*** SEPT '10 ***

Sony Japan (http://www.ripten.com/2010/09/14/sony-files-patent-for-a-ps2-adaptor-mauler/) files for a "backwards compatibility device" patent:

Your PS3 backward compatibility dreams may be finally be answered. Sony Japan has filed a patent for a “new generation to previous generation” external adapter.


*** SEPT '09 ***
SEGA leaks Sony's plans for PS2 and Dreamcast emulation on PS3 (http://www.gamezine.co.uk/news/formats/playstation3/sega-leaks-sony-s-plans-ps2-emulation-on-ps3-$1328865.htm)

SEGA has let a pretty fat cat out of the bag by releasing confidential notes from a meeting with Sony Computer Entertainment America.

Sony wants to release all PS2 games on the PlayStation 3, according to a meeting between SEGA America and SCEA.

The meeting was held on August 5th, with comments regarding SEGA's PS3 and PSP releases, as well as Sony's plans for the console in the near future.

There's mention of a big announcement at the back half of this year, which we now know is the PS3 Slim and price cut. However, there's finally confirmation that Sony is interested in emulating all PlayStation 2 games.

The notes reveal that "SCEA wants to sell all PS2 titles on PSN." Whether this will come as a case by case basis, like the God of War remastering, or that Sony is creating a universal emulator for all PS3 models is unknown. We'd personally expect the former, since Grand Theft Auto Vice City is a specific title mentioned.

Since this meeting was held in August of this year, the PS3 Slim and its hardware would have been in the company's mind - so there must be plans to overcome the difficulties of the missing PS2 GPU.

There's also mention of how these games would be marketed, with PS3 controllers shown in PS2 TV ads.

The link to this confidential information, which was on SEGA's personal FTP, is now broken.
(thx Mikazaru)


*** JUNE '09 ***
A recent patent (http://www.siliconera.com/2009/06/29/sony-patents-emotion-engine-emulation-technology-for-cell-processors/)by Sony will allow the Cell processor to emulate the Emotion Engine (PS2 hardware chip).

PlayStation 3s without PS2 backwards compatibility are missing the Emotion Engine, a chip Sony designed as the PS2’s CPU. What if the PS3’s cell processor could emulate the Emotion Engine? Theoretically, all PlayStation 3s would be able to play PS2 games even if a console didn’t have the proper hardware. According to a recent patent filed by Sony Computer Entertainment in the US, Sony has the code and technology ready to do this.

I remember reading somewhere that full software emulation was always planned & that including the ps2's Emotion Engine/Graphics Synthesizer was a stopgap measure. Kind of surprised it's taking so long though.

Full software emulation for PS2 has been the plan since day one for the Playstation 3. Unfortunately it was not finished and they temporarily stuck additional kit into the box.

I've been saying it was coming for a long time now and I do hope they prove me right on his. The PS2 has an amazing catalog of titles. As soon as all PS3's can play them we'll get some on PSN.

Don't hold your breath on the PS2 BC. Why would Sony do it while they still make profits from PS2 console sales?

Just because when PS2 BC is on PS3, it doesn't mean it will be fully compatible.

How many PS3 owners would be winning to pay for the PS2 BC if Sony has to ensure it covers the cost?

Don't hold your breath on the PS2 BC. Why would Sony do it while they still make profits from PS2 console sales?

Just because when PS2 BC is on PS3, it doesn't mean it will be fully compatible.

How many PS3 owners would be winning to pay for the PS2 BC if Sony has to ensure it covers the cost?
Because all ps3 sales can help boost blu-ray sales which is a longer term win. PS2 sales are just a short term win.

I've no doubt this will happen. As soon as the PS3 is capable of emulating the emotion engine and playing PS2 games Sony can start selling classic PS2 titles on the PSN. That's a veritable gold mine with the PS2's vast catalog of hit titles.

i always thought i would want bc. but after playing ps3 titles in hd, i don't think i can go back. also, i know all ps2s had bc. but i don't remember ever popping in a ps1 title.

Yeah I thought I would still play my PS2 & PS1 games on my PS3 but truth be told they look absolutely horrible on any hd-tv. Once you go hi-def, it is hard going back to upconverted/standard def.

I've no doubt this will happen. As soon as the PS3 is capable of emulating the emotion engine and playing PS2 games Sony can start selling classic PS2 titles on the PSN. That's a veritable gold mine with the PS2's vast catalog of hit titles.


This is the reason. Sony and the devs don't get a cut off any of the used PS2 games being traded around the world right now, if those games were on psn competing in price with the used games, Sony makes money the devs make money, and there in now not a limited supply of the game.

Yeah I thought I would still play my PS2 & PS1 games on my PS3 but truth be told they look absolutely horrible on any hd-tv. Once you go hi-def, it is hard going back to upconverted/standard def.

I was the same way (I just about puked when I put Shadow of the Colossus back in), but there are still some PS2, and even PS1, titles I go back to. I've been cruising through Final Fantasy XII again, and it's heavenly.

This patent doesn't hint at anything of the sort, sorry. As many have pointed out, the PS3 has done Emotion Engine emulation for years. It was how the original 80gb and European 60gb systems ran PS2 games.

The real trick to PS2 emulation on PS3 is the GS - the GPu. The problem is that the GPU on PS2 has access to very high bandwidth memory (EDRAM) that the RSX does not. Which means you can't just offload graphics processing to the RSX - it doesn't have the bandwidth to handle PS2 games. I know this sounds weird but it is just how it is.

Sony might get around this at some point - its just who knows.

How much bandwidth does the GS EDRAM have?

The RSX has 25GB/s at its disposal.

Seriously, I think they will do EE emulation, but not GS emulation (after all, EE emulation was done in the 80GB MS/MGS4 PS3 less than a year after launch). I think the only way to play PS2 games will be recompiled games from PSN. If the PS3 got the ability to play PS2 discs, that would be a revenue source missed due to the very high availability of used PS2 games.

According to wiki, gs has 48 gb/sec.

This patent doesn't hint at anything of the sort, sorry. As many have pointed out, the PS3 has done Emotion Engine emulation for years. It was how the original 80gb and European 60gb systems ran PS2 games.

The real trick to PS2 emulation on PS3 is the GS - the GPu. The problem is that the GPU on PS2 has access to very high bandwidth memory (EDRAM) that the RSX does not. Which means you can't just offload graphics processing to the RSX - it doesn't have the bandwidth to handle PS2 games. I know this sounds weird but it is just how it is.

Sony might get around this at some point - its just who knows.

Something gives me the feeling that Sony could probably work around that. There's no reason the Cell, or the Cell/RSX in unison, can't be used to emulate PS2 games. We're not talking about emulating a terribly advanced piece of hardware here. We're talking about hardware that was bleeding edge in 2000 and then became the weakest hardware of the last generation in 2001. My PCs architecture is nothing like the PS2's but it doesn't have difficulty emulating PS2 games, hell it'll even render them in 720p should I please. The PS3's definitely a more powerful platform than my PC, no reason it can't do the same.

What are your PC's specs?

Anyway, the point here is that its not just about "power" - that word is shorthand that omits a LOT of details. And one of those details is what we are discussing here. What helped the PS2 pump out fantastic looking games 4 or 5 years on (God of War IMO looked better than virtually any Xbox 1 game - certainly better than Halo 2) was the huge amount of bandwidth (and programming flexibility) the GS had.

I'm not saying Sony won't or hasn't been able to work around that quirk , but its definitely a big problem and likely why the PS2 hasn't been emulated already.

Full software emulation for PS2 has been the plan since day one for the Playstation 3. Unfortunately it was not finished and they temporarily stuck additional kit into the box.

Got any proof to back up that claim?

It seems very unlikely that Sony would scrap software emulation and redesign their hardware for a temporary solution. The costs of such an endeavor are huge.

Ken Kuturagi said as much in early interviews. They definitely did plan on doing that. Of course, that was before the hardware was finalized, and I do believe early on some sort of Cell-based GPU was being planned.

sure glad I got a launch model, its just wrong that they took that functionality out to save money on production costs, BC was a major selling point and it would help people justify the price, BTW I enjoy BC and the upscalling options of the PS3, wish everyone could experience it

sure glad I got a launch model, its just wrong that they took that functionality out to save money on production costs, BC was a major selling point and it would help people justify the price, BTW I enjoy BC and the upscalling options of the PS3, wish everyone could experience it

I don't agree. PS3 sales went up a lot after they took out BC and dropped the cost from $500 to $400. Now sales have stagnated again, but adding back in BC won't change that. BC is a nice feature but people don't buy new hardware to play old games.

Ken Kuturagi said as much in early interviews. They definitely did plan on doing that. Of course, that was before the hardware was finalized, and I do believe early on some sort of Cell-based GPU was being planned.

Problem with that is if Sony had planned on software emulation from day one they would have used hardware capable of doing so. To do otherwise would have been foolish.

I don't agree. PS3 sales went up a lot after they took out BC and dropped the cost from $500 to $400. Now sales have stagnated again, but adding back in BC won't change that. BC is a nice feature but people don't buy new hardware to play old games.

I definitely agree with that. I see BC as a marketing tool only, and not something that is used often in the gaming community. I know I bought my 60 gig solely because they were getting rid of BC, and I have only played a single PS2 game on it (and only a couple of times).

Guess I'm one of the "freaks" who plays almost as many PS1/2 games on my PS3 as I do PS3 games.

I wouldn't read too much into this patent. As others have said, it isn't the EE that's the problem. But PS2 games will make it to new PS3 skus somehow eventually.

There are some big problems, though.

First, the PS3's inherent tech limitations. As others have mentioned, this is the presumed reason why we haven't seen software BC yet.

