play ps2 and ps1 games without jaggies. At least I can play most of them and watch blu-ray movies as well as play the ps3 launch titles.
Things aren't perfect yet, but at least they work.
Links, please. I've had no problems with my launch 360, and neither have the majority of my friends.
One of the advantages of only releasing 400,000 consoles is that quite a few of them end up on ebay. Who knows how many of them are defective? We won't find out until those systems actually get opened.
BTW, the EBGames I shop at won't turn their PS3 on. It locks up after about 30 minutes. They have to shut it off, wait for it to cool down, and restart it. It's too much of a hassle for a system that, even if they had in stock, nobody wants.
Post by: dvsone on December 13, 2006, 04:50:00 PM
Definitely this is a bit disappointing from Sony's part. I don't remember them having any problems with B/C on the PS2, and you would think because this is their 2nd B/C console they would of nailed it. It would be interesting to know if newer PS2 titles are having the same problem.
I think both the 360's and the PS3 B/C is disappointing.
360 has high quality B/C but a poor amount of titles
PS3 has poor quality B/C but a high amount of titles
This stinks. Maybe it's the whole "We can update that via firmware updates" that has made Sony really lazy with this console. With the PS2 it was shipped out the factory and that was it till the new version of the hardware.
Now people are saying that it's acceptable that it doesn't work correctly when it's shipped out the factory. And if it fixed within a year via a firmware update that's acceptable. This is a formula for a poor quality product. For a company that prides themselfs on producing a higher quality of product, they sure did get lazy with this console. Maybe if sony didn't have the ability to update consoles via firmware updates, they wouldn't have rushed the console out the factory door until it was of the highest possible quality.
Post by: KAGE360 on December 13, 2006, 06:25:00 PM
if its true that the ps3 is running BC using ps2 parts then this is sad.
the 360 had issues at launch like any other system, but FAR less then the ps2. the ps3 will have issues as well, with a larger instal base you have a larger number of defective products. the 360 though, wasnt launched missing any major features. every game worked and every feature was well thought out such as working on ANY TV, having preset controls, cutsom soundtrack, working controllers, etc. the ps3 is unfinished, no other way around it.
Post by: biabia8659 on December 13, 2006, 09:45:00 PM
Post by: Pheidias on December 14, 2006, 06:44:00 AM
Post by: KAGE360 on December 14, 2006, 07:32:00 AM
QUOTE(Dirvance @ Dec 14 2006, 05:23 AM)
It also seems people keep purposely ignoring the fact that Sony didn't want to release the ps3 in 06 period. Microsoft is the one who rushed its console to make the 05 window. That doesn't make Sony late, it makes them early since THEIR plan was in 07. How long has Sony had jaggies? Its almost like a trademark for them lol. Some games it actually looks nice while in others not so nice.
so a console that has been in development for more then 3 years and always planned for an 05 launch is considered "rushed" to you? also no one is denying that microsoft forced sony's hand into releasing the console early, that doesnt mean sony had to be a bunch of tools and act like that wasnt the case.
QUOTE(Dirvance @ Dec 14 2006, 05:23 AM)
So here is what you guys are telling me.
Microsoft Launch:
1. 1/3 of all consoles failed.
2. 80% had overheating issues.
3. No BC
4. Various HDD errors
5. Lack of Triple A games.
Sony Launch:
1. BC issues
2. HDD errors (referring to Red light bug)
3. Controller syncing problems (i guess i have heard people say this but haven't seen news post about it)
Those are all i can think of right now. I didn't include neither X360's or PS3's HD issues cause HD period is a work in progress with the industry has no standard on (Like S-Vid was).
for someone who likes to speak of fanboys, these are some pretty bold statements without any support, links, or sources. this comparison is so biased its almost beyond laughable, so what Triple A titles did the ps3 launch have? especially when you consider it had one of the lowest rated launches in gaming history. you also forgot about the compatibility issue with MANY HDTVs which i consider a BIG deal.
please give me a link where it shows 1/3 360's were faulty or 80% had heating issues, of the hundreds of people i have talked to over the year maybe a handful had a faulty system. people like you make me sick
QUOTE(Dirvance @ Dec 14 2006, 05:23 AM)
Big difference i see is hey at least Sony's consoles worked at launch.
yeah i see that:
Post by: Martinchris23 on December 14, 2006, 09:36:00 AM
QUOTE(chrnochime @ Dec 13 2006, 04:32 PM)
Beats having a $400 console that had a chance of working normally roughly equaling to how likely it is to NOT step on a landmine in a mine field.
