Post by: Aerok on March 15, 2007, 02:08:00 PM
Post by: Martinchris23 on March 16, 2007, 04:44:00 AM
QUOTE(Aerok @ Mar 15 2007, 08:15 PM) 
Niiiice, much better than Microsoft ever did in a year.
I think you'll find that since Sony promised 100% compatibility with PlayStation and PS2 games, that they haven't achieved this in any market. Even the US/JAP releases of the PS3 aren't 100% compatible. The European version is nowhere near.
Microsoft said from the start that their BC efforts would be minimal.
Let's wait and see what Sony release before praising/critisizing tho - we all know they're prone to stretching the truth. By that I mean lying through their arses.
Martin
Post by: Thraxen on March 16, 2007, 06:28:00 PM
QUOTE(Martinchris23 @ Mar 16 2007, 05:51 AM)
I think you'll find that since Sony promised 100% compatibility with PlayStation and PS2 games, that they haven't achieved this in any market. Even the US/JAP releases of the PS3 aren't 100% compatible. The European version is nowhere near.
Well, obviously 100% BC is nearly impossible. But for all practical purposes the N. American PS3 are 100%.
Post by: Mr Invader on March 16, 2007, 08:09:00 PM
QUOTE(Aerok @ Mar 16 2007, 09:09 AM)
They never said the BC effort would be minimal, they said enough effort would be put to satisfy the owners. Now are we all satisfied? Judging by many posts in this forum, no.
QUOTE
We under promised and over delivered on that.
^Peter Moore on BC
Post by: Martinchris23 on March 17, 2007, 03:08:00 AM
QUOTE(Thraxen @ Mar 17 2007, 12:35 AM)
Well, obviously 100% BC is nearly impossible. But for all practical purposes the N. American PS3 are 100%.
Obviously? Not to Sony it wasn't. That's all they spewed for the last 12 months and more, not forgetting they tore into MS for using Software emulation.
Either it's 100% BC or it's not. Sony say it isn't:
Taken from the SCEA website
http://www.us.playst...ompatibleStatus
QUOTE
Final Fantasy Anthology
Publisher: Square EA (Square Enix)
Product No: SLUS-00879
Description: On the Final Fantasy V Disc (Disc 1), when the users character progresses to the first save point, and selects SAVE from the Game Menu, a black transition screen appears and the title hangs.
Final Fantasy VIII
Publisher: Square EA (Square Enix)
Product No: SLUS-00892
Description: Throughout gameplay, when the user's party encounters a random enemy in the "world map", and the pre-battle transition screen appears, approximately 40 - 60% of the pre-battle transition screen appears black, and the remaining portion of the screen appears corrupted.
C-12: Final Resistance
Publisher: Sony Computer Entertainment
Product No: SCUS-94666
Description: In NEW GAME mode, when the opening FMV plays, the dialogue audio does not play. Note: When this issue occurs, and the user presses the X button to bypass the FMV, and the FMV ending sequence plays, the title hangs.
Tomb Raider
Publisher: Eidos
Product No: SLUS-00152
Description: When the title is left inactive for approximately 15 seconds on the Main menu, the title hangs.
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Product No: SLUS-20926
Description: In all areas of the title allowing EyeToy USB Camera interaction, the screen freezes at random points for approximately 1 - 10 seconds, and the title may hang.
Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence
Publisher: Konami Digital Ent.
Product No: SLUS-21243
Description: During network gameplay, with 1 PS3 user hosting a Team Deathmatch Game Type, and 5 other users as clients, the host is randomly disconnected, and is unable to reconnect
NHL 07
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Product No: SLUS-21458
Description: During network gameplay, the user is randomly disconnected, and is unable to reconnect.
Vampire Hunter D
Publisher: Jaleco
Product No: SLUS-01138
Description: Upon boot-up, the title remains on a black screen following the initial loading screen.
Publisher: Square EA (Square Enix)
Product No: SLUS-00879
Description: On the Final Fantasy V Disc (Disc 1), when the users character progresses to the first save point, and selects SAVE from the Game Menu, a black transition screen appears and the title hangs.
Final Fantasy VIII
Publisher: Square EA (Square Enix)
Product No: SLUS-00892
Description: Throughout gameplay, when the user's party encounters a random enemy in the "world map", and the pre-battle transition screen appears, approximately 40 - 60% of the pre-battle transition screen appears black, and the remaining portion of the screen appears corrupted.