Second, there's no guarantee that it would make Sony money. If they're trying to win over former PS2 gamers to the PS3, then those gamers already own a PS2. And if those same gamers buy a PS3 down the road, they won't buy it based on its ability to play PS2 games. Or better said, the number of gamers who might buy it for that reason are not a big enough population to justify the added cost of development.

Third, if they decide to start selling PS2 games on PSN, there's still no guarantee they'll make any money. PS1 games have been very slow in coming to the US. The big reason they sell so many in Japan is because people there go crazy for portables (the PSP). Here, those old games are a harder sell. The big-time classics will probably sell well (FF7, MGS, RE, and so on). But the vast majority of the PS2 library just isn't worth it to Sony, unless they can figure out a way to cut good licensing deals and cheaply emulate and support the ports.

Maybe it will be part of their PSN overhaul in the spring? :rolleyes:

Got any proof to back up that claim?

It seems very unlikely that Sony would scrap software emulation and redesign their hardware for a temporary solution. The costs of such an endeavor are huge.

Here you go:
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20061108/123308

Going back even further:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/09/02/ps3_will_play_ps2_psone

I definitely agree with that. I see BC as a marketing tool only, and not something that is used often in the gaming community. I know I bought my 60 gig solely because they were getting rid of BC, and I have only played a single PS2 game on it (and only a couple of times).

Your thoughts are not that of the masses though. FFVII sold over 100,000 copies on the PSN within 2 weeks of being released. Without BC this would not be possible without a complete remake. Now think of the anticipation that God of War 3 is generating and how much Sony could cash in on the hordes if they could sell you PS2 games to play on ALL PS3s? I'd buy GoW & GoW2, no questions asked, but it wont be done until Sony gets B/C in ALL PS3s.

FF7 has some certain circumstances that led it to sell that much.
One, its been rumored for years.
Two, a copy of the game on eBay is like $50+.
Three, its one of the biggest selling games of all time
Four, it was really cheap. Like $10 or something.
Five, it was announced when every Sony fan was watching the E3 press conference.

I highly doubt any BC release will get anywhere close to that. Even GOW/GOW2, not with those games already in many people's homes.

Third, if they decide to start selling PS2 games on PSN, there's still no guarantee they'll make any money.

We all have seen how half-assed Sony has been with PS1 so I have little confidence in PS2 on PSN. But I think Sony is working on this stuff because they believe in the idea of one system playing every PlayStation game. I really don't think the move to remove BC was made out of anything but necessity. Plus, they're gonna want PS2 games running on PS4.

I'm like some of you, I don't really miss the BC very often. However, I do like to occasionally revisit some of my favorites. I played thru MGS on my PS2 and that's about the only time I can remember playing a PSone game on my PS2. As a huge Metal Gear fan, those are the only PS2 games I didn't sell from my catalog, so getting BC on my PS3 would be nice so I could play them again some time. Plus my wife has a game or 2 and a Friends trivia game that are all PS2 and she misses playing them.

PS4??? According to Sony's 10-year product life cycle plan...we still have at least 5 more years before we get to that.

I don't understand something here. Well, two things actually. First, why bother to patent something on a system as unique as the PS3? How many other people will ever try and develop backwards compatibility for a PS3 clone? And secondly, I thought that patents covered physical objects? If this is a software solution, wouldn't it be a copyright? (Or is Sony actually changing the architecture of the board or the cell processor itself?) If it's a structural change they're patenting, then it certainly couldn't be applied retroactively to non BC PS3s by a firmware update. Something doesn't add up.

You can patent software techniques/algorithms.

Do you all think that this may come with Firmware 3.0?

http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2009/06/30/ps2-emulation-already-up-and-running/

PS2 Emulation Already Up And Running?

Is your PlayStation 3 running firmware greater than 2.10? Chances are it is, but did you know that apparently it’s then already capable of running PS2 games then? “PS3 is capable of running PS2 games with 100 % software emulation but the performance and compatibility is really poor,” says lherre on GAF. “The emulator is present in every PS3 in the market (since 2.10 if I remember correctly) but is “deactivated”. “ He then goes on to suggest that the current PS3 firmware has some “interesting” files on it, which are presumably linked to his statement above.

This follows our news this morning that Sony have applied for a patent for a purely software-based solution to the PS2 emulation issue and ties in nicely with the job advert from last January for a software engineer at Sony Japan to work on exactly this. TheSixthAxis has also learnt this lunchtime that the bottleneck isn’t the Emotion Engine, which is already up and running, it’s the Graphics Synthesizer that’s causing the headaches. If Sony can crack this, then surely that would open the gates to downloadable PS2 games over the Store, as we suggested this morning.

Your thoughts are not that of the masses though. FFVII sold over 100,000 copies on the PSN within 2 weeks of being released. Without BC this would not be possible without a complete remake. Now think of the anticipation that God of War 3 is generating and how much Sony could cash in on the hordes if they could sell you PS2 games to play on ALL PS3s? I'd buy GoW & GoW2, no questions asked, but it wont be done until Sony gets B/C in ALL PS3s.

You're talking about a separate issue - downloadable "retro" gaming vs. disc compatibility. That makes a whole lot more sense to me, that PS2 games using software emulation would only work through PSN downloads. That is something that would give Sony financial incentive to keep developing the technology.

You're talking about a separate issue - downloadable "retro" gaming vs. disc compatibility. That makes a whole lot more sense to me, that PS2 games using software emulation would only work through PSN downloads. That is something that would give Sony financial incentive to keep developing the technology.

Essentially they are one in the same though. Without BC funtioning Sony cannot sell you PSN downloads.

That is interesting if true, but of course the difference between getting it running slowly and getting it customer ready is huge. It's worth noting 2.1 came out a year and a half ago, so if it's still not ready then it seems its a pretty tough nut to crack.

If Sony can work out a way to do BC on the current PS3 hardware they will without a doubt. All that PS2 software is just money on the ground when the PS2 goes out of production in the next year or so. Add the fact that people like buying games again for the nostalgia/convenience and it's a no brainer.

PS2 isn't going out of production any time soon. The original PlayStation didn't even go out of production until early 2006 and that was after PS2 was the top selling console for six years running. I wouldn't be surprised if Sony is still making the damn things in 2012.

Essentially they are one in the same though. Without BC funtioning Sony cannot sell you PSN downloads.

if they found a way to recompile them they could.

if they found a way to recompile them they could.

Recompiling every PS2 game they would want to sell on the PSN would probably take a hell of a lot more time than just finding a workaround to emulating the PS2's GPU.

Hearing all this BC talk just make me happy that my 60gb has full hardware BC. I've been champing through Persona 4 for about a month now and I'm much preferable to letting my PS3 upscale instead of the TV.

Recompiling every PS2 game they would want to sell on the PSN would probably take a hell of a lot more time than just finding a workaround to emulating the PS2's GPU.

Hearing all this BC talk just make me happy that my 60gb has full hardware BC. I've been champing through Persona 4 for about a month now and I'm much preferable to letting my PS3 upscale instead of the TV.

They wouldn't have to recompile every PS2 game - only the first party titles they would want to sell (probably not all that many). Other titles would be up to their publishers.

They wouldn't have to recompile every PS2 game - only the first party titles they would want to sell (probably not all that many). Other titles would be up to their publishers.

O, only the first party titles? Well that's different. I guess it can't possibly be that hard to recompile 4 Ratchet and Clank games, 3 Jak games, 2 God of War's, 3 Sly Coopers, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Killzone, Gran Turismo 3 and 4, and the multitude of other games I've forgotten to mention. And of course they can just leave recompiling the other games to the publishers, how silly of me. I'm sure Square-Enix would love to get a team together to recompile all their PS2 titles so they'll work on the PS3, and if they don't what does Sony care? It's not like Sony wouldn't have pulled in a bunch of royalty money for nothing off those titles.

Ok, serious time now. Sony's got a veritable ****-ton of first party PS2 games that I'm sure they'd love to throw up on the PSN and recompiling all of them would take a considerable amount of time and effort comparable to or greater than just making emulation work right. On top of that no third party publisher is going to make an effort to recompile their old games to sell on the PSN and not being able to throw the numerable awesome third party PS2 titles up for sale would be a blow for Sony. However if Sony just figures out how to emulate the PS2's GPU then all they need to do is dump PS2 .iso's onto the PlayStation Store, attach a price tag, and watch the free money pour in.

Ok, serious time now. Sony's got a veritable ****-ton of first party PS2 games that I'm sure they'd love to throw up on the PSN and recompiling all of them would take a considerable amount of time and effort comparable to or greater than just making emulation work right. On top of that no third party publisher is going to make an effort to recompile their old games to sell on the PSN and not being able to throw the numerable awesome third party PS2 titles up for sale would be a blow for Sony. However if Sony just figures out how to emulate the PS2's GPU then all they need to do is dump PS2 .iso's onto the PlayStation Store, attach a price tag, and watch the free money pour in....which is exactly why it hasn't happened (among many other reasons). :rolleyes:

If it was a sure way for Sony and other publishers to make money, you can bet that it would already exist. But it isn't, so it doesn't.

...which is exactly why it hasn't happened (among many other reasons). :rolleyes:

If it was a sure way for Sony and other publishers to make money, you can bet that it would already exist. But it isn't, so it doesn't.

I don't think it's a matter of it not being a sure fire way to make money, I think it's a matter of Sony having more important things to do first.

You can't simply recompile games that were programmed to the metal. Half the game code would probably have to be rewritten just port them.

I don't think it's a matter of it not being a sure fire way to make money, I think it's a matter of Sony having more important things to do first.Yeah, like make money. :D

Full software emulation for PS2 has been the plan since day one for the Playstation 3. Unfortunately it was not finished and they temporarily stuck additional kit into the box.

