If you're wondering what happened to Sony's initial promise of full PlayStation 2 backwards compatibility in the PlayStation 3, the answers is simple: money. Speaking with a small room of journalists at last week's E3, SCEA's President and CEO Tretton explained that the tough decision came down to production cost and hardware priorities.
"It was not our goal to bring a new platform out at $599," he said of the initial PlayStation 3 launch, explaining that they began thinking about ways to lower production costs almost immediately. Weighing the cost of the different components and features, backwards compatibility seemed like something they could afford to lose.
"I think the common feeling internally was that backwards compatibility is a nice thing to have," he continued, "but as you moved beyond launch, there were going to be less times when somebody pulled out a PS2 game and put it in their system."
"If you paid $599 for [one] machine that had backwards compatibility, now for $529 you can get a PS3 and a PS2. You can stack them on top of each other if you really want to," he jokes. "I'm not saying that literally, but [that's] in terms of the financial investment that we ask people to make."
Tretton ignores the fact that it's impossible to stack a PS2 on top of a PS3 because of its curved-top design. And since the slim PS2 opens from above, putting a PS3 on top of it would be foolish. But he does make some interesting points. Is backwards compatibility a deal breaker for you, or are you OK with having two Sony consoles in your entertainment center?
Contest:
1:36 PM on 07.21.2008
| 
Is it a big deal for most people? No. But it's just enough to bug me.
That said, I was just playing Suikoden V on my PS3 last week, so I'm definitely glad for the PS2 compatibility.
I used to use my PS3's backwards compatibility, but I realised it wasn't worth putting the extra strain on my PS3's disk drive (Especially after having a PS3 whose drive died) until my PS2 dies. I wouldn't trade my 60gig for one without it though.
But all that doesnt matter to me and my launch PS3 having ass.
I DO play PS2 games on my 60 GB PS3. I have a large collection of PS1/2 JRPGs and SRPGs that cycle through the system, and the slick interface for spawning BC memory cards makes the overall experience pretty enjoyable. Upconversion is nice, but more in that it helps keep my TV happy than making the game look much better.
The long and short of it is I'm glad I have BC. I'm actually pretty curious how much they save by pulling the HW PS2 pipeline, as without it I feel like they're really sealing new users off from easily accessing a large chunk of their library. It'd be one thing if they still offered a "premium" version that had this functionality - to have it then completely drop it makes me a little worried about the PS3's product planning.
For me, backwards compatibility is a system seller. It was what got me to pick up a PS2 before a Gamecube. Blu-Ray isn't remotely prominent enough to justify buying the console "for the player". We'll see how things stack up in holiday season 2009, which is when I'll probably buy a PS3 after next year's price drops.
Well, to cut a long story short: Yes, I am waiting and will continue to wait for a fully backwards compatible model before I plunk down the cash. Yes, I know I'm missing out on a lot of games now, but missing the initial launch of a game does not mean you missed out on a game.
Therefore I will continue to sit in my tower and wish they would just do the damn thing already.
They knocked the 360's backwards compatability asking what the point was to do something half assed when the PS3 can play everything.
Now they're just backpedaling assholes.
almost 600 bucks as the PS3 version that had it
double the controllers
double the space
double the TV connections
Crappy connection to play ps2 games on my 50' TV
double the power connectors
hum.. No. Asshole.
I'm from the group of people who didn't have a PS2, so I cheer for digital delivery of ps2 games, like the xbox 360 is doing with some xbox classics.
...now we have NO bc in the PS3 and quotes like this, and I wonder to myself, "Where are all those whiny bitchy fanboys now?"
/pot stirred
Software emulation actually did have an additional hardware component involved. I'm still trying to dig sources up, but I remember the 60GB/20GB had the PS2 CPU and GPU in HW. The 80 GB dropped the "Emotion Engine" CPU, but they added emulation support. The 40 GB dropped the GPU as well, and they're either STILL working on some way to emulate the whole pipeline or it's impossible to emulate everything fast enough (OR they don't care enough to add it). Like I said earlier, it makes me wonder how much pulling those parts saved.
In any case, it seemed very important when I was purchasing my ps3 that I track down the no-longer-manufactured 60gb. Now that I have it, I've played ps2 games a handful of times, and it's definitely a nice feature, but i also don't feel like it's crucial. I would probably feel differently, of course, if I didn't have it.
I was reading a discussion on Fark.com about the PS3, which has some hardcore gamers that frequent there and a lot of mainstream people on it and quite a few complained about the lack of BC. One guy who works at Gamestop posted there and he said a lot of customers have been put off on buying the PS3 because of the confusion on which version is BC and which is not.
This is simple to us, but the mainstream doesn't keep up with every bit of news like we do, and most probably don't know that newer models have no/modified BC. With an install based of 140 million, that's a pretty big middle finger Sony is giving.
Note the "he jokes" and "I'm not saying that literally" parts. Quality reporting going on here.
Plus, vertically it would be possible — though not advisable I'm sure — but I imagine that was the "joke" he was referring to.
Just having the wireless controller is enough for me to prefer using my PS3, frankly speaking.
I'm very glad for BC, and even if I didn't use it at all I'd be happy to have it (even in its imperfect software emulation available on current 80gb models), as opposed to, say, the 360's, which was terrible from the get-go.
To remove 6-7 year old processors from the system? It wouldn't surprise me if the saving were under 10 bucks. We are seeing 99$ PS2 emerge, and in these you have to account for the extra components that the ps3 already have(sound, video connection, controller ports,etc), the memory, the plastic, the controller, the extra cables, and all that. I'm pretty sure they are not selling PS2s at loss at this point (since they'd be robbing themselves from PS3 customers.. at a loss) and you get the idea of how much they are saving
I didn't have the disposable cash nor an HDTV (I think it's dumb to go with the 360 or PS3 so they look like a PS2 and xbox on a SDTV) at the time. Now that I was able to buy a PS3, why did the technology gave me LESS than before?
That mother's HUGE!
I only just got my HDTV about a month ago. I've always viewed my PS3 purchase as an investment because I knew, down the line, BC support was gonna be dropped entirely. As of maybe a week ago, I saw an MGS4/80gb PS3 bundle. I'm sure you could find one of those and be happy.
And after owning the thing for over a month, only this morning did I finally buy a game for it (2 actually. Toys-R-Us has that kick ass buy 1 get 50% off the second PS3 games sale). All this time I've been rocking Metal Gears 1-3, SotC, Capcom vs. SNK 2, Driver (the original for PS1) and Odin Sphere. I literally bought it just for the BC with all of the pretty!
I think it's important if for no other reason that it's confusing about which versions of the PS3 have emulation or don't (or limited). I can barely keep up with it so I can understand the mainstream's confusion which is arguably the most important group they want to attract to that feature.
I understand why they're doing it. No one expected the PS2 to still be selling as well as it is and they don't want to undercut that, but it's still a dickish move on their part. I'm just glad I snapped up the 60GB version when I had the chance.
I never had a ps2 and there's only one good ps3 game and I don't like it.
fuck backwards compatibility."
Well put!
I have played ONE Ps2 game on my PS3, I play my PS2/PS1 games on my PS2.
It's more likely that if you would have actually bought it, you would have done so by now (almost two years with release, 80GB w/95% BC are still out there). I have the 80GB version and can play all but 1 PS2 games on it. With what I've payed for rechargeable batteries and wireless adapter, it's been the same cost as a 360 and more than worth it for a great piece of hardware.
and a dreamcast.
ESPECIALLY the dreamcast.