C-12: Final Resistance
Publisher: Sony Computer Entertainment
Product No: SCUS-94666
Description: In NEW GAME mode, when the opening FMV plays, the dialogue audio does not play. Note: When this issue occurs, and the user presses the X button to bypass the FMV, and the FMV ending sequence plays, the title hangs.
Tomb Raider
Publisher: Eidos
Product No: SLUS-00152
Description: When the title is left inactive for approximately 15 seconds on the Main menu, the title hangs.
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Product No: SLUS-20926
Description: In all areas of the title allowing EyeToy USB Camera interaction, the screen freezes at random points for approximately 1 - 10 seconds, and the title may hang.
Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence
Publisher: Konami Digital Ent.
Product No: SLUS-21243
Description: During network gameplay, with 1 PS3 user hosting a Team Deathmatch Game Type, and 5 other users as clients, the host is randomly disconnected, and is unable to reconnect
NHL 07
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Product No: SLUS-21458
Description: During network gameplay, the user is randomly disconnected, and is unable to reconnect.
Vampire Hunter D
Publisher: Jaleco
Product No: SLUS-01138
Description: Upon boot-up, the title remains on a black screen following the initial loading screen.
These took about 5 minutes to search. For all practical purposes, these games either don't play as intended or don't work at all. Why would they have a website to check compatibility if they were practically 100% BC?
If 100% BC was never achieveable, Sony should have just said that from the start. I'm sure the people in the UK buying a PS3 to replace their PS2 will sleep soundly in their beds knowing that although Sony lied through their teeth, they stripped the hardware BC out of the UK PS3 and are still charging more for it.
As for Xbox BC on the 360, I was never disappointed as I knew it was going to be thin on the ground. That's the benefit of being told the facts from the start.
Post by: Martinchris23 on March 17, 2007, 01:08:00 PM
QUOTE(Thraxen @ Mar 17 2007, 04:40 PM)
Your point? I said 'practically'. Considering there are several thousand PS1 and PS2 games, you're still talking about BC that is likely somewhere in the neighborhood of 99%+. And, damn, if your going to start counting games that play but have a bug or two in them you're going to have to remove at least half of MS' BC list too. You're right... the PR guys should have never said '100%'... but anyone with a brain knew that people were going to be able to find a game or two that didn't work. The same thing happened with the PS2. There were a few PS1 games that didn't work. But for all practical purposes most people consider the PS2 to be 100% BC with PS1 games. And at the end of the day... despite any claims the PR guys made that Sony didn't deliver on, Sony's BC is better, using hardware OR software, than MS and the 360.
Where are you getting 99%+ from? Have you already been through the site I linked and added the totals?
My point is that with any of the examples where it says 'title hangs', it means the game's unplayable. We're not talking about bugs here. No, for the list of games with bugs we're talking a helluva lot more. I expect some BC bugs, but not unplayable games when you've basically ripped the guts out of a PS2 and implanted into another console. FTR, games in the PlayStation database which work are not listed as 'working', or 'ok', rather listed as 'no major problems'. Whew - that's a relief.
I just found 5 games unplayable without even trying. Again, not 1 or 2.
What annoys me the most is that people defended Sony when they made the 100% BC statement and even in the face of failure, people still defend it. "Oh we all knew it wouldn't be ALL games". Aye, right!
Finally, to say that non-AA and badly upscaled BC is better than FSAA and HD BC needs a new pair of glasses. The quantity of BC games that MS have released may not be as big as the PS2s, but it sure beats it in quality.
I'm just hoping the software BC effort produces a better output. Otherwise there are going to be a LOT of UK PS3s on eBay. For most people I know interested in getting the PS3, they have no intention of buying many PS3 games just yet. I'm wondering how long it'll be before they dig out the PS2 again.....
Post by: Foe-hammer on March 17, 2007, 08:11:00 PM
Post by: Martinchris23 on March 18, 2007, 03:34:00 AM
I'm as much as a fanboy as the next person who owns consoles from all three companys. Xbox is actually outnumbered in this house - sorry to disappoint you. If it were MS screwing around with consumers, they'd get backlash too.