Do you work for Sony's videogame division and know something that was never released to the public?

Otherwise, what your saying is incorrect because they've never publically stated such a thing. In fact it had the appearance that full hardware based compatibility was the plan before backpedaling quickly to cut losses and hastily modifying plans for the PS3 launch in other regions like Europe to use partial software emulation before cutting it completely.

A lot of people suspected this would happen eventually when they went to a partial emulation solution and then removed it completely, but it was never known to the public that it was planned.

Do you work for Sony's videogame division and know something that was never released to the public?

Otherwise, what your saying is incorrect because they've never publically stated such a thing. In fact it had the appearance that full hardware based compatibility was the plan before backpedaling quickly to cut losses and hastily modifying plans for the PS3 launch in other regions like Europe to use partial software emulation before cutting it completely.

A lot of people suspected this would happen eventually when they went to a partial emulation solution and then removed it completely, but it was never known to the public that it was planned.

I knew this and I'm public:cool:

They've never came out and said that full software based emulation of the PS2 was a goal or in the works.

Its just speculation that people have now assumed as fact since it makes so much sense as being something they'd want to accomplish. However, given that its been so long and nothing has been released, I doubt its in the works. However, I hope it happens. :)

A patent for EE emulation when its already been emulated in Playstation 3's around the world doesn't change anything.

I was thinking picking up a 60 GB used for my bro for ps2 compatibility! But now might as well wait for skinny, sexy, cheaper! LOL and universal!!

I was thinking picking up a 60 GB used for my bro for ps2 compatibility! But now might as well wait for skinny, sexy, cheaper! LOL and universal!!Huh?

This thread's all about how Sony isn't bringing software BC. There's no sign it's coming or even in the works. I wouldn't hold your breath.

Do you work for Sony's videogame division and know something that was never released to the public?

Otherwise, what your saying is incorrect because they've never publically stated such a thing. In fact it had the appearance that full hardware based compatibility was the plan before backpedaling quickly to cut losses and hastily modifying plans for the PS3 launch in other regions like Europe to use partial software emulation before cutting it completely.

A lot of people suspected this would happen eventually when they went to a partial emulation solution and then removed it completely, but it was never known to the public that it was planned.

GI reported this to be the case based on one of their inside sources. http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/uk-teams-working-on-playstation-hub-ps3-back-compatibility

IGN then reported when the "plan" changed.

June 5, 2006 - A surprising report has emerged from Japan's Ultra One monthly technology magazine. The magazine's July issue reports that Sony will be achieving backwards compatibility on the PlayStation 3 not through software emulation, as previously announced, but through physical hardware.

The magazine states that the PS3 hardware, in its current form, includes the core PlayStation 2 chipset. This presumably means that initial PS3 units will include the single Emotion Engine (the PS2 CPU) and Graphic Synthesizer (the PS2 graphics chip) combo chip that powers the slim model PS2.
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/711/711242p1.html

It's commonly believed (even without a press release) these posts are true.

Either Sony had a good plan that got delayed due to slow emulation development and had to add hardware to meet existing promises or they are so stupid they threw in hardware and had to yank it out unaware that adding to the PS3 would make it more costly. Choose what you want to believe.

Well I'll shut up now, I wasn't aware of this prerelease information, or I've forgotten about it.

All I know is since release as they gradually made PS3's less compatible, and then removed PS2 compatibility completely, that they never stated that a software based solution was their goal or even in development.

All I know is since release as they gradually made PS3's less compatible, and then removed PS2 compatibility completely, that they never stated that a software based solution was their goal or even in development.True. In fact, they've even stated the exact opposite. This was from an interview at E3 2008 in the wake of dropping BC from PS3s: "[Sony did] not take a greater hit on production cost without losing PlayStation’s heritage [and backwards compatibility] wasn’t all that expensive.”

“But we’re selling PS2 software to PS2 customers, and selling PS3 software to PS3 consumers."

“I would like to have had it in there, but Sony’s collective strategy determined we could afford to lose it. We’ve now gone down that road: we’re not going back.”http://www.vg247.com/2008/07/16/tretton-would-have-liked-backwards-compatibility-in-ps3/

If Sony sticks to their 10 year plan, the PS2 only has one more year of production. If it's possible, BC through full software emulation will surely be returning to the PS3. A $300 slim with BC would sell extremely well. Whether Sony is able to go that low in price & still make a profit is questionable though.

It's not just a matter of recompiling PS2 games to run on the PS3. There's the matter of the completely different VPU/GPU architecture to contend with that would require many programmer-hours of porting effort for each and every game. The graphics code would have to be rewritten.

It's not just a matter of recompiling PS2 games to run on the PS3. There's the matter of the completely different VPU/GPU architecture to contend with that would require many programmer-hours of porting effort for each and every game. The graphics code would have to be rewritten.

Umm, isn't the whole point of emulation to model completely different hardware than the one being run? SNES games aren't ported to run on a PC when run through a Windows emulator. That's what the emulation code is, its modeling in software the hardware processes of the system being emulated.

Umm, isn't the whole point of emulation to model completely different hardware than the one being run? SNES games aren't ported to run on a PC when run through a Windows emulator. That's what the emulation code is, its modeling in software the hardware processes of the system being emulated.Right, but the question is whether it's easier/cheaper to figure out a solution to the GS emulation problem, or to re-engineer specific high-profile PS2 games and sell those individually through PSN. But I haven't the foggiest clue how Sony sees the issue, or if they even care at this point.

Add me to the wanting PS2 BC. I thought it was really stupid for Sony to go on their promises and remove it altogether.. I still occasionally pop in PS2 games into my old fat PS2 but it's a pain in the ass because it comes out the closet and gets all hooked up just for a short time to play. I think PS2 DLC might be coming on PSN and if it does without PS2 BC for disks it'd be a MAJOR d*ck move on Sony. I say bring it, both PSN DLC and BC :cool:

Guess I'm one of the "freaks" who plays almost as many PS1/2 games on my PS3 as I do PS3 games.


Ha. I guess I'm one of those freaks too. I play MORE PS2 games on my 60 gig PS3 than PS3 games. I still have the SMT games to finish up after all.

However I can't see Sony being enthused about allowing PS2 discs to play on all PS3s. From a business standpoint it would be preferable to make all PS3s capable of playing PS2 games that could be downloaded from PSN.

From a business standpoint it would be preferable to make all PS3s capable of playing PS2 games that could be downloaded from PSN.Yup. The money they might make from selling more PS3's because they're backwards compatible with PS2 discs pales in comparison to what they will undeniably make by bringing just a few key PS2 titles to PSN. Sad but true.

http://www.gamezine.co.uk/news/formats/playstation3/sega-leaks-sony-s-plans-ps2-emulation-on-ps3-$1328865.htm

I know John Koller said that backwards compatibility is "off the table" and some people think that full software emulation isn't technically feasible -- but according to Sega, it is still in the works.

I was thinking that there were no more big surprises left for TGS. Maybe I was wrong.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=17695474&postcount=1

Aside from PS2 emulation, there are a lot of interesting tidbits here. Thanks Sega!

I know John Koller said that backwards compatibility is "off the table" and some people think that full software emulation isn't technically feasible -- but according to Sega, it is still in the works.That isn't "backwards compatibility." This is exactly what most folks here predicted would happen. Sony plans on selling emulated PS2 titles on PSN. No surprise there.

What is surprising are some of the other tidbits in those meeting minutes. Weird to see a first-hand account of how these meetings go down at the publisher level. Feels a bit like looking in my parents' closet just before Christmas. :D

-Alpha Protocol isn't "RPG" enough according to one of Sega's product evaluators (using Mass Effect as their gold standard). :rolleyes:

-Sony mentioned lots of cross-platform PS3/PSP interoperability. :rolleyes:

-Japan import section on PSN (specifically mentioning Yakuza). :D

-A bunch of home junk, and a handful of movie tie-ins with hybrid BDs. :rolleyes:

-Dreamcast games on PSN. :D

Some of those things are pretty massive. Bit of a goldmine. Props to whoever found this! Hope it doesn't cost someone their job.

That isn't "backwards compatibility." This is exactly what most folks here predicted would happen. Sony plans on selling emulated PS2 titles on PSN. No surprise there

I'm sorry -- I don't really understand. Whether a PS2 game is on disc or downloaded off of PSN, doesn't your PS3 have to be compatible with it? Are you suggesting that Sony is going to port the games over to the PS3? If it were just a few key titles, I would understand -- but the document specifically says "SCEA wants to sell all PS2 titles on PSN".

Props to whoever found this! Hope it doesn't cost someone their job.

I'm willing to bet it does.

I'm sorry -- I don't really understand. Whether a PS2 game is on disc or downloaded off of PSN, doesn't your PS3 have to be compatible with it? Are you suggesting that Sony is going to port the games over to the PS3? If it were just a few key titles, I would understand -- but the document specifically says "SCEA wants to sell all PS2 titles on PSN".I'm just taking issue with your use of the term "backwards compatibility." Offering PS2 titles for sale over PSN is no guarantee of BC since it wouldn't necessarily make the console suddenly "backwards compatible" with my current PS2 discs. Impossible to tell from the abbreviated note.

Excatly, if you already had Jak&Daxter ps2 disc you would not able to play it (excluding older 60gb phats which is fine). Sony may add a virtual ps2 console, but you had to buy the same J&D ps2 game again for few bucks. There is a fine print how you interpret ps2 BC never comes back comments by Sony executives. They play safe and deny an obvious issue, but may not tell the whole picture. That's how big companies do, they will and should not tell anything until its ready to a primetime.