And I'd rather have "half-ass" BC than no compatibility. I remember reading about ppl who whined/b!tched about Xbox360 having no BC for a lot of games. What, now that's a plus instead of a minus? I'm no fanboy(didn't buy a PS2) but I'd much rather be given the possibility to play FFX on PS3 than in 360's case, buy an XBox just so I won't have to wait until God knows when MS decides to make a game playable on the 360.
1. I've had my 360 since launch day and never had a problem with it. Your comparison is totally unjustified and without any figures, unbelievable. I know plenty of 360 owners, all of which have perfectly working units.
2. You're right - people were whining about the few titles that Xbox had on their BC list. This was purely down to two major things:
Sony stating they would have 100% compatibility.
Peoples ignorance on how much work was involved to do it PROPERLY.
Sony in their usual style wound up the hype machine and people bought it. As usual, the end product was nothing like they described.
So yes, people are now praising MS's efforts as they are showing Sony up to be a right bunch of bitches. And your comment on waiting for BC? I definitely would wait rather than getting this crappy attempt laid by Sony. I would be EMBARRASED if I had spent $600 on a next gen console and the best BC efforts were worse than a console costing 1/6 of the price (and five years older!).
Here's the difference - MS are continually releasing new titles to their BC list in glorious HD with full AA. Sony are not.
Post by: VariableElite on December 14, 2006, 10:14:00 AM
QUOTE(Dirvance @ Dec 14 2006, 04:23 AM)
I couldn't agree more. They will have to change the name of the forums to "Come rag on Sony, Xbox fanboys welcome" I am quickly discovering that if i want a intelligent conversation or discussion about anything ps3 related i am in the wrong place.
It also seems people keep purposely ignoring the fact that Sony didn't want to release the ps3 in 06 period. Microsoft is the one who rushed its console to make the 05 window. That doesn't make Sony late, it makes them early since THEIR plan was in 07. How long has Sony had jaggies? Its almost like a trademark for them lol. Some games it actually looks nice while in others not so nice.
...
Big difference i see is hey at least Sony's consoles worked at launch.
1. Intelligent conversation or discussion != lying about supposed 360 hardware issues.
2. The PS2 had 2/3s of the hardware marketshare. A company that owns 2/3 of a market isn't "pushed" into anything. Oh, and what happened to the "Spring of 2006" launch date that Sony execs were spewing for a while?
Oh, and leave it to a Sony fanboy to declare jaggies a feature. What's next, 10 FPS is slideshow mode, for those that want to revel in the quality of their HD systems?
3. How can we tell? All their systems are on ebay at the moment.
Post by: Marrvia on December 14, 2006, 04:26:00 PM
QUOTE(Dirvance @ Dec 14 2006, 02:23 AM)
It also seems people keep purposely ignoring the fact that Sony didn't want to release the ps3 in 06 period. Microsoft is the one who rushed its console to make the 05 window. That doesn't make Sony late, it makes them early since THEIR plan was in 07.
Huh? Sony's plan was to release it in March '06, then they delayed it to November '06 only a couple months before because they couldn't manufacture the blue ray drives. Where do you get your info?
Post by: C o s m o on December 14, 2006, 08:05:00 PM
B: I have thought a lot about this. If I had spent $600+ for a console with some of the issues (especially the ones TS listed on page 1), I'd be pissed. The 360's BC isn't perfect. For example, I have MTV Xbox Music Maker, and I make little songs on it for my 4-year-old who loves it. I tried to do it on the 360, but it was buggy as hell, so I went back to the XBox.
But Xbox games do look good. On the PS3, that's awful for such a hardware powerhouse. Big Ken should've kept his mouth shut. Now $ony looks terrible in the marketplace.
Post by: celicagt1993 on December 15, 2006, 08:04:00 AM
QUOTE(Ninja Sniper X @ Dec 13 2006, 03:11 PM)
I don't personally have a PS3 so I can't comment on this first hand but if this shit is really true than Sony F@ucked up BIG TIME. I love how everyone at Sony is a hypocrite. First they slam M$ for having two different units, than they did. Next they slammed M$ on an incomplete BC list... well at least the BC games don't look like ass on the 360...
at least with the 360, if you buy a core, you can buy the extra's to make it a premium. with the ps3, if you buy the lower system, you are SOL with the WiFi connection.
reading alot of these posts, it seems alot of people (not all) are trying to get people to see their side.... here's a news flash for you..... it won't work.
sure, the 360 had problems. as we see the ps3 does too. 1/3 of the 360's, i would like to actually see numbers as proof, otherwise i call FUD. I really haven't seen ANY xbox fanboys stating such unrealistic claims on the ps3.