You've forgotten this thread is to discuss the SOFTWARE emulation provided for the Euro PS3s. Can you tell me how 1,200 games is 99% of all PS/PS2 games?
I can't tell you how many people in the UK are aware that the European console is different to the US/JP version, but I know it's not many. By your comments, you think it's perfectly acceptable to announce full BC and then only deliver 1,200 BWO a software emulator.
I don't agree - I think if you stopped being a fanboy yourself for 5 minutes, you wouldn't agree either.
Post by: Foe-hammer on March 18, 2007, 03:55:00 AM
QUOTE(Thraxen @ Mar 18 2007, 12:45 AM)
Fair enough, but I don't care to have a half dozen systems connected to my TV. It's nice to be able to retire them. The 360's BC doesn't bother me that much since my original XBox is still in use thanks to XBMC and the emulators. But the PS3 and Wii have taken over the PS2's and Cube's game duties. Every game I've tried on each has worked perfectly. So why bother having them all connected? It just creates unnecessary wire clutter... and I already have too much of that anyway. The fact that neither upscales really doesn't matter to me. It would be nice if they did, but the fact they can replace their predecessors is good enough. If they were like the 360 and could only do <50% of the older games I likely wouldn't even be able to retire them due to games not working. Then I'd have two more systems connected to my TV. No thanks.
Agreed. I love having one system do as much as possible, and also use the orignal xbox quite a bit for xbmc and emulators. MS's BC is piss poor; no question about it. But i'm glad they at least improved the graphics on the few that do work well. If only they would get morrowind and rallisport challange 2 BC, i'd have no complaints...well very few anyway.
Post by: Thraxen on March 18, 2007, 02:22:00 PM
QUOTE(Martinchris23 @ Mar 18 2007, 04:41 AM)
I already own a Playstation (yes the original release), PS2, Xbox, 360 and a couple of Nintendo DSs. The games on the PS3 right now are no better than on the 360, which has a massive list of games to it's arsenal. I also own the HD-DVD drive for the 360 so I have my HD Movie portion covered. Why would I want to buy a £500 / $1000 console when the games I already own on the PS and PS2 play much better on their original consoles?
I'm as much as a fanboy as the next person who owns consoles from all three companys. Xbox is actually outnumbered in this house - sorry to disappoint you. If it were MS screwing around with consumers, they'd get backlash too.
This was never a discussion about 360 and PS3 retail games. You will get no argument from me that the 360 line-up is currently the best of any of the new systems. As for MS screwing around with customers... poor BC, loads of dead systems, and a supposed new version featuring HDMI. I'm not overly concerned with any of that since my situation is such that none of those have really impacted me, but they have affected a lot of people. MS has been no angel. I know the Sony PR guys have really brought much of this down on them, but it's getting REALLY old. Then when someone like you comes along and calls the PS3 BC a 'failure'.... then I know the Sony hate bandwagon has gone too far.... it's a ludicrous statement to make.
QUOTE
You've forgotten this thread is to discuss the SOFTWARE emulation provided for the Euro PS3s. Can you tell me how 1,200 games is 99% of all PS/PS2 games?
Excuse me... but YOU brought the N. American PS3 into the discussion when you tried to nitpick over the fact that it wasn't actually technically 100%. I never made the claim that the European PS3 was 99%. Don't put words in my mouth. The only claim I've made regarding their move to software BC was that it was better out of the gate than MS' software BC after 1 year.
QUOTE
I can't tell you how many people in the UK are aware that the European console is different to the US/JP version, but I know it's not many. By your comments, you think it's perfectly acceptable to announce full BC and then only deliver 1,200 BWO a software emulator.
The move to software emulation is once that has been know for close to a year. They've been saying for quite a while they planned to remove the PS2 chips at some point to cut costs, but wouldn't do it until they felt the software emulator was good enough. It shouldn't really be a surprise to anyone at this point. If you feel cheated, don't buy one.
Anyway, expect that 1200 number to be higher at launch. That's why they haven't released the official list yet. They are trying to certify as many games as possible for the v1.6 firmware release. I wouldn't be surprised if the final list for the 1.6 firmware was 1400-1500 games.
Post by: Martinchris23 on March 19, 2007, 03:55:00 AM
QUOTE
This was never a discussion about 360 and PS3 retail games.