I'm just taking issue with your use of the term "backwards compatibility." Offering PS2 titles for sale over PSN is no guarantee of BC since it wouldn't necessarily make the console suddenly "backwards compatible" with my current PS2 discs. Impossible to tell from the abbreviated note.

Ditto.

PSN is new this gen and I fear Sony has realized, with PS1 downloads, just how easy it is to resell games back to people.

Good news, I hope this leak is true.

I would think they had perfected emulation or had the tech perfected after discontinuing the last software BC 80GB console, figuring out a way to emulate not just the CPU, but now the GPU through purely software. and finding an opportune time to put this new business strategy into motion while winding down the previous hardware BC strategies. With the different PS3 configurations, a plain jane firmware update with 100% software BC would render the differences irrelevant and maximize their potential customer base. It should be more than possible for Sony to get a 100% working engine, considering fan-made PS2 emulators are at least somewhat doable on the PC.

At this point, software BC on PS2 is like Brett Favre every offseason. Either do it or don't. These endless leaks or patent applications or whatever are getting very old and redundant.

This should be considered a rumor until Sony officially announces it (if they do).



Quote:

"Tuesday, 22 Sep 2009 10:00

PlayStaiton 2

SEGA has let a pretty fat cat out of the bag by releasing confidential notes from a meeting with Sony Computer Entertainment America.

Sony wants to release all PS2 games on the PlayStation 3, according to a meeting between SEGA America and SCEA.

The meeting was held on August 5th, with comments regarding SEGA's PS3 and PSP releases, as well as Sony's plans for the console in the near future.

There's mention of a big announcement at the back half of this year, which we now know is the PS3 Slim and price cut. However, there's finally confirmation that Sony is interested in emulating all PlayStation 2 games.

The notes reveal that "SCEA wants to sell all PS2 titles on PSN." Whether this will come as a case by case basis, like the God of War remastering, or that Sony is creating a universal emulator for all PS3 models is unknown. We'd personally expect the former, since Grand Theft Auto Vice City is a specific title mentioned.

Since this meeting was held in August of this year, the PS3 Slim and its hardware would have been in the company's mind - so there must be plans to overcome the difficulties of the missing PS2 GPU.

There's also mention of how these games would be marketed, with PS3 controllers shown in PS2 TV ads.

The link to this confidential information, which was on SEGA's personal FTP, is now broken, but can be found via NeoGAF.

[UPDATE] - Another exciting titbit is that SEGA could provide Sony with Dreamcast titles for the PS3.

The publisher has been tasked with providing SCEA a list of titles so that they can choose which games they're interested in having exclusively. It is further added that "if we give them a long period of exclusivity they’ll give us more marketing support."

hmm

All I want are Guardian Heroes and Radiant Silvergun.

I'm just taking issue with your use of the term "backwards compatibility." Offering PS2 titles for sale over PSN is no guarantee of BC since it wouldn't necessarily make the console suddenly "backwards compatible" with my current PS2 discs. Impossible to tell from the abbreviated note.

If -IF- any of this is to be believed, then the stated goal of selling ALL PS2 games via PSN can lead to only one logical conclusion: PS2 hardware emulation by software program. Recoding every single PS2 game (and how many are there now? I don't want to count) is something only Captain Ahab would try. That would be the Xbox 360 model of B/C, which was abandoned due to the amount of man-hours needed. A lot of good titles were left on the table. Hardware emulation, as a comprehensive solution, is the only reasonable answer to re-distribute a large number of games. With that assumption (and I always accept my own assumptions), I don't understand why Sony would block currently owned disc-based games from compliance with a BC solution. That too would leave money on the table with all the unsold PS2 games floating around (and new titles still being released). They could do that,sure, but it would really be a dick move and not in concert with Sony's past tendencies toward user-friendly compatibility of both old hardware and software.

All I want are Guardian Heroes

Damn straight.

Excatly, if you already had Jak&Daxter ps2 disc you would not able to play it (excluding older 60gb phats which is fine). Sony may add a virtual ps2 console, but you had to buy the same J&D ps2 game again for few bucks. There is a fine print how you interpret ps2 BC never comes back comments by Sony executives. They play safe and deny an obvious issue, but may not tell the whole picture. That's how big companies do, they will and should not tell anything until its ready to a primetime.

I just feel that if Sony takes this route, they will have a public relationships nightmare on their hands. To offer an emulator would be great -- but to gimp it so it will not play back the disc version of the game would be a mistake. This is similar to the PSPgo situation. There are a lot of hardcore PSP owners who want the Go. However, they already have a large collection of UMDs and they are not about to rebuy all of these games. Unless the "goodwill program" that Sony has mentioned is revealed at TGS, the Go is going to have a really tough go of it without the support of its most ardent fans.

Ditto.

PSN is new this gen and I fear Sony has realized, with PS1 downloads, just how easy it is to resell games back to people.

But don't you thnk the main reason that FF VII and MGS are so popular on PSN is that people no longer have their physical copies of the game?

It wouldn't be an issue of recoding the games like God of War. It may be something where they can make an emulator, but it has to be tweaked for each game (like Bleem on the Dreamcast). So, with each game the download package would include a version of the emulator that works with that title. Of course, the user wouldn't "see" an emulator, but just a game to be launched in the list.

But don't you thnk the main reason that FF VII and MGS are so popular on PSN is that people no longer have their physical copies of the game?

I have a library of oldies still on disk because I found them valuable.

Sure, could plug in the old PS2, but I'd rather see sony just allow emulation since the ROM's won't be changing.

But don't you thnk the main reason that FF VII and MGS are so popular on PSN is that people no longer have their physical copies of the game?

I think, in the case of FF VII, the lack of physical copies along with people trying to ebay copies for $100.00 or more had a lot to do with it. The hype always helps, and don't forget the ability to take this with you on PSP.

As soon as Sony started counting the money from the re-sale of Mortal Kombat 2 (I think that thing has been top 20 since it hit in 08) PS2 games being sold again was just a matter of time. I mean there's no way that a company lets a 2,000 title catalog just lay there. Judging by the reactions I've read people are welcoming this with some exceptions. I'm already biting on the GoW compilation and am interested in what they plan to offer for download, if anything.

I'm sure if Sony were capable of building a 100% compatible PS2 emulater then they would gladly do so and offer PS2 game downloads on the PSN.

The only reason they cannot offer them for download today is that they would not be compatible with every PS3 SKU, which would lead to a lot of costumer confusion, not to mention backlash.

Even if full backward compatibility is too difficult to achieve, then Sony can still develop emulation for their biggest selling PS2 titles.

All I want are Guardian Heroes

Damn straight.

Let me officially "third" that. Guardian Heroes was beyond awesome...

- Jer

If -IF- any of this is to be believed, then the stated goal of selling ALL PS2 games via PSN can lead to only one logical conclusion: PS2 hardware emulation by software program. Recoding every single PS2 game (and how many are there now? I don't want to count) is something only Captain Ahab would try.But like I said, keep in mind that this is what Sony is pitching to Sega (and presumably other publishers). So it doesn't actually mean anything other than Sony is trying to get publishers on board.

But most folks in the development community doubt that Sony could easily get full, across-the-board emulation to work. If Sony decides to release PS2 titles through PSN, they're probably not going to just flip a switch and suddenly have all 2000 titles appear on the storefront overnight. They'll do something like what Nintendo does with VC titles and what Sony already does with PS1 Classic titles--release 1-3 per week. That would give them much more time to do per-title emulation rather than across-the-board emulation.

I don't understand why Sony would block currently owned disc-based games from compliance with a BC solution.But they wouldn't be "blocking" anything. It might actually not be technologically possible. Meaning that the only way Sony can emulate PS2 games is on a per-title basis. There may be nothing sinister about it. And if they're going to all the time, money, and effort to do so, they deserve to get paid for it.

But of course this is all just speculation. It would be fantastic news if Sony did introduce a FW update that enabled software-based full BC.

All I want are Guardian Heroes and Radiant Silvergun.

I didn't see it mention Sega Saturn games. I have both and they are obviously amazing. Panzer Dragoon Saga is another Saturn game that should be shared with more people.

As far as Dreamcast games I'd like to see Powerstone and Powerstone 2 with online play added.

It would be fantastic news if Sony did introduce a FW update that enabled software-based full BC.

Hopefully such a FW update wouldn't brick the PS3's of those of us who bought the last ones made with PS2-emulating firmware (i.e., the 80GB MGS4 bundle, June 2008). I've only tried a few PS2 games, but they all work (e.g., GTAIII and up, Ratchet and Clank, etc.).

Looks like I'm going to need a bigger hard drive if this happens. I don't think 120 GB will be enough to store a number of PS2 and Dreamcast games.

Hopefully such a FW update wouldn't brick the PS3's of those of us who bought the last ones made with PS2-emulating firmware (i.e., the 80GB MGS4 bundle, June 2008). I've only tried a few PS2 games, but they all work (e.g., GTAIII and up, Ratchet and Clank, etc.).


+1.......havent tried any ps2 games in my 80gb that dont run correctly....including mostly obscure kids games like Franklin,Strawberry Shortcake, and Tom and Jerry. If those run anything should.

We'd personally expect the former, since Grand Theft Auto Vice City is a specific title mentioned.

I would sell my first-born for an HD re-up of GTA Vice City. Ok, well, I don't have kids. So, thirty bucks?

I've only tried a few PS2 games, but they all work (e.g., GTAIII and up, Ratchet and Clank, etc.).

I thought the games looked bad..

Playback of PS2 games on a Ps3

Not for me
;)

I thought the games looked bad..