somethings that i have heard, ps3 controller sync problems, jaggies, and things like that. i have also heard ps3 fanboys saying 360's overheat (true, they are hotter, but i believe this is more user error than true issues, but not every issue is user error), and problems like manufacturing errors, example the 3 ring of light. most of these are launch systems. I don't think i've heard about someone's Dec 2006 console messing up as much. maybe it was rushed, but it's fixed, and at least MS did decide to realize there are mistakes and extended warrente, and things like that.
as for the ps3, it's really to early to tell. They might have the same problems, might not. this becomes apparent after use. We'll use the 360, we all know it puts out more heat... any electronic device gets effected by heat over time. as the system heats up, and cools down over and over the joints on the motherboard begin to fail. This is why car's have problems over years (can't remember how many ECU's i've fixed by redooing the joints on the board). I do feel that the ps3 lacks good games, but time will heal that. the games do look better on the 360 than the ps3, IMHO, but time "should" heal that too, i'm hopeful. I do also feel that the online for PS is lacking alot, but again, time will fix this. will it be better than XB live? I really want to say no... this is where I might show some fanboyism. MS does have 5 years on sony in this area. Lets flip the coin over so that it's comparable on the sony's side. PS has been out longer......... They do have more games and series running for it. same concept, different aspect of it.
----on the hardware line of things, i do lean toward the 360, but it's only because developers have had more time to work on it.
----on the games side of it, it leans towards the ps3 as far as the number of series it has. (this doesn't inclued game play, that is more on the item above)
----on the online service, it leans towards the xbox, hands down.
to me, they are even IMO.... But keep in mind, any wine only gets better with age, no matter what the brand is. It just depends on if you are having white meat or red meet, is what matters on which wine to choose.
Post by: VariableElite on December 15, 2006, 11:37:00 AM
QUOTE(h4xx3d @ Dec 15 2006, 10:58 AM)
Microsoft admits high hardware failure rates of launch 360 consoles. Link. It's not BS. If you paid any attention to xbox-scene or any xbox site around the 360 launch, you'd know the failure rate was alarmingly high.
It seems people have also forgotten the disc scratching issue the 360 initially had. Link
Microsoft initially refuses to replace scratched discs. Link
Design flaws of the 360. Link
I did NOT find any articles pertaining to the number of returned 360 consoles on xbox-scene. I doubt microsoft ever divulged the numbers anyways... but yea. From my personal experience almost all of my friends who purchased consoles on launch had to send them in for repairs. My own console had to be exchanged after months of use when it randomly began to display the red lights of death when powered on.
I'm not saying the 360 is a crappy console. I love mine, GOW is amazing :-D However, I've also been very impressed with my ps3.
This post is merely to remind you of the 360 launch issues. Since being released for a year, most of the issues have been resolved and it has turned into a great console. Yes, the ps3 had a year longer to be produced, but there are fewer issues with the console. These will be resolved in the next year, just as the 360's were.
Be patient people. Quit bashing the console, especially if you do not own one yourself.
About the price argument:
[Snipped]
Define "alarmingly high." 1%? 5%? 100%?
Oh, you can't, can you?
I've said this multiple times, but there is no proof yet that the PS3 has any fewer hardware issues than the 360, simply because SO MANY OF THEM HAVE NOT EVEN BEEN OPENED YET. At the time of this post, there are approximately 25,000 for sale on ebay. Who knows how many people are still waiting to see if prices are going to rise right before Christmas, or how many are still sitting underneath some Christmas tree somewhere?
The scratched disk thing is a non-issue: it only happened to those who moved their console while it had a game inside, which the owner's manual specifially warned people against. Why don't you move your PS3 while you're playing RFoM, and tell us how that turns out?
The list of design flaws is BS, of course. Only two of them are actually hard-wired into the console (overheating CPU/GPU and no HDMI); the rest can be fixed? via dashboard updates. I guess Sony has MS beat there, because of that scalar fix they released that allowed games to be played in unlisted resolutions. Oh, wait...
And, please, for the love of all that is good, drop the pointless price argument already. I don't need Wifi, so why should I be forced to purchase it? I think that the video quality of HD-DVD is superior to BR, so why make me purchase a BR player? If the PS3 had come with a cheap $5 plastic stand, and the only official MS plastic stand was $50, would that be another item on your list? The only reason people came up with that moronic comparison was because MS has a lower cost of entry than Sony at the moment.
P.S. I didn't see HDMI or component cables on either of those lists for the PS3. Be sure to add those next time...