No, but the point was made in reply to you suggesting I play some BC games on a PS3. Again, why would I want a PS3?
QUOTE
As for MS screwing around with customers... poor BC, loads of dead systems, and a supposed new version featuring HDMI
Again, why are you discussing the MS BC so vehemently? This thread is about the European support of PS3 games. Each argument submitted has been "Well, it's better than MS's effort". Well it damned well should be. I will say this again as it falls on deaf ears - MS never intended to release BC for the 360. Their official communication said as much. Compared to a company which promised full BC, it's an applauded effort when you have the likes of Sony sho seem to think that shunning their European market won't hurt them.
MS didn't own the intellectual rights to the Xbox and a change in GPU made things ultimately harder.
Anyone with a shred of common sense would tell you to over-deliver is always better to over-promise.
And yes, if a company promises to deliver 100% BC (official Sony marketing), and they don't manage it (which they haven't done) it means they failed to deliver. Hence it being a failure.
Loads of dead systems? Mine's been fine from launch day and everyone I know with a 360 will tell you the same with theirs. When you have over 10.5 million consoles, you're bound to have some failures.
The HDMI was never confirmed by Microsoft - in fact they denied it when asked.
QUOTE
Excuse me... but YOU brought the N. American PS3 into the discussion when you tried to nitpick over the fact that it wasn't actually technically 100%
Because you were so confident it was practically 100%. It clearly isn't. Their FAQ stated as much too "Some games will not work as intended, whereas other may not work at all" !!!.
The point was relevent however - if they cannot manage full compatibility with the original hardware, how long will it be to achieve near 100% using a software solution?
QUOTE
I wouldn't be surprised if the final list for the 1.6 firmware was 1400-1500 games.
That's purely speculation and based on Sony's track record, I'm frankly surprised you think they'll over deliver. The official statement says 1200 at launch, therefore it's 1200 at launch.
Forget the rest of the argument as it's not going to get anywhere fast - just answer me this (which you still failed to answer) - How is 1200 titles anywhere near 100%?
Post by: Martinchris23 on March 20, 2007, 06:18:00 AM
QUOTE(Thraxen @ Mar 20 2007, 02:50 AM)
It's so absurd how people can constantly bash Sony and totally ignore MS' shortcomings.
Well, I'm in the PS3 section of the forums, so surely the focus is on Sony?? If I want to bash MS (which I have done so), I'll do it in the Xbox forums.
QUOTE(Thraxen @ Mar 20 2007, 02:50 AM)
People constantly bash Sony and turning a blind eye to failings by other companies. Again, I understand that Sony boasts more than the others, but it's ridiculous how people act as if only Sony does these sorts of things.
see above.
QUOTE(Thraxen @ Mar 20 2007, 02:50 AM)
I guess if someone was hinging their purchase on complete BC they can now opt to not buy the system. For those of us in N. America, despite the fact you dug up one game that for sure doesn't work, they essentially delivered what they said in terms of BC before the launch here.
There lies the rub - take a guess as to what information has been advertised regarding the PS3 in the UK, which would separate the two in terms of functionality?
I'll tell you - none.
Anyone who pre-ordered the PS3 will be assuming it's going to be compatible with all their older games. This is my point exactly. What have Sony done to correct this (mis)information? How can someone make an informed choice when they're not aware of the difference? Jeez, the national newspapers are running promotions on the PS3 this week and are still showing pictures of the concept PS3 with the boomerang controller!!!
I really want to continue this discussion, but unless you want to keep it on topic I have no further interest. My biggest concern is the level of ignorance within the UK for the PAL console and what damage it'll do for the games industry in general.
Post by: KAGE360 on March 20, 2007, 08:57:00 AM
im sure the ps2 GPU in the ps3 is the main factor behind the high number. this is why i dont understand why the 360 and ps3 are being compared with BC, one has no components to help while the other has the GPU of the previous console. if the 360 had a Gforce 3 in it, then i would go so far to say 99% of xbox1 games would be BC.
either way, BC was never a deal breaker or even an issue for me. personally i like microsoft's approach of developing the system first with no comprimises then building a system with BC in mind that may have some negative effects. then again, this is coming from someone who cares little for BC, i buy my next gen systems to play next gen games.