Playback of PS2 games on a Ps3

Not for me
;)

Do they look better when played back on a PS2? I have no idea, as I've never played/seen them on a PS2.

It's the HDTV effect of playing low-rez SD games on a high-rez display. PS2 games, espcially compared to modern PS3 games, just aren't visually stunning no matter how you play them. Like momma said however, it's the inside that counts. :)

For example, I played Shadow of the Colossus a year after getting a PS3, and it's in my top three of games for any system over the last four years.

As a guy that’s recently played back through Zelda OOT and the original Chrono Trigger emulated on a WUXGA laptop, I don’t really care so much about top notch eye candy on *every* game I play. I’d just like to be able to run some of the PS2 games without having to get the PS2 down from the garage and jury rig it into my setup, further being able to use the wireless DS3 controller is pretty important.

-Suntan

It's the HDTV effect of playing low-rez SD games on a high-rez display. PS2 games, espcially compared to modern PS3 games, just aren't visually stunning no matter how you play them. Like momma said however, it's the inside that counts. :)

For example, I played Shadow of the Colossus a year after getting a PS3, and it's in my top three of games for any system over the last four years.

Well, considering that GTAIV doesn't look all that great on the PS3 compared to other games like Infamous and MGS4, playing the PS2-only games GTAIII, GTA-Vice City, GTA-Vice City Stories and GTA-Liberty City Stories on the PS3 on my HDTV is not all that bad an experience. The main thing is the difference in control layout - e.g., GTAIV uses the R2 or R3 button to accelerate, IIRC, whereas the PS2 games use the X button. (I don't really play them, anyway; my granddaughter is the GTA fan! Don't...mess...with...her!)

I certainly have no interest in repurchasing games I already own again unless they actually render the games at a higher resolution (as well as sell them at a steep discount). As it is already, PS2 games are blurrier when played on the PS3 then they are on an actual PS2, so I just keep my PS2 slim hooked up to my TV anyway.

Well, considering that GTAIV doesn't look all that great on the PS3 compared to other games like Infamous and MGS4, playing the PS2-only games GTAIII, GTA-Vice City, GTA-Vice City Stories and GTA-Liberty City Stories on the PS3 on my HDTV is not all that bad an experience. The main thing is the difference in control layout - e.g., GTAIV uses the R2 or R3 button to accelerate, IIRC, whereas the PS2 games use the X button. (I don't really play them, anyway; my granddaughter is the GTA fan! Don't...mess...with...her!)


Granddaughter GTA.......:eek:

Since i have never owned a console until the PS3 i say bring on the PS2 BC.

Any software based system won't be 100%. Even the hardware BC 60gb isn't 100%. Hell sometimes games aren't even compatible with newer hardware revisions of the same systems (I know this happened with PSOne).

It's the HDTV effect of playing low-rez SD games on a high-rez display.

And the size of our sets now. Most PS2 games were designed for 4x3 sets around 27" in size, at 480i. Even then you could see some pixellation. Now, I'm sure the smallest set that PS3 gamers play on is 32". Average is probably 37/42". That really blows up the pixels.

Keep in mind that 480i, SDTV is a bit fuzzy which actually functions similarly to anti-aliasing. Especially over composite. When you blow up some of these older games to giant, super sharp screens using a connection designed to transmit the source perfectly without artifacts you're gonna see some stuff you didn't before.

Despite what others say, PS2 games look great on my 720p set played through my PS3. With all the scaling turned off, games look more vibrant and more crisp. Sure, it shows how much aliasing is missing, but PS2 games were never very good with that anyway.

Keep in mind that 480i, SDTV is a bit fuzzy which actually functions similarly to anti-aliasing. Especially over composite. When you blow up some of these older games to giant, super sharp screens using a connection designed to transmit the source perfectly without artifacts you're gonna see some stuff you didn't before.

Also keep in mind that most PS2 games generally used oddball frame buffer sizes like 512x512. The PS2 didn't have a "scaler", like the 360 for example, so some odd visual effects can take place. You can end up with a skewed aspect ratios, extreme aliasing in the vertical plane and pixel popping. Many games turn on the "flicker filter" to try and hide these artifacts which just makes the games even more blurry and just as artifact laden. The most obvious effect of the oddball frame buffer sizes are the huge black borders most PS2 games exhibit.

Despite what others say, PS2 games look great on my 720p set played through my PS3. With all the scaling turned off, games look more vibrant and more crisp. Sure, it shows how much aliasing is missing, but PS2 games were never very good with that anyway.

Here's a comparison I did a few years ago of the difference between the PS3's HDMI output vs the PS2 slim: http://www.hdtvarcade.com/hdtvforum/index.php?showtopic=11408

The final outcome is that the PS3 blurs the image tremendously by default even if you turn off all the options available. Some people prefer the PS2 games to be blurred, so they find it to look "better". If you prefer your PS2 games to be at all sharp, your only option is sticking with an actual PS2 (keeping in mind that the larger your HDTV, the more this applies to you). Also atleast 3 frames of input lag are introduced by the PS3 before any latency your TV introduces comes into play (bothers some people, others won't even notice). This can effectively render some games like DDR unplayable if they don't have some form of latency correction available in their options.

Here's a comparison I did a few years ago of the difference between the PS3's HDMI output vs the PS2 slim: http://www.hdtvarcade.com/hdtvforum/index.php?showtopic=11408I remember seeing those before. My question is that in those you say you set progressive "manually." Do you mean you set it to progressive in the game options? If so, then yes, that does blur the image. You need to leave it at 480i output in the in-game settings (not the XMB ones). Something to do with how the PS3 deals with PS2 games makes progressive output look blurry. Your display will de-interlace regardless, so it ends up in "progressive" no matter what.

As for latency, that's an issue regardless. The only way to minimize lag is to go CRT, regardless of whether you're using a PS3 or a PS2 or playing PS3 games or PS2 ones.

I remember seeing those before. My question is that in those you say you set progressive "manually." Do you mean you set it to progressive in the game options? If so, then yes, that does blur the image. You need to leave it at 480i output in the in-game settings (not the XMB ones). Something to do with how the PS3 deals with PS2 games makes progressive output look blurry. Your display will de-interlace regardless, so it ends up in "progressive" no matter what.

As for latency, that's an issue regardless. The only way to minimize lag is to go CRT, regardless of whether you're using a PS3 or a PS2 or playing PS3 games or PS2 ones.

Actually, the only way to output PS2 games in 480i when using the PS3 is to use component cables and disable everything but 480i. The plus side of outputting 480i over component with the PS3 is that it is the only way to bypass the blurring the PS3 does by default. It gives you an output nearly identical to an actual PS2 slim.

The "manually" turning on 480p I was disussing was actually either turning it on in the game's options or to turn it on by holding down the buttons and turning progressive scan on when the game prompts you. If you don't "manually" enable 480p, the PS3 automatically takes the normal 480i output and uses that as the basis of creating it's 480p output (as opposed to actually using the game's native 480p output when available).

If your HDTV is introducing significant latency, it will add onto the 3-4 frames of latency the PS3 is already causing with PS2 games. You can potentially be looking at 8+ frames of input lag if your TV has a real latency problem. The latency generally isn't a huge concern unless it's a timing sensitive game. I know that the default input latency is at the level that Madden players considered "unplayable" when plasma TVs were used during one of the Madden tournaments a few years ago.

-Alpha Protocol isn't "RPG" enough according to one of Sega's product evaluators (using Mass Effect as their gold standard). :rolleyes:

Well, OTOH, if it is LESS "RPG" than Mass Effect that may be saying something...

An alleged Sega document from a meeting with Sony Computer Entertainment America is turning heads after it apparently divulged confidential details of upcoming Sony PlayStation 3 marketing and motion controller plans. The document was downloaded directly from Sega's press site and posted by French Sega fansite Objectif-SEGA under the heading "[Exclu] Stratégie de SEGA : l'incroyable fuite?" or "[Exclusive] Sega's Strategy: An Unbelievable Leak?" The story was then spotted by NeoGAF and the document's contents reposted in full, along with the link to the original Sega URL (currently--and ones assumes permanently--unavailable).

Among the leak's zingers, Sega's document--titled "SCEA Meeting Aug 5th Notes / Aug 6 2009 – DRAFT FOR COMMENTS"--suggests Sony may be planning to roll out a PlayStation 2 emulator, a feature it's recently claimed was "off the table" for good.

Here's the document checkpoint (my emphasis):

PS2 emulator for PS3 (confidential)
SCEA wants to sell all PS2 titles on PSN (GTA Vice City/Sonic/etc)
For co Marketing money show PS3 controller on TV ads – similar to EA Madden Spots, NCAA, etc…

What this confirms: If the document's legitimate, that the PS2 emulator may still be on the table. Note, however, that Sony's assertion the PS2 emulator was "off the table" technically occurred nearly two weeks after the date on Sega's document. It's entirely possible Sony was toying with the idea and finally made a command decision to scuttle things permanently in the interim.

What it doesn't: That the PS2 emulator is in any way a sure thing, or even what "all PS2 titles" means. "Sonic" is obviously Sega's, but the company has nothing whatsoever to do with Rockstar's GTA Vice City, implying "all" means all, and not just Sega's PS2 library. On the other hand, it seems a trifle odd to scribble down those two specifically.

The document also fills in a few PlayStation 3 "motion control" gaps. We already knew Sony was planning a spring 2010 launch (March specifically in Japan, according to the document) but the note addresses additional marketing specifics. It alleges Sony plans to sell 4 to 5 million units worldwide, that the device might be backward compatible with older games (Sega's Virtua Tennis is offered as an example, though this could refer to future iterations of the series), and that Sony believes "motion controller support" will distinguish the PS3 SKU from its competition.

