PS3 Backwards Compatibility. Why was it removed?

Something that I have been pondering for a while.

Why did sony loose backward compatibility with the forty gig model? Does anyone know what the justification behind this was?

As a 40g ps3 owner myself, i was pondering about it. Its probably the same reason they removed memory card ports and 2 USB port off of it too. I guess thats what makes it cheaper.

It's part of their plan to take over the world! :shock:

Didn't you know?

many reasons:

1. sell more PS2s
2. to convince ppl to move on to PS3
3. to make system cheaper
4. whatever else

People whined and cried over the price in the first place and so they did something about it. Now that the price is cheaper, people still complain. At least the ps3 has controller ports unlike the wii or 360. You don't really need flash memory readers since usb flash drives can be used in the controller ports. I am not saying sony isn't in the wrong, but the consumer has to be reasonable as well. You are getting a game machine DVD and Blue Ray player with Divx support with internet browser that can read pc devices like flash drives, gamepads and whatever other usb things you can throw in there. Can the 360 or Wii do any of that? The other systems are good at what they do yes, I don't mean for this to sound like a fanboy post, but on 360 you have copy music by way of cd, so even if you can play music in the background, it does make it a hassle. You also get a system where there is no memory file cap like on 360. Microsoft had to expand the cap just to fit super street fighter 2 in HD. You get a completely open network that can handle user created content and have brand new games on a network that can look and play as cool as a retail disc game only smaller like Siren or Ratchet Quest for Booty.

Why do people still want to play PS2 at the second year mark of the PS3? Seriously!! Get with the program.

Greed.

It encroached on PS3 game sales. Some of the responses in this thread puzzle me... how brainwashed some people are!

People whined and cried over the price in the first place and so they did something about it. Now that the price is cheaper, people still complain. At least the ps3 has controller ports unlike the wii or 360. You don't really need flash memory readers since usb flash drives can be used in the controller ports. I am not saying sony isn't in the wrong, but the consumer has to be reasonable as well. You are getting a game machine DVD and Blue Ray player with Divx support with internet browser that can read pc devices like flash drives, gamepads and whatever other usb things you can throw in there. Can the 360 or Wii do any of that? The other systems are good at what they do yes, I don't mean for this to sound like a fanboy post, but on 360 you have copy music by way of cd, so even if you can play music in the background, it does make it a hassle. You also get a system where there is no memory file cap like on 360. Microsoft had to expand the cap just to fit super street fighter 2 in HD. You get a completely open network that can handle user created content and have brand new games on a network that can look and play as cool as a retail disc game only smaller like Siren or Ratchet Quest for Booty.

Why do people still want to play PS2 at the second year mark of the PS3? Seriously!! Get with the program.

gamenerd15

PS2 games are still awesome, and if you need an RPG fix that's the only place to go right now, more RPG's have come on the PS2 In the last 2 years then on the PS3 all together. Seeing as my PS2 strangely died on my (get it at launch) a week before the PS3 launch its great to still be able to play my PS@ games with out having to buy another PS2.

Because it was a good feature.

Wait..

That's not a good reason to take out a great feature..

That must mean..

SONY HOODWINKED US!!!

People whined and cried over the price in the first place and so they did something about it. Now that the price is cheaper, people still complain. At least the ps3 has controller ports unlike the wii or 360. You don't really need flash memory readers since usb flash drives can be used in the controller ports. I am not saying sony isn't in the wrong, but the consumer has to be reasonable as well. You are getting a game machine DVD and Blue Ray player with Divx support with internet browser that can read pc devices like flash drives, gamepads and whatever other usb things you can throw in there. Can the 360 or Wii do any of that? The other systems are good at what they do yes, I don't mean for this to sound like a fanboy post, but on 360 you have copy music by way of cd, so even if you can play music in the background, it does make it a hassle. You also get a system where there is no memory file cap like on 360. Microsoft had to expand the cap just to fit super street fighter 2 in HD. You get a completely open network that can handle user created content and have brand new games on a network that can look and play as cool as a retail disc game only smaller like Siren or Ratchet Quest for Booty.

Why do people still want to play PS2 at the second year mark of the PS3? Seriously!! Get with the program.

gamenerd15

I figured it out. :D

This must be a 'joke-post'.

didnt a sony rep said something along the lines of no one caring for bc?

anywho theres a thread about all the lies sony made in the recent past. it gives insight that pertains to this.

i would like to think that it was done to save money but they said it wasnt that expensive.i will just pretend that full bc was a bonus for spending 600$gamegod

Yeah, I hear ya... but I'm not spending another $200 (give or take) if my PS3 takes a dump. I still have my PS2, but it makes more noise than my Xbox 360 so I expect that'll be going the way of the buffalo soon.