Post by: throwingks on March 20, 2007, 01:41:00 PM
QUOTE(Thraxen @ Mar 20 2007, 01:36 PM)
Sony just put up the BC site:
http://faq.eu.playst.../bc/bcGames.htm
PS2 games are about where I thought they would be, but I am surprised at the PSOne list. Given that the PSP has a good PSOne emulator I would have thought more PSOne games would have been listed. I'm wondering if they are all not working or if many of them simply haven't been tested. I'm leaning toward the latter because I can think of no reason why the PS2 BC% should be higher.
Anyway, some credit must be given to Sony for classifying the games. At least you know whether to expect perfect emulation or for there to be some issues. The 360 BC lists just says which game work, but doesn't tell you if there are any issues.
Sony better have that kind of list or the would be one Hell of a backlash. I don't give them credit at all, they are covering their asses.http://faq.eu.playst.../bc/bcGames.htm
PS2 games are about where I thought they would be, but I am surprised at the PSOne list. Given that the PSP has a good PSOne emulator I would have thought more PSOne games would have been listed. I'm wondering if they are all not working or if many of them simply haven't been tested. I'm leaning toward the latter because I can think of no reason why the PS2 BC% should be higher.
Anyway, some credit must be given to Sony for classifying the games. At least you know whether to expect perfect emulation or for there to be some issues. The 360 BC lists just says which game work, but doesn't tell you if there are any issues.
They already fucked up BC once, if they did again, they would for sure have some lawsuit. Simply because of unfulfilled promises. The reason M$ doesn't have that list, is they handled BC they way they said they would from the beginning.
Post by: Martinchris23 on March 20, 2007, 05:16:00 PM
QUOTE(Thraxen @ Mar 20 2007, 09:09 PM)
We've been debating much of this already.
Lol, and how!
I believe this new part of the eu.playstation.com website is the first time they've publicly announced what the PS3 can('t) do. I'm surprised as you that the PlayStation emulation is as bad as it is. I would have thought a PlayStation emulator would have been a doddle to code, especially since we've had some pretty good ones on the PC for ages now - Bleem and PSexe spring to mind.
My only point about the hardware BC of the N.American PS3 is that Sony should not have stated it was going to be 100% compatible. 100% is absolute - there is no variance. This isn't the case - all it takes is one unplayable title and they fail. I don't care how you cut it, but 100% is 100% - end of story.
Going forward, I hope they'll be less spin and more truth from Sony from now on - the release of these pie charts is a big step in the right direction. I fear it's come too late for people with pre-orders to change their mind (although was that their intention from the get-go???).
Martin
Post by: throwingks on March 20, 2007, 05:34:00 PM
QUOTE(Thraxen @ Mar 20 2007, 05:09 PM)
I meant for breaking down the list better than MS. And don't give me that BS excuse for MS... because, NO, they have not handled BC as they said. I proved that point above (Link). Also, there are plenty of working games on their list that have bugs, but they don't tell you which ones. So why shouldn't Sony at least get credit for having a better list?? They could have simply slapped a list up like MS and pretended that they all work perfectly... which is exactly what MS did. Anyway, perhaps you would like to read the debate above and get caught up? We've been debating much of this already.
I have read every one of yours posts, pretty much the day you posted it. I have agreed with you even helped your arguments in the past, in other threads.M$ has always maintained they had a less than stellar BC catalog. Evidence in your link above.
Sony claimed superiority through hardware emulation. Using it as another reason to spend $200 more on what they say is a superior machine. They even did this with the PS2.
They better admit every flaw in their BC because right now, it is under a microscope. M$ isn't because they have maintained from the beginning, BC is an afterthought.
All I am saying is, Sony was forced into making their list comprehendable, because they would receive a huge backlash from everywhere if they didn't describe, in full, the truth about their new BC.
My statements in the previous post were because of this statement:
QUOTE
Anyway, some credit must be given to Sony for classifying the games. At least you know whether to expect perfect emulation or for there to be some issues. The 360 BC lists just says which game work, but doesn't tell you if there are any issues.
I don't believe Sony deserves any credit. They are looking out for themselves. The detailed list is needed for PR because they screwed up bad already.You compared to the 360 and I was saying the comparison is not fair. M$ does not deserve to be under a microscope. I cannot deny numbers, 1200 is good for software emulation. But, that is NOT what they advertised. And, they should do better than that since they designed and own the rights to the hardware. I personally think the list will grow. But, that is not the issue.