Several games are mentioned, one in particular--developer Obsidian's upcoming role-playing game Alpha Protocol--stirring the waters after a presumed SCEA product evaluator alleged the game "[feels] barely RPG." Obsidian's already responded on its official message boards, and you can read the collated posts--generally dismissing the criticism--at Shacknews if you like.

Other points of interest:

- Sony admits multiple movie titles (Planet 51, Transformers) have underperformed this cycle.

- Sony allows retailers like Walmart to dictate what goes into a game pack (movie tickets are mentioned) to move the SKU.

- Sony's considering putting both movies and games on single Blu-ray discs, presumably to sell them less the cost of multiple discs and packaging and perhaps pass on the savings to consumers.

- 3-4 weeks prior to a game's release "is usually ideal demo timing."

- Concerning Sonic Racing (does this refer to Sonic & Sega All-Stars Racing due out next year?) Sega is "open to DLC to differentiate [the] PS3 SKU," including "characters from Rare or Fable universes." Could this mean Sonic vs. Banjo-Kazooie? Tails vs. The Mystical Murgo?

- Sony may be planning a "special Japanese Import section" on the PlayStation Network to allow gamers to purchase Japanese versions of games directly. This note falls under the heading "Yakuza," the title of Sega's PS2 action-adventure game released in North America on September 5, 2006. Sega adds it "might need to localize menus...with subtitles."

- Sega's Iron Man 2 is a "great candidate for HOME space – explore Tony Stark's lab etc."

- Valkyria Chronicles II for the PSP--sequel to the turn-based RPG for PS3--may actually be called Valkyria 1937 (the original was set in 1935) and Sega mentions it "could bundle with PSP as well." Perhaps Sega wants to keep the "II" moniker freed up for something else PS3-bound down the road?

- Sega's considering a collector's edition of "all old [S]onic games on one BD disc," titled "Best of Sonic" and retailing for "around $99."

Intriguingly, the document suggests SCEA requested two-to-one indexing (either "cataloguing for display" or "drawing value comparisons") of PS3 to 360 SKUs "to garner most favorable treatment." See highlighted below.

Sony PS3
SCEA reiterated plans to sell 13 million PS3s this year
Big announcement back half of year they can’t talk about (potentially price cut of PS3 to reach hardware goals)
SCEA commented on indexing between PS3 and 360 SKUs, should be around 2:1 to garner most favorable treatment.

Sony's response when asked about the document? "We don't comment on rumors or speculation." We'll see if Sega has anything further to add.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/172443/sega_memo_spills_sony_ps2_e
mulator_motion_control_plans.html/
That will put sony in 2nd place if they sale that many ps3 this year.

Actually, the only way to output PS2 games in 480i when using the PS3 is to use component cables and disable everything but 480i.That isn't what I meant. I was referring to what you say below that: The "manually" turning on 480p I was disussing was actually either turning it on in the game's options or to turn it on by holding down the buttons and turning progressive scan on when the game prompts you.This is what I was wondering about. Yes, if you "manually" enable progressive scan in-game, it gets significantly more blurry than if you just leave it as is (in terms of the in-game settings).

In terms of the tech, I'm not sure why that matters, but it does and the difference is noticeable on my setup. Perhaps the PS3 de-interlacing algorithm is better than the games' algorithm. Regardless, that complicates the test you did with your photos. Instead of using the in-game 480p setting as your standard unscaled image, you should have used an unaltered output mode.

If your HDTV is introducing significant latency, it will add onto the 3-4 frames of latency the PS3 is already causing with PS2 games.Right, but the lag introduced by most TVs is more significant than what's being caused by doing any scaling to PS2 games. So playing a PS3 game or a PS2 game doesn't matter. Lag is still present. Hell, hook up a PS2 to an HDTV and you get noticeable lag. Many older rhythm games (the first Guitar Hero, earlier DDR games, etc) are completely unplayable on virtually any HDTV whether you're using a PS3 or a PS2. Factor in the very likely possibility of audio lag through an AVR, and lag can be a bitch with older games no matter what console you're using. The only solution for lag is to play on a CRT.

An alleged Sega document from a meeting with Sony Computer Entertainment America is turning heads after it apparently divulged confidential details of upcoming Sony PlayStation 3 marketing and motion controller plans.We've already got a whole thread devoted to this leak, and the full text of the document's been posted in multiple threads already. Thanks though.

Sorry for reviving this old thread but I feel that there is some kind of relevance to this now.

Recently NPD just announced that PS2 sales are dropping and they are no longer going to report on sales figures for the system. Game announcements for the systems are also trickling into non-exsistant. I feel that Sony may have been holding back in releasing a firmware update to keep PS2 sales going.

With E3 right around the corner, announcing firmware emulation for all PS3 seems like it could be a firm possibility. A service to download PS2 classics seems very reasonable as well.. I notice in my non-backwards compatible PS3 I do have the option to manipulate PS1/PS2 game saves. I assume this is because of the few PS3's that play PS2 games but it does make you think that it is possible on all systems.

Does anyone have further knowledge on the topic or any speculation on possible PS2 emulation?

My Target has been liquidating all PS2 items...

(a complete DJ Hero kit w/ game for 19.99. a complete guitar hero 5 kit for a little bit more).

Seems to me vendors are getting out of PS2.

I still have my launch U.S. PS2, and last year sold my launch Japanese PS2. It had a very good run, and hopefully Sony gives it new life over the PSN with an emulation upgrade.

ha! I still have my fat PS2 at my parents house, just played some Onimusha few visits ago. Good ol' days.

With E3 right around the corner, announcing firmware emulation for all PS3 seems like it could be a firm possibility. A service to download PS2 classics seems very reasonable as well.. I notice in my non-backwards compatible PS3 I do have the option to manipulate PS1/PS2 game saves. I assume this is because of the few PS3's that play PS2 games but it does make you think that it is possible on all systems.

Does anyone have further knowledge on the topic or any speculation on possible PS2 emulation?

just read about this (http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2010/05/18/ps3-firmware-3-40-coming-soon/) today. have no idea what it really includes, but after seeing your post it was the first thing to come to mind.

IIRC, at last year's E3, Sony announced their renewed attention to releasing PS1 games via PSN (and announced that FF7 would be immediately available). I suppose it's possible they announce something similar for this E3 with a comparably big launch title (like FF10?).

But I see no reason why they would add full software BC via a firmware update. There's no reason for them to do that. They may start selling PS2 games via PSN, but I highly doubt they'll just magically "unlock" PS2 disc BC.

60gb launch model FTW...

IIRC, at last year's E3, Sony announced their renewed attention to releasing PS1 games via PSN (and announced that FF7 would be immediately available). I suppose it's possible they announce something similar for this E3 with a comparably big launch title (like FF10?).

But I see no reason why they would add full software BC via a firmware update. There's no reason for them to do that. They may start selling PS2 games via PSN, but I highly doubt they'll just magically "unlock" PS2 disc BC.

I'd buy ICO and SOTC again from the PSN even though I have the discs and a launch PS3 just for convenience factor since those discs are in a drawer in another room and not on the shelf with the current batch.

I still start up Burnout every once in a while just because it's on the HD....

But I see no reason why they would add full software BC via a firmware update. There's no reason for them to do that. They may start selling PS2 games via PSN, but I highly doubt they'll just magically "unlock" PS2 disc BC.

I agree. There is no financial incentive for Sony to undertake the *huge* task of trying to emulate every PS2 game out there just so people can buy used copies of PS2 games. Really the best way to do this was the way they did it with the launch 20 and 60gig models.

What they likely will do going forward is release PS2 games on the PSN on an individual basis. That way they only have to emulate a single game at a time, and at the same time they make a profit on titles sold so there is incentive to justify the development costs.

The biggest 'hurdle' with this approach is that PS2 games can take up several gigs of storage space, therefore it almost requires that end users upgrade their standard hard drives if they are interested in multiple titles.

I just think that in making PS3 fully BC that they will really begin to say look at the great library of games that are now readily able to be played on every PS3. Couple that with an entry level system, similar to the X-Box Arcade, now the consumer will have a Blu-Ray player and the ability to play the hundreds of great games available on PS2 at a minimum cost into gaming. I know this is all speculation but it would really provide people an insentive to pick up PS3 over a 360.

Chances are none of this will happen but what the hell.

I just sold my last 3 PS2 games. Goddammit.

I haven't played a single PS2 game on my BC compatible PS3.... whats the point? I don't want my eyes to bleed from blurry graphics and nearly every game has a better sequel out so why do people make such a huge deal about this, if you want to play PS2 games so bad bust out your old PS2 or go buy one for $50

I just think that in making PS3 fully BC that they will really begin to say look at the great library of games that are now readily able to be played on every PS3.They already tried using that as a selling point. I use BC all the time, but I'm in a very small minority. Through multiple customer reactions and surveys, Sony quickly learned that the vast majority of potential customers believed the following:

I haven't played a single PS2 game on my BC compatible PS3.... whats the point? I don't want my eyes to bleed from blurry graphics and nearly every game has a better sequel out so why do people make such a huge deal about this, if you want to play PS2 games so bad bust out your old PS2 or go buy one for $50So combine this way of thinking with the fact that PS1 games have done well for Sony (and that the PS2 has a huge and amazing library), and you can see what Sony's probably thinking.

Speaking of awesome PS2 games that don't (yet) have sequels: I need to pop in SSX3 one of these days. Just a brilliant game and there's nothing since that touches it.

I'd be up for them releasing PS2 games on PSN.