As for the people saying that BC isn't that important anyway, I'll admit that there's enough good games on PS3 that I don't really HAVE to play PS2 games, but, firstly, PS3 has no good RPGs. PS1 and PS2 have dozens... from the Final Fantasy series, to the Dragon Quest games, to the Suikoden series, to the Xenosaga trilogy, to Chrono Cross... PS3 doesn't have a Katamari game, which is one of my favorite games. PS3 doesn't have the Dark Cloud series, which was the PS2 equivalent of Zelda and I don't know why the hell a sequel hasn't been formally announced. PS2 is home to the definitive GTA experiences (i.e. III, Vice City and San Andreas), and also has Ape Escape 2 and 3, which most people don't give a damn about but I love it. By cutting backwards compatibility, Sony deprives us of 10000 games that the earlier adopters have access to, many of which are evergreen classics. And you folks make it out like Sony's doing us a favor? What kind of fool has such corporate loyalty without being on the company payroll? lol, are they offering robust benefits packages to fanboys now? Unpluck your heads from your posteriors and you will see that you've been had.

What the above poster said and aso it could be a ploy for Sony to continue selling PS2sBecent

a combo of that and the fact early PS3 owners didnt buy PS3 games. ANyway, the funny the lost of the EE chip didnt reduce price that much and i hear that software BC doesnt cost sony nothing.

[QUOTE="Becent"]What the above poster said and aso it could be a ploy for Sony to continue selling PS2sPSP107

a combo of that and the fact early PS3 owners didnt buy PS3 games. ANyway, the funny the lost of the EE chip didnt reduce price that much and i hear that software BC doesnt cost sony nothing.

Well, that's because it didn't have very many. But naturally, Sony didn't think of that. And yet, now that the console HAS a bunch of great games and they're actually selling relatively well, Sony yanks BC.

But I really doubt that people who already own a PS3 will go out and buy a PS2. But if PS3 was BC, that might entice someone into buying one that may have only previously bought a PS2. It doesn't make any sense... but I think the past few years have shown that several key players at Sony are being paid much more than they're worth. As far as I can see, they've still got more pink slips to hand out over there before this company comes even close to the success of PS2.

The driving force for the PS2 was the "Emotion Engine". When the PS2 was released it was obviously technologically ahead of it's time (as all consoles are) in order to compete with the constantly upgrading PC gaming market. Now, since that technology is somewhat dated it's cheaper to produce and you can also make that engine in one small chipset.

When the PS3 was first released, it came with the emotion engine built in. So essentially, when you bought a PS3, you were buying a PS2 as well. That was one of the reasons that the PS3 was so expensive. The most expensive part of making a console is obviously the hardware. The Operating System and firmware (once produced) doesn't cost much because every system will use it. So with every sale you make after the first console, the OS becomes free. But you can't cut the cost on hardware. Unless, the manufacturers you use make it cheaper as the technology becomes out dated.

The different audio and video connections, SD card slots, the Emotion Engine chipset, USB Ports, Bluetooth compatibility, Ethernet chipset, CD lens, DVD lens, Bluray Lens, Hard drive, etc... All costs more money to manufacture. I can only assume that they attempted to have an emulator for PS2 games at the time that proved to not be fully compatible and therefore needed to spend more to use the ACTUAL Emotion Engine to be able to market backward compatibility.

The PS3 in itself is no toy. Developers are having trouble programming for it right now because it works much differently than any other NextGen console (and even PCs). Generally a programmer will build a game based on the power of the processor. The PS3 actually has one main processor and multiple sub processors. Each sub can be dedicated to a different portion of the games programming and the main can be used to put it all together. Developers are only beginning to realize that now (as mentioned by the development teams behind "Dead Space" and "Red Faction" and we should FINALLY see what the PS3 is TRULY capable of soon.

The PS3 (at it's release) costed Sony more money to manufacture than consumers were actually paying (believe it or not). But, that's normal cause first and foremost, a console needs to create an install base to attract developers and exclusive titles. But, now while they're nearing year three, it's time to start making back their money.

To cut the cost of all of this hardware Sony has committed themselves to including, they've taken away some hardware to attract more consumers with a price drop. They've removed 2 USB ports, some connection options (which I'm not sure of) and (the most expensive part) the Emotion Engine. You can play the original PS1 games on your PS3 anyway, because they HAVE been able to implement an Emulator for that system which works VERY well.