Comparing Sony BC to M$ BC is, and it shouldn't be done. Sony set themselves up for this. M$ isn't sin-less, but they are not under fire right now, or they would be doing things like this too.
Can you imagine what would be said if Sony didn't make a detailed list? It would spell disaster for their PR. With a quick look at the list it seems to be about 50% < than stellar titles. about 25% 1 dots. It would be a nightmare if people weren't ready for those numbers.
Post by: Martinchris23 on March 21, 2007, 02:17:00 AM
QUOTE(Thraxen @ Mar 20 2007, 02:50 AM)
Actually, it was 1000 when they first announced it. Then it was raised to 1200 a couple of weeks later. And Phil has stated since the announcement of 1200 that they hadn't released the list because they were still adding to it. So, yes, it is speculation... but it's based on how quickly they raised it from 1000 to 1200. I just said I wouldn't be surprised it the final number was higher.
And I said "That's purely speculation and based on Sony's track record, I'm frankly surprised you think they'll over deliver".
Guess I was right.
You sure have a lot of misplaced faith at times!!
Post by: Martinchris23 on March 21, 2007, 06:20:00 AM
QUOTE
On the other side, MS is given a free pass for their BC efforts. People act like MS blessed us by doing anything at all. While they never boasted about 100%, the DID claim they would continually work on BC and add as many titles as possible (as quote above). But now they said they are seriously considering stopping work on BC.
I think after 16 months, it's not a tragedy to think about stopping now. As it's been spelled out numerous times before (which you seem to ignore time after time) is that the GPU differences were the biggest obstacle. It's not like the 360 had the original Xbox hardware inside. By the sounds of it, software BC support for PAL PS3 systems will more or less cease before the console even launches!!
QUOTE
Both companies have backed off their original claims, yet Sony takes the most criticism by far.
And will continue do to so as long as they under-deliver and over-promise. I'm afraid it's a fact of life and frankly I'm having trouble understanding why you cannot grasp this.
QUOTE
We even have people like Martin here in this thread that actually called the N. American systems a BC 'failure' because they weren't technically 100%. Wow... a few titles out of thousands don't work... that's some failure
Ok, let me explain standard business practice: MS set a target they would achieve 10 million consoles by December 2007. They reached it so therefore their sales strategy was a SUCCESS. Had they not reached it, they would have FAILED. Hence their sales strategy would have been a failure.
Sony stated on many an occasion that the PS3 would be 100% backward compatible with Playstation and PS2 titles. Neither console (NTSC or PAL) have achieved this, therefore they failed to reach their target. Had Sony set a target for 90% BC, they would have succeeded and indeed over-delivered. People would be praising them for achieving their target.
I thought this would be an easy concept to grasp. It's certainly why there are so many disgruntled PS3 owners.
Post by: throwingks on March 21, 2007, 08:18:00 AM
QUOTE
In response to these issues, Sony's PR department pointed out that it, from the start, expected backwards compatibility to be less than 100%. It was also good enough to point out that some people can put up with playing games that lack sound.
Post by: Thraxen on March 21, 2007, 10:05:00 AM
QUOTE(Martinchris23 @ Mar 21 2007, 07:27 AM)
I think after 16 months, it's not a tragedy to think about stopping now. As it's been spelled out numerous times before (which you seem to ignore time after time) is that the GPU differences were the biggest obstacle. It's not like the 360 had the original Xbox hardware inside. By the sounds of it, software BC support for PAL PS3 systems will more or less cease before the console even launches!!
See.... more excuses. MS claimed they were going to continually work on BC (as quoted), then later says, "Just kidding, we quit". But you give them a free pass because it's 'harder'. Boo f'ing hoo. They over promised and under delivered just as Sony did when they said 100% BC. What don't you grasp about that?
QUOTE
And will continue do to so as long as they under-deliver and over-promise. I'm afraid it's a fact of life and frankly I'm having trouble understanding why you cannot grasp this.
See above. This comment is non-sense in light of the fact both companies did the same thing.
QUOTE
Sony stated on many an occasion that the PS3 would be 100% backward compatible with Playstation and PS2 titles. Neither console (NTSC or PAL) have achieved this, therefore they failed to reach their target. Had Sony set a target for 90% BC, they would have succeeded and indeed over-delivered. People would be praising them for achieving their target.