I would at least like more of God of War bundle releases if not maybe direct downloads of PS2 games on PSN. I never played any of the PS2 Final Fantasy games but would like to as well as ICO and a handful of other games as well. I would pay 10-20 bucks to play those upscaled on the PS3.

I have a 60gb PS3 and have barely made use of its backward compatibility capabilities.

Personally, I'd prefer Sony took some of their more memorable titles (like some of the Ratchet & Clank or Jak & Daxter games) and released remastered PS3 editions ala the God of War Collection. To me that makes more sense and makes better use of the hardware.

I'd prefer they speed up the XMB and when you hit X on your friend's name on the friends list it doesn't sit there for a minute syncing trophies I don't give two shits about

I agree. There is no financial incentive for Sony to undertake the *huge* task of trying to emulate every PS2 game out there just so people can buy used copies of PS2 games. Really the best way to do this was the way they did it with the launch 20 and 60gig models.

What they likely will do going forward is release PS2 games on the PSN on an individual basis. That way they only have to emulate a single game at a time, and at the same time they make a profit on titles sold so there is incentive to justify the development costs.

The biggest 'hurdle' with this approach is that PS2 games can take up several gigs of storage space, therefore it almost requires that end users upgrade their standard hard drives if they are interested in multiple titles.

To be honest, it all depends on how many PS2 games Sony would plan on making playable on the PS3. If it's only a small handful, then yeah, the game-by-game emulation policy would probably be the best method. However, if they plan on leasing a large library of games, it's actually easier to emulate the hardware of the PS2 than it would be to emulate the individual games. (Since in order to emulate one game, they would basically need to emulate the hardware of the PS2 first).

I have been a HUGE follower of emulation since my college days back in the late 1990's. Been following MAME for over a decade now, as well as the emulation of systems like the NES/SNES/Genesis/Dreamcast, etc. Since Sony created the PS2, they have a much better understanding of the hardware that makes up the system as well as the copy protection put in place in the games and the system itself. As a result, they can much more readily emulate the hardware of the system since they also have an intimate knowledge of the PS3 hardware and what it can and can not do. As a result, once they code for the emulation of the PS2's hardware and copy protection systems, the emulation will work for ALL PS2 games and that would include disc-based and downloaded games. (Since the downloads would simply be the disc images of the PS2 games). Therefore, in the long run that would be the simplest, and least time-consuming process for them.

Therefore, in the long run that would be the simplest, and least time-consuming process for them.Only way that would work is if they include it as part of their rumored "premium" subscription. Otherwise, they'd get no return on their investment, regardless of whether full emulation was a simpler, cheaper process.

I feel that Sony may have been holding back in releasing a firmware update to keep PS2 sales going.

I doubt it. If it was financially viable to program and release a PS2 emulator, they'd of programmed and released an emulator when the PS2 was a going concern and backwards compatibility could serve as a draw to get more PS2 diehards onto the platform. It isn't going to come back just because the platform is discontinued and dead just so they can digitally rerelease titles.

Heck, their PSOne downloadable release support is half hearted at best and every single PS3 and PSP can play those titles out of the box. So I don't see it ever happening.


I notice in my non-backwards compatible PS3 I do have the option to manipulate PS1/PS2 game saves. I assume this is because of the few PS3's that play PS2 games but it does make you think that it is possible on all systems.

It's there because there's no need to disable it for PS3 consoles that lack PS2 compatibility. It's still useful for archiving PS2 data and conserving space on PS2 memory cards for PS3 owners that lack PS2 BC but keep a PS2 around for PS2 titles (Including myself, the feature is very useful when you have a 100+ PS2 titles and don't want more then a couple of memory cards kicking around).

*** SEPT '10 ***

Sony Japan (http://www.ripten.com/2010/09/14/sony-files-patent-for-a-ps2-adaptor-mauler/) files for a "backwards compatibility device" patent:

Your PS3 backward compatibility dreams may be finally be answered. Sony Japan has filed a patent for a “new generation to previous generation” external adapter.

*** SEPT '10 ***

Sony Japan (http://www.ripten.com/2010/09/14/sony-files-patent-for-a-ps2-adaptor-mauler/) files for a "backwards compatibility device" patent:AFAIK this was filed (Feb '09) well before Sony came out and officially stated (Aug '09) that they will no longer pursue backwards compatibility for PS2 on the PS3.

In other words, Sony's going to try to make money off of their PS2 back catalog through HD collections. BC would interfere.

EDIT: Note, too, that the first HD collection was released after Sony's official statement, and almost a full year after that patent was filed.

They can co-exist if they really spice up the re-releases. Besides, if this device ships, Sony makes sales off of its purchase as well as the PSN store since they can stock up on PS2 digital files with this out. I know I prefer dloads to discs if given the choice. Right now, HD re-releases on discs (three in two years?) are rarer than Sony being able to add 2-3 PS2 digital files every month.

I wonder if it'll be like the adapter for the Atari 5200 and/or the Colecovision... more expensive than the system it's emulating. :)

They can co-exist if they really spice up the re-releases. Besides, if this device ships, Sony makes sales off of its purchase as well as the PSN store since they can stock up on PS2 digital files with this out. I know I prefer dloads to discs if given the choice. Right now, HD re-releases on discs (three in two years?) are rarer than Sony being able to add 2-3 PS2 digital files every month.I suppose it's possible. Sony themselves may be taking a "wait and see" approach.

But I have a feeling publishers would do everything they could to prevent Sony from releasing any such device. PSN releases would be the only viable alternative I can imagine where they wouldn't piss off publishers. But then they'd have to block it from working with discs. And at that point, you run the risk of confusing and pissing off consumers. It could happen, but it just seems like it's too late to do it in a way that satisfies everyone. I think the Sony honchos realized this--which is why nine months after filing this patent, they officially stated that they were no longer pursuing PS2 BC on PS3. Instead, we saw the alternate solution: HD collections.

Siliconera is saying the patent is a recent one. Even ign.com (http://psp.ign.com/articles/112/1120354p1.html)has picked it up as "new" news. Maybe a reveal will happen at TGS if true. Here is a diagram submitted with the patent:

http://cdn2-b.examiner.com//sites/default/files/styles/image_full_width/hash/73/db/73db5392bcc8490c966f15ab5cd749b3_0.png

It does look like a PS2, because #304 might be the memory card?

At first glance on this news, I thought perhaps it might be for the PS3 to plug into the PS4! :~)

Siliconera is saying the patent is a recent one. Even ign.com (http://psp.ign.com/articles/112/1120354p1.html)has picked it up as "new" news.From what I understand it was only recently made public, but the filing is from February of 2009. The source that Siliconera got this from states clearly that the patent was filed "on February 19, 2009." As I understand it, patent filings are confidential for a limited amount of time (in order to prevent IP theft). Thereafter, they become accessible to the public--which is why we often see these filings come up a year or more after the actual filing.

Here's the source (via Google translation):
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A//gigazine.net/index.php%3F/news/comments/20100914_ps3_ps2_adapter/&sl=ja&tl=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Not saying it won't happen, but a patent filing (especially one from before Sony changed its stance on BC) doesn't mean much one way or the other.

I don't have any PS2 discs, so as far as I'm concerned as long as they crank out a steady stream of HD collections (either on disc or for DL) of PS2 greatest hits, I'll be happy. Now that I've been spoiled with PS3 graphics, "remastered in HD" is the only PQ I'll accept at this point. However one collection per year (so far) is not a steady stream, I'm afraid.

The first question I had when I saw this was where this box is connected to, because USB is far too slow to handle this and there is no weird "high speed port" on the PS3 like there has been on systems in the past. Thanks to Digital Foundry I have the answer:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ps2-adaptor-patent-blog-entry

Apparently the device is hooked up to the PS3's ethernet jack.

This patent basically describes a 32X or Sega CD, except it makes the system worse not better (so did the 32X etc.).

Considering the fact that Sony is not going to be giving this away for free, and it has an entire PS2 on board (so you won't be getting native 720p or anything), I still can't see why one would not just buy a PS2 and hook it up next to the PS3 if you really must play PS3 games.

It wouldn't surprise me if Sony is working on something like this for PS4 - if the PS4 doesn't run on Cell as has been theorized, they could release a PS3 add-on box at launch for people. It's much cheaper than putting a PS3 board inside the PS4.

Having a solution tied directly into the PS3 gives several benefits over a separate PS2 slim purchase:

- Upscaling options, which is important since 480i/p sources often lag heavily when connected to modern HDTVs

- Bluetooth wireless control

- Bye, bye memory cards: just save games on the PS3's hard drive

- The possibility of dloading digital PS2 files

- Wireless internet for the few online supported games the PS2 has

From what I understand it was only recently made public, but the filing is from February of 2009. The source that Siliconera got this from states clearly that the patent was filed "on February 19, 2009." As I understand it, patent filings are confidential for a limited amount of time (in order to prevent IP theft). Thereafter, they become accessible to the public--which is why we often see these filings come up a year or more after the actual filing.

Here's the source (via Google translation):
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A//gigazine.net/index.php%3F/news/comments/20100914_ps3_ps2_adapter/&sl=ja&tl=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Not saying it won't happen, but a patent filing (especially one from before Sony changed its stance on BC) doesn't mean much one way or the other.

The ign article says that last year Sony took out a different BC patent and haven't shown anything from it so far, but that this is a new one. You might be referring to the older patent.

What about playing ps2 backups ?

- Upscaling options, which is important since 480i/p sources often lag heavily when connected to modern HDTVs

Reading the DF article, this solution could introduce lag to the system. And PS2 through PS3 is laggy for non-480p games (I think it adds an extra 3 frames).