Post by: KAGE360 on December 15, 2006, 01:45:00 PM
some people want all of that NON-gaming features in their system. others dont.
i dont want WiFi (not stable enough for gaming IMHO), dont want HD-DVD/blue-ray, dont want a browser, and i dont want to install operating systems. when i set out to purchase a game system i just care about it playing games and what it does for gaming. <- this is why i prefer the 360. until the ps3 can offer standard control settings, custom soundtrack, HD display on every HDTV, unified character profiles online, game downloads for every game, and more gaming related features then it will not match the 360 as a game system in my view.
i hope that you guys are getting the point that i look at these things for what they are: game systems. everything else comes second to the core meaning of the package to me.
Post by: VariableElite on December 15, 2006, 07:57:00 PM
QUOTE(h4xx3d @ Dec 15 2006, 06:41 PM)
Sorry, I don't tally everything that happens around me
And I'd say it's pretty bad if they make a big deal about the snazziness of the lights switching position based on the console's orientation, and then doing so with a disc inside scratches it. And that will not happen with the ps3, nor will it on any new 360s. The point was, nothing's perfect at launch. Evidently there's a little too much fanboy running in your blood ;-)Okay, component cables for the ps2/3 come to a whopping $32.99 that still doesn't shift the sea-saw.
I don't need wifi either, I have a ps3. Guess what, I bought the 20gb! Fancy that, I wasn't forced to buy wifi either. HD-DVD's are not superior to Blu-ray. Show me proof for that claim
The initial ones were, this is true. Key word, INITIAL. This is no longer the case. If you WANT to buy a full featured console, the PS3 is the better value. No one's forcing you too. So y'know what? Don't buy one. And while you're at it, leave the PS3 forums. You're presence is counter-productive. The point of these forums are to help and inform. Someone who does not own the console cannot do a whole lot of informing on issues of personal preference.Oh, I'm not a fanboy. I simply hate what Sony has done to the video game market -- how it's been dumbed down for the mainstream public.
I don't hate all of Sony. I do like their cameras and home theatre equipment.
By the way, if owning a PS3 is a requirement to post on these forums, it's news to me. In addition, things would get pretty boring around here, as very few people seem to be able to get their hands on one.
As far as HD/BR comparisons go, there are plenty of sites out there that have done side-by-side tests, and the general consensus is that HD is the superior technology. Sorry to burst your bubble, but just because Sony backs something doesn't mean it's gonna win.
P.S. If the mods do ever institute a PS3 requirement, I'm more than happy to furnish a copy of my receipt for one.
Post by: Martinchris23 on December 16, 2006, 12:45:00 AM
What the hell does the pricing have to do with it?
Once again, the BR/HD-DVD argument rears its head.
There are plenty of topics already associated with these other subjects - why not post there instead next time.
Post by: Martinchris23 on December 16, 2006, 06:22:00 AM
QUOTE(h4xx3d @ Dec 16 2006, 08:04 AM)
The thread definitely headed offtopic. Yea, my fault too :-P If you'd read everything though, people were bringing up the price paid for the console vs it's flaws. So it was relevant to the conversation.
Mentioning that a $600 piece of electronic equipment is full of flaws has nothing to do with price comparisons against the 360. Just because someone mentions $$$ doesn't open the way for all price-related talk!
Since you want to talk about price, how do you honestly feel after spending $500/$600 on a console only to discover the BC catalog looks worse on your new machine? I would really love to hear your take on it.
Martin
Post by: smitty2003 on December 16, 2006, 01:39:00 PM
QUOTE(h4xx3d @ Dec 13 2006, 07:43 AM)
The problem with having a playstation forum added into a long time xbox forum really has been showing a lot lately. There's far too many fanboys who just want to come in and talk shit.
I own both a ps3 and a 360. I love them both. The ps3 has some minor flaws, but it's been out for less than a month. There've been far fewer problems with the console than there were with the 360 this far into the launch. The majority of the launch 360s were broken... ie didn't work AT ALL. Some people were lucky enough to be able to play for a short time before their console died, but there were very few that didn't have to be sent back to Microsoft. Sony didn't screw up nearly as bad as M$ did. Whoopidy doo, I might have to wait awhile to play ps2 and ps1 games without jaggies. At least I can play most of them and watch blu-ray movies as well as play the ps3 launch titles.
Things aren't perfect yet, but at least they work.
i agree with alot of what he is saying, except the blue ray part. who cares about blue ray, i wanna play video games with my video game system. the PS3 isnt going to selel a million or so units and be a great console just for the blue ray. it needs games to back it up. But as for the fan boys, this whole topic is biased. you have your sony fans vs your MS fans. even those who say they own both and love both finish by saying something backing one or the other. for example my qoute above.