Oh give up this lame ass point. Damn. So they delivered 99% BC to N. America. Fine. I guess they failed. This point isn't even worth arguing anymore since it's so utterly and completely stupid. You seem to be happier with someone aiming low and hitting their target than with someone aiming high and barley missing. Good luck with that. No point in setting yourself up for disappointment when you can simply not try. A winning strategy every time, right?
QUOTE(Martinchris23 @ Mar 21 2007, 03:24 AM)
And I said "That's purely speculation and based on Sony's track record, I'm frankly surprised you think they'll over deliver".
Guess I was right.
You sure have a lot of misplaced faith at times!!
For the record, that statement was in reference to what I thought the number would be for the launch of the software BC. As such, they did deliver over 1200. But I admit that if they are now saying they don't plan to work on it much more that really is disappointing. So now both companies are calling it quits on BC. How disappointing.
Here's my bottom line opinion on how BC stands now:
360 BC: A failure. They promised continual work on BC and later said they are going to quit. Only achieving about 35% on a rather small number of games... and many of those non-perfect.
PS3 NTSC systems: A success. They claimed 100% and came very close. Easily in the very high 90's on thousands of games and two generations of hardware. Most non-fanboys would consider this a success. Your constant quibbling over a handful of games is nonsense and is regarded as such.
PS3 PAL systems: A failure. They are off to great start, but this news that they aren't going to work much more on their software emulator is highly disappointing. So I will admit this effort must now be considered a failure.
and just for the hell of it...
Wii BC: A success. Nintendo claimed it would play GC games and I haven't heard of too many complaints.
Post by: Martinchris23 on March 21, 2007, 05:06:00 PM
QUOTE
You seem to be happier with someone aiming low and hitting their target than with someone aiming high and barley missing. Good luck with that. No point in setting yourself up for disappointment when you can simply not try. A winning strategy every time, right?
Don't start posting stupid comments about setting targets for achievements etc. It's a waste of time.
Internally, all business set targets - most aren't achievable but it drives the company harder and will always do better than if nothing was set or measured before. This has NOTHING to do with what the public are informed for very good reasons.
Externally, customers are told realistic targets so they have expectations regarding the product or service they intend to purchase. There was no way that Sony were ever going to get 100% backward compatibility and they knew this. It didn't stop them jumping on the hype-wagon.
So in reply to your comment, you should NEVER over-promise customers, especially when you have no intention of fulfilling it.
You don't sell a HDD boasting a terabyte in unformatted partition capacity and then supply a HDD with only 900GB. "Oh, sorry about that - we did try to get a full terabyte but we couldn't manage it - I'm sure you won't mind losing the 100GB since you're still getting 900?". It's called false advertising, to which Sony are blatently guilty of.
Since you still persist to put MS and Sony in the same boat, can you please provide a link to where MS said they would provide near perfect compatiblity? I'm sure you have something, otherwise you wouldn't be so adamant.
QUOTE(Thraxen @ Mar 21 2007, 04:12 PM)
Here's my bottom line opinion on how BC stands now:
360 BC: A failure. They promised continual work on BC and later said they are going to quit. Only achieving about 35% on a rather small number of games... and many of those non-perfect.
That's an entirely different argument to which I agree with. They should have just stated a period of time.
QUOTE(Thraxen @ Mar 21 2007, 04:12 PM)
PS3 NTSC systems: A success. They claimed 100% and came very close. Easily in the very high 90's on thousands of games and two generations of hardware. Most non-fanboys would consider this a success. Your constant quibbling over a handful of games is nonsense and is regarded as such.
You either didn't read throwingks post earlier, or chose to ignore it. If you call nearly 200 titles a "handful", you are living on a different planet. So suppose you owned 20% of those titles - this "handful" may be 80% of your games library. You're going through your library of PS2 and Playstation games on your new $600 PS3.
...loading problems..
ok, next title.
...sound problems..
ok, onto the next one.
..game hangs..
Considering this console was described by Sony as 'near perfect' compatibility, where does this leave the consumer? It's only nonsense if you're lucky enough not to own any of the problematic titles - that's an extremely narrow-minded view and pretty selfish TBH. So it doesn't affect you - hurrah for you then, eh?