Well, DF isn't always spot on when they are forced to speculate instead of doing hands-on testing. They had an article pegging the Move with lag 133 ms by simply recording with their camera a few months ago. They didn't even bother to factor in the possibility of the HDTV being an issue, their camera recording introducing issues, or perhaps the programming of the demos they observed being less than optimized for lag testing, so the analysis was kind of lazy. We now know that that Move's lag is only 22 ms, which is a merely half a frame more laggy than the Dual Shock 3. All other lag is introduced from other factors, just like any game.

Still, in theory I can see how an ethernet connection option would be tough to introduce without lag being an issue for upscaling. Until Sony announces the final product though (if they do), we don't have much to go on.

I'd be up for a Game Boy Player style solution for PS2 compatibility on the console. But I can't imagine it will ever happen.

What about playing ps2 backups ?

What about it? Are you honestly asking if Sony would enable piracy on this device if it was released and does what we're speculating?

lol

The 80gig did backwards compatibility with software instead of the 'emotion engine' hardware from the 20/60

This suggests that Sony could offer a backwards compatibility download off the playstation store. Make it a $50 download and people who want it can buy and they keep control of the games.

The 80gig did backwards compatibility with software instead of the 'emotion engine' hardware from the 20/60

This suggests that Sony could offer a backwards compatibility download off the playstation store. Make it a $50 download and people who want it can buy and they keep control of the games.

The original 80GB PS3 only emulated the PS2 CPU in software while the PS2 GPU was on hardware.

It is possible this PS2 BC patent is only for the external PS2 GPU and still does the PS2 CPU in software.

Another PS2 BC everyone needs to consider is percentage of PS2 BC. 20/60GB PS3 had 99% PS2 BC. The original 80GB PS3 had lower percentage of PS2 BC. I own all the models and there are certain PS2 games that ran flawlessly on 20/60GB PS3 models have glitches on the 80GB PS3 model.

With another version of PS2 BC design, there will be a percentage of PS2 games that will not run properly. So, question is how much Sony wants to dedicate their development to fix/improve the PS2 games that don't run properly on the new BC? If Sony does the entire PS2 BC in software for free, it will become another endless development cost to Sony. If Sony sells the new BC has an external hardware, is the cost enough to cover the additional additional development cost because there will be PS2 games that will not run properly.

The point is the moment Sony releases the PS2 BC to gamers, you can bet on the same day of the release, there will be a lot of complains from gamers why their favorite PS2 game doesn't run properly.

Sony wants to push PS3 games and make profit if they do bring PS2 games back as remastered or in the original form as download version. They also have control over which PS2 games are known to run properly.

The first question I had when I saw this was where this box is connected to, because USB is far too slow to handle this and there is no weird "high speed port" on the PS3 like there has been on systems in the past. Thanks to Digital Foundry I have the answer:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ps2-adaptor-patent-blog-entry

Apparently the device is hooked up to the PS3's ethernet jack.

This patent basically describes a 32X or Sega CD, except it makes the system worse not better (so did the 32X etc.).

Considering the fact that Sony is not going to be giving this away for free, and it has an entire PS2 on board (so you won't be getting native 720p or anything), I still can't see why one would not just buy a PS2 and hook it up next to the PS3 if you really must play PS3 games.

It wouldn't surprise me if Sony is working on something like this for PS4 - if the PS4 doesn't run on Cell as has been theorized, they could release a PS3 add-on box at launch for people. It's much cheaper than putting a PS3 board inside the PS4.

Another possibility with this new external BC hardware is Sony may release another PS3 model with a high speed IO port. If the external BC does require a high speed interface with PS3, neither USB or Gigabit Ethernet ports are going to be fast enough because both ports are quite slow. An example is iSCSI was designed to use Ethernet as the disk IO interface but even with gigabit Ethernet, it wasn't that fast plus the iSCSI still has to share with the lan traffic. With PS3 only has one gigabit Ethernet port, it still has the share the lan traffic to PSN network with the BC device. Unless a cap limit is put onto the lan traffic going through the Ethernet port, it will be difficult to guarantee the bandwidth available for the BC device.

Sony already knows there are many PS3 gamers will be willing to buy another PS3 like when slim model came out. So, Sony can replace the next PS3 model with a high speed IO interface. Many PS3 gamers want the PS2 BC enough will consider buying another PS3.

Another theory that can be done with existing PS3. The SATA port is the fast port on existing PS3 models. The external BC could attach to the hard drive's SATA port and the hard drive itself can be moved to the external BC enclosure. Both devices can share the high speed SATA IO. While this may sound silly to have the PS3 hard drive as external, since PS3 is intended to be stationary, the external BC + hard drive are just sitting next to the PS3 console.

Until Sony releases more details how the BC device is going to interface with PS3, we can only guess.

Until Sony releases more details how the BC device is going to interface with PS3, we can only guess.

The big question to speculate on is if anything is even going to come from this. Not much point in speculating about the details of a potential device that probably isn't going to happen.

I'd love to see it be a hybrid device that brought PS2 and PSP support to the PS3. I'd love to be able to properly play PSP software with proper scaling, correct aspect ratios, and Dual Shock 3 support for every UMD release.

The ign article says that last year Sony took out a different BC patent and haven't shown anything from it so far, but that this is a new one. You might be referring to the older patent.Don't think so. As I said, patents aren't made public immediately after a filing. It takes a while (generally 18 months) before the public has access to them.

This all came from a Japanese forum where one of the users was doing some patent digging and happened upon this year-and-a-half old (there's the magic "18 months") Sony patent. An American site or two picked it up (and translated it using Google), and then the big sites (like IGN) ran with it. This patent is really not worth anything more than a brief "Huh. Interesting." Nothing more.

Also, the day I start trusting IGN as a "source" for legal documents is the day I start trusting Entertainment Tonight as my go-to world news program. IGN is just confused and doesn't know much about the law (and barely knows the gaming industry).

The big question to speculate on is if anything is even going to come from this. Not much point in speculating about the details of a potential device that probably isn't going to happen.Pretty much.

Forget ign then - go right to the source. Siliconera originally reported on both stories. There are TWO patents.

You can click on the new one here (http://storage.siliconera.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/WO2010095400A1.pdf), dated August of 2010, and compare the diagrams and description to the one from Spring 2009. The diagrams and descriptions are completely different, but both refer to BC in some way. The old one described here (http://www.siliconera.com/2009/06/29/sony-patents-emotion-engine-emulation-technology-for-cell-processors/)was a way of emulation the PS2's Emotion Engine on the Cell processor, while this new one is literally a new add-on contraption.

True, they both may mean nothing in the end, but they are separate patents.

True, they both may mean nothing in the end, but they are separate patents.Nope. I'm honestly not trying to be a dick, but if we're seeing a patent now, it means it was filed 18 months ago. If an actual "recent" patent were leaked, it would be a major deal with ramifications far, far outside of the video game industry. This wasn't a leak. It's a publicly accessible document.

If you look at the original patent filing (at the forum source (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A//gigazine.net/index.php%3F/news/comments/20100914_ps3_ps2_adapter/&sl=ja&tl=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8), not from Siliconera), you'll see that the "old" one is actually identical to the one you're calling "new (http://storage.siliconera.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/WO2010095400A1.pdf)." The explanation for the "August 2010" date is that the version you're linking to was just entered into the public record (in August 2010, exactly 18 months after the original patent filing in February 2009). But they are in fact the same patent.

Any resident patent lawyers in the house? :D

EDIT: I see what happened. The one you cited above as the "old (http://www.siliconera.com/2009/06/29/sony-patents-emotion-engine-emulation-technology-for-cell-processors/)" one isn't the same one I posted in an earlier post. The one you cited is an entirely different patent (and was filed in 2007/2008), but has nothing to do with this particular filing. I wasn't referring to that one, but to the story as originally reported (http://www.siliconera.com/2010/09/14/sony-japan-files-patent-for-new-generation-console-to-previous-generation-console-adapter/). Regardless, this recently released document is from a February 2009 patent being made public in August 2010. There's really nothing to see here.

patents take 3 years to process

this looks like something where you can plug your PS2 into your PS3

Another possibility with this new external BC hardware is Sony may release another PS3 model with a high speed IO port.

I don't think Sony will do that. Adding something like that increases costs (redesigned motherboard), and that's the one thing Sony does not want to do. Not to mention the fact that releasing an add-on box always incurs costs - manufacture, shipping, marketing - and I just don't see why Sony would be eager to spend that money so people could play the games they bought 7 years ago. At least Move will theoretically drive new software sales.

It's just not something that seems likely. If anything it seems like a BC solution for the next system.

^^^ That could be it for the first patent, but could it work for the second? I guess it could. They'd simply make BC be an optional, separate purchase with 99% software support. That way it can take advantage of all of the next-gen features without incurring a heavier cost on the system's launch model. It wouldn't be an ethernet port to connect it though - something faster would be in place.

Considering most modern GPUs have more than 48gb/s* of memory, I would halfway expect to see PS2 software emulation on PS4 (along with, of course, a wide array of PS2 games on PSN). PS3, not likely at all, and I doubt they want to incur the costs of bolting a PS3 onto the PS4 motherboard (like they did with PS3 and early models of PS2) since that is just added expense. They could easily sell a PS3 add-on box to customers who want PS3 support. Pricing could be tricky, though.


*this is the problem with emulating PS2 on PS3. The PS2 GPU has 48gb/s of bandwidth, the RSX has like 22gb/s.

Well then a single add-on BC box for all three consoles (and PSP?) at maybe $100 would be interesting. PS3s would be around $200 or so at the time, so with the PS4 purchase requirement that would be a good deal if they integrate it well enough. As costs come down, they can eventually sell an (optional) all-in-one PS4 with the BC box built in.