PS3 will work out the kinks as did the xbox 360. The onyl problem i think sony has is that they didnt say no to a few things. like mobile suit gundam: crossfire. If ne body has seen this or played it, then they would knwo that sont should have said absolutely not to this game, because it makes the system look horrible. the game cant even run smooth and its graphics arent up too par for the PS2. All systems have their flaws at launch and they all get fixed. Nintendo's Wiimote sucks as far as durability goes, but they will fix that. It's a thing that comes along with launch systems, they have bugs, and then they fix them. deal with it!!!!!
Post by: Martinchris23 on December 18, 2006, 01:45:00 AM
QUOTE(h4xx3d @ Dec 16 2006, 06:27 PM)
It honestly doesn't bother me. Yes, it's ugly as hell. But I'm willing to hold off playing older titles for now. I'm confident it will be fixed soon. I've got Resistance and Blazing Angels to tide me over till then. If this were a few month's after release, I'd be pissed. But it's not...
And I see what you mean about the price argument. It just bothers me seeing people complaining so much about the price. The idea was not to say the 360's a ripoff, I'm a very happy 360 owner. It was merely to put things into perspective. That even if you don't want everything that's included, it's not that bad of a deal.
Taking into account that the BC games are processed by hardware, I really hope they are able to sort this. Personally I don't think they can or they would have done it. It's just looking like a rush job TBH.
My problem is that a lot of people are buying the PS3 because they have attained a huge back catalog of PS2 games and have spent their Xmas budget on the console itself. To now play these games in lower quality would really be a kick in the teeth. You're right - for the money, you're getting a lot. However, it's all in vain unless the games make use of the hardware. If you were looking for a BR player then it would be a cheap alternative to a standalone unit. That's IF you were already willing to spend $999 on one anyway (and would obviously have the money to do so!). I don't want to continue the OT stuff on this thread, so I'll leave it there.
I think Sony
Martin
Post by: Pheidias on December 18, 2006, 07:40:00 AM
Either way this just makes me want a wii even more
Post by: epsilon72 on December 19, 2006, 11:00:00 AM
This is a post from the playstation forums, apparently it's some guy who is in frequent contact with the sony techs-
The tech from Sony did offer a very broad explanation of what the problem was, for anyone who is interested. He said that, apparently, they are having alot of problems with PS2 emulation on the PS3. I then pointed out that the PS3 doesn't use emulation because it has the PS2s Emotion Engine built into it. He said that was correct, and that the Emotion Engine was rendering the graphics, but that the PS3 was still Emulating the PS2s Operating System, and that's where they are having problems. This actually makes sense. This could be why some 480i games look OK, and why a small handful of 480p games still look horrible. It just depends on whether the game is reliant on aspects of the OS that aren't being emulated properly. Unfortuneately, this could also mean that this may not be a single patch solution. We may be looking at a 360 situation here where multiple patches, slowly expands the list of Backwards Compatible games over time. Then again, what do I know? In the end, this information doesn't help us get this problem solved any faster. I just thought some here might be interested.
http://boardsus.play...o...ing&page=76
I hope the problem gets fixed soon. It's pretty pathetic that they didn't fix this problem before launch. What's strange though is that my PS2 has the same problem.
In that thread (for those who haven't read it) the cause of the jaggies is that lines of pixels are being "flipped", distorting the image. There's a lot of pictures of the phenomenon on the first page.
Post by: h4xx3d on December 19, 2006, 02:03:00 PM
I see that as good news. There is hope that it will be fixable through software updates. I'd suppose it does make sense that there is emulation involved, otherwise all games would have worked 100% out of the box and there would be no need for a compatibility list at all.
Post by: Kid Flash on December 22, 2006, 09:51:00 PM
Post by: Mr Invader on January 04, 2007, 09:27:00 PM
Post by: Pheidias on January 24, 2007, 03:07:00 AM
Post by: incognegro on January 24, 2007, 05:32:00 AM
QUOTE(Pheidias @ Jan 24 2007, 11:14 AM)
Guess they fixed this with the 1.5 firmware, good job
Really?
Thats not what I heard,
Anybody that actually has a ps3 can confirm this?
Post by: Pheidias on January 24, 2007, 09:15:00 AM
Post by: griffin XXI on January 24, 2007, 01:54:00 PM
QUOTE(Mr Invader @ Jan 4 2007, 10:34 PM)
i still say that there is no reason to buy a next-gen console if you plan on playing old outdated games, why don't you just save your $500 and buy 10 or more games with it?
Just hearing/thinking about BC in new gens, is more time than should be allowed. BC is RIDICULOUS and an absolute waste of everyones time. Play games on the their respective console!