QUOTE(Thraxen @ Mar 21 2007, 04:12 PM)
PS3 PAL systems: A failure. They are off to great start, but this news that they aren't going to work much more on their software emulator is highly disappointing. So I will admit this effort must now be considered a failure.
Agree with exception to the first statement. They were never off to a great start. The software BC was always a cheap trade-off with Sony and should have been seen as such. If they couldn't manage 100% compatibility with the actual PS2 hardware in the PS3, it was blatently obvious it was never going to happen with the software implementation.
Post by: dokworm on March 22, 2007, 07:41:00 AM
And THEN they quietly drop the chip out of the PAL models and leave us with about half of the total library of PS2 and PS1 titles not working at all, and others working with annoying problems.
Microsoft said from the outset they would do as many as possible, 18months later they are scaling down work on it, which makes sense and is longer than most people expected.
Buying a 360 you went in with your eyes open, they never pretended that BC was going to be comprehensive or perfect so you knew not to hock your xbox1 to buy a 360.
For those of us that sold our PS2 hardware based on the promise from Sony, only to have it pulled at the last minute, well that is nothing but a big fat lie.
They must have had this planned for some time too the bastages, you can't just rip out a chip or two and get SW emulation up and running in a few weeks - this must have been on the table for a l-o-n-g time, and is just dirty (not to mention all the ports, dual outputs etc. that disappeared before the US release).
Why Sony thinks it is OK to charge us more and dump an inferior product on us is beyond me. That sort of disregard for customers is just disgusting.
Post by: dokworm on March 22, 2007, 08:27:00 AM
QUOTE
The PS3 has full backward compatibility, all the way back to PSX. The Xbox 360 will only be compatible with certain key games--one doesn't have to think very hard to come up with the names of those games--but it won't play even close to everything. Microsoft will be updating this game list as time goes on, presumably through Xbox Live, but that just sounds like a hassle. And what if you don't use Live? The PS3, meanwhile, supports every single PSOne and PS2 game (with a few inevitable oddball exceptions, of course). That's a massive advantage for Sony, and it could play a major factor into many gamers' buying decisions. Kudos to Microsoft for trying to hustle in backward compatibilty at the last second, but it only gets partial credit for doing a partial job. Sony clearly thought ahead, and that's a huge advantage.
Hmmm....
QUOTE
The PS3's native 1080p support, along with dual display support. This may seem like a little thing, but it could prove to be a crucial advantage for the PS3.
Hmm, where is my dual display support?
QUOTE
The PS3's CPU is nearly twice as fastas the Xbox 360's. The Xbox 360 has three 3.2 Ghz PowerPC cores; the PS3's weirdo Cell processor is also rated as 3.2 Ghz. But in terms of true performance--GigaFLOPs, a term which relates to the sheer volume of complex floating point operations a processor can handle--there's no contest. The Xbox CPUs hover at around 115 Gigaflops; the PS3's CPU weighs in with 218 Gigaflops. Both CPUs are enormously powerful, but the PS3's is nearly twice as fast as the 360's. That will allow for more advanced physics models, more impressive special effects, bigger, more detailed environments, and so on. There are three main technological battlefronts: RAM (Xbox 360 and PS3 tie), graphics processing power (likely another tie, or a narrow win for one console), and CPU power. The PS3 handily wins the crucial CPU fight without even breaking a sweat. That's huge.
Yeah right, so why do the PS3 games look and perform the same (or even worse in some cases) than the 360 games?
QUOTE
If you look on the back of the PS3 you will see some cool new features. There are two HDMI outputs, which will allow you to hook up your Playstation 3 to two HDTV monitors. HDMI is a full digital video and audio connection method which allows you to get a cleaner signal. There are also two more USB ports in the rear in case the four in the front aren't enough. There are also three network ports, a power cutoff switch, and the AC-in which is different from the one on the PS1 and PS2. It will also allow you to hook the PlayStation 3 to two HDTV monitors. You will be able to use your surround sound and listen to your video games with the high-end audio capabilities
When I look at the back of the PAL PS3 I seem to be missing some of these cool new features.
Sure stuff changes but Sony constantly does this, lies about the specs and the tries to quietly pretend it never happened while delivering a good - but nowhere near promised - product.