However, it seems that the removal of backwards compatibility was only temporary. From what I understand now, the new PS3s (ie: MGS Bundle) actually have a great working PS2 emulator and now it appears that can make the price drop AND PS2 compatibility permanent.

seriously though.. why do they care so much for backwards compatability anyway. of course we all wish PS3 had it. i wish my 40GB had it bit seriusly. most if not all ppl who bought a PS3 already have a PS2 so why r u complaining. go play PS2 games on a PS2 thats what they were made to be played on. if u want BC soooo much then u might aswell go out and spend $100 on a PS2 and a memory card because its never gonna happenThe_Wild_Tiger

I agree. On the early years of PS2, I play my PS1 games on PS1...until now. I prefer playing games on its original system.

To the topic...because Sony wants people who don't have a PS2 but still wants to play PS2 games to buy PS2.

many reasons:

1. sell more PS2s
2. to convince ppl to move on to PS3
3. to make system cheaper
4. whatever else

The_Wild_Tiger

that about sums it up. the ps3 costs alot of money to make. cutting down on costs allows them to max their profits. plus, you can get a ps2 decently cheap these days. and when you can sell two systems very well not to add the bonus PSP, your doing well.

If PS3 still had an EE chip, Sony will sell more systems faster. PSP107

Some people are not aware that Europe never got the full backward compatible with EE chip, SCEE removed the EE chip in the PS3 60GB.

Only the NTSC got full backward compatible not PAL.

Here is two question

1. Why didn't SCEE give Europe EE chip in the PS3 60GB like the USA counter part?

2. Why is it that only the PAL version lost the backward compatible while USA and Japan still continues to get Backward compatible?

The PS3 should have the same features and same choices worldwide. If USA continues getting BC then Europe should have the same choice and please don't say anything about import.

The main reason was to make it cheaper, but it also reduced the size of the boad which is 1 step closer to a PS3 slim, cuz there is no way they could fit all of it into a slim ps3 right now, if it were to come out next year. But it could be possible in 2 or 3 years when they shrink the components enough.kb8618

i think that this is the main reason. I found a very good picture comparing the motherboard from the 60gig model with the 40 gig.

Something that I have been pondering for a while.

Why did sony loose backward compatibility with the forty gig model? Does anyone know what the justification behind this was?

billbzly

my take on it is so:

1. Reduce the price.

2. Sony is trying to move away from the ps2, and get people into the ps3/next gen., since the ps2 is close to the end of its 10 yr cycle. And since development for the ps2 is almost going to cease, theres no point in keeping BC for the ps3.

I figure if you have ps2 games, you must have a ps2. Just use that. seriously. 360 BC was crap. It didn't stop me from hooking up my original xbox.PhysicsLCP

lol i was gonna add this to my previous post also. If you have ps2 games, you must have a ps2 right?

Don't get me wrong, I love BC, but I rarely use it. And when I do it's to play some older RPGs. I have a PS2, so if I'm that excited about playing a lot of PS2 game for some reason, I'll just pull my PS2 out of the box. no big deal. If PS3 can be made cheaper removing the feature, I'm all for it. I'm a purist too though. I'd rather play my NES games on a real NES than play through an emulator.PhysicsLCP

There is one thing wrong about not having backward is that you would have too much consoles. Let me example lets say I buy consoles and never sell like you are say then

first I had the NES and sega master system
then I sold the NES and sega master system = for the SNES and sega mega drive
then I sold the SNES and sega mega drive = for the N64 and PS1
Then I sold the N64 and PS1 = for the PS2 and gamecube
Then I sold the gamecube for the nintendo wii.
Then later I bought the PS3 40GB

There is also comodore and atari but I never seen my sister was the one that played them I was small back then.

That is why BC is important, its easy to have say to keep the old console to play the old games but to do that you need more than 10 consoles to play all the games you like.

Some people think nah Backward is rubbish and they should keep the old console but that isn't true backward compatible is way better than some people thinks.

They need to phase the PS2 out and get people on PS3 and PS3 games. Honestly if you buy a PS3 and play PS2 games, get your brain checked.ryokinshin6x3

No they're not phasing out PS2; didn't you see they were still talking about PS2 at E3?

What they want is money with ppl buying PS2 for PS2 games and PS3 for PS3 games instead of buying PS3 for all.

I need to get my brain checked when I play PS2 games on my PS3? You're kinda... out there.

Seriously who want to hook up two machines when one machine could get all the work done, not to mention my PS2 is going to die because of old age. Get ur brain checked if you think I should buy another PS2 for PS2 games.

[QUOTE="PhysicsLCP"]I figure if you have ps2 games, you must have a ps2. Just use that. seriously. 360 BC was crap. It didn't stop me from hooking up my original xbox.ashunpnoy

lol i was gonna add this to my previous post also. If you have ps2 games, you must have a ps2 right?

I bought only the xbox and the gamecube last generation, so I am using my 60 gig model to play all the good ps2 games I've missed.