Support NeoGAF

[James Sawyer Ford]

I would have to believe that if all it cost was $20 to add in a CELL variant chip to enable backwards compatability, that is WELL worth the cost long-term for the entire PS4 userbase to be able to purchase PS3 software.

I think the average PS4 user would probably buy at least $20 worth of PS3 software over its entire lifespan.

 

[Margalis]

Lol, wait wait wait.

So, you're trying to convince me, they won't emulate PS3 games on completely capable hardware, but they'll COMPLETELY REWRITE the code for a CELL based game and make it "Ultra HD"?

Lol.

Isn't that exactly what happened this gen?

Guys, you're trying to say instead of emulating God of War 1 & 2 they'll rewrite them and make them HD?

Lol!

Edit: The PS3 started with hardware compatibility with PS2, then moved to software compatibility (supposedly - the whole software BC thing was weird), then removed even software compatibility. Why would you remove software compatibility - something that costs nothing - other than for business and strategy reasons?

As far as using Cell as a generic compute thing, I think most multiplat developers would be happy to not have to deal with Cell unless there is an API that makes it basically invisible. On PS3 it caused tooling issues and was a pain, but at least it provided high performance. Fucking around with Cell when all it's doing is acting as a DSP is probably more trouble than it's worth.

 

[RoboPlato]

I would have to believe that if all it cost was $20 to add in a CELL variant chip to enable backwards compatability, that is WELL worth the cost long-term for the entire PS4 userbase to be able to purchase PS3 software.

I think the average PS4 user would probably buy at least $20 worth of PS3 software over its entire lifespan.

Easily, especially if it includes PSN titles. It would also allow Orbis to gain a lot of momentum with Plus. They could make a lot of major PS3 titles free as advertising for the next gen sequels.

I'm still not convinced it'll happen but if they can do it without going over their TDP or budget they should go for it.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Easily, especially if it includes PSN titles. It would also allow Orbis to gain a lot of momentum with Plus. They could make a lot of major PS3 titles free as advertising for the next gen sequels.

I'm still not convinced it'll happen but if they can do it without going over their TDP or budget they should go for it.

Yeah, I forgot the impact of Plus....that's a huge instant game collection that can attract new PS4 users.

Backwards compatability is more important now than it ever has been.

I have my reservations that it WILL happen, but like you said, if it can fit within their plans, why not?

Especially if they now have to go with Jaguar cores, which should reduce the thermal load and reduce costs a bit.

I know gofreak is quick to mention Gaikai, but I don't think Gaikai is going to be feasible for most folks for a while, probably not until the end of the gen will it gain any sort of significant traction.

 

[Bittercup]

Edit: The PS3 started with hardware compatibility with PS2, then moved to software compatibility (supposedly - the whole software BC thing was weird), then removed even software compatibility. Why would you remove software compatibility - something that costs nothing - other than for business and strategy reasons?

That's not what happened.
The first models had GS and EE build in (full hardware compatibility). Then they removed the EE and only included the GS (mix of hardware and software compatibility). For later models they removed the GS as well and no more backwards compatibility.
There was never a full software backwards compatibility in the PS3 and neither was that removed.

 

[phosphor112]

Isn't that exactly what happened this gen?

Guys, you're trying to say instead of emulating God of War 1 & 2 they'll rewrite them and make them HD?

Lol!

Edit: The PS3 started with hardware compatibility with PS2, then moved to software compatibility (supposedly - the whole software BC thing was weird), then removed even software compatibility. Why would you remove software compatibility - something that costs nothing - other than for business and strategy reasons?

As far as using Cell as a generic compute thing, I think most multiplat developers would be happy to not have to deal with Cell unless there is an API that makes it basically invisible. On PS3 it caused tooling issues and was a pain, but at least it provided high performance. Fucking around with Cell when all it's doing is acting as a DSP is probably more trouble than it's worth.

Cool, so just like PS3 had "HD Classics" the PS4 is going to feature "Already HD Classics?"

Also, want to know why people hated dealing with the Cell? They had to use it as a CPU. It's not a CPU. It's a stream processor.

PS2 BC was removed because it DID cost money. It had the Emotion Engine in it, and the EE is weak enough not to be able to contribute to anything for the PS3. That's the opposite situation for PS4 and the PE they patented.

 

[sangreal]

I guess cell would make more sense than having an extra gpu that only does gpgpu tasks (which even df said sounded strange) but who knows

 

[SniperHunter]

addition of cell aside, wouldn't sony have to pay royalties to nvidia to get bc working in orbis?

 

[sangreal]

DF did say that the compute module is likely for physics, which would give the CPU a ton of room to breathe considering how important I expect physics and procedural animation to be next gen. It's a good strategy for getting the most out of a Jaguar based system, especially if it's cheap.

they didn't say that. they just gave physics as an example of something commonly offloaded since a gpu is better at it than a traditional cpu

 

[colt45joe]

mkay, cool. all these consoles are going to have great games for us all to play.

 

[Solal]

I can see a huge commercial impact if PS4 is able to read PS3 games: how many people won't buy it until a game appeals to them? Now with BC many would buy it just to play the PS3 masterpieces that would be very cheap at that point.

I mean: for Sony, the 20$ that the Cell would cost them, would be reimboursed VERY fast (just 2 or 3 PS3 games per console and that's it!).

And it s such a good selling point: play hundreds of games (maybe even in better condition: could had some AA on some of them for instance couldn't they?) day 1.

 

[Bittercup]

addition of cell aside, wouldn't sony have to pay royalties to nvidia to get bc working in orbis?

Depends on the contract they made with nvidia. But I would assume they didn't make the mistake of not owning the rights to it or any other insurance to be able to just use the design in future products.

 

[JohnnySasaki86]

That's not what happened.
The first models had GS and EE build in (full hardware compatibility). Then they removed the EE and only included the GS (mix of hardware and software compatibility). For later models they removed the GS as well and no more backwards compatibility.
There was never a full software backwards compatibility in the PS3 and neither was that removed.

Yep. The do have full software emulation for about 40 PS2 titles now on the PSN Store though.

 

[JohnnySasaki86]

addition of cell aside, wouldn't sony have to pay royalties to nvidia to get bc working in orbis?

Yea think so. Wait even if there emulating RSX and the hardware isn't in there?

edit: oops sorry for double post

 

[Ashes]

If $40 dollars is nothing, why don't they used that remaining $40 and add in another 4gb fast ram and make it 8gb with a huge bus.

Why stop there? add CUs instead. Much better ps4>ps3 bc.

Spoiler

would be lovely to have bc though... this is one of those instances where I hope I'm wrong.

 

[googleplex]

addition of cell aside, wouldn't sony have to pay royalties to nvidia to get bc working in orbis?

I'm pretty sure Sony own RSX out right. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong

 

[JohnnySasaki86]

If $40 dollars is nothing, why don't they used that remaining $40 and add in another 4gb fast ram and make it 8gb with a huge bus.

Why stop there? add CUs instead. Much better ps4>ps3 bc.

Spoiler

would be lovely to have bc though... this is one of those instances where I hope I'm wrong.

$40 isn't nothing, it equates to $600 million over the first 15million consoles sold.

 

[Psychotext]

I'm pretty sure Sony own RSX out right. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong

They do, but it's also possible to own the design and only have a licence for the instruction set... time will tell on that one.

 

[nelsonroyale]

The Dev Kits don't seem to include any such compute module, but they are dev kits anyway. The idea is very tempting, but unlikely imo. Apart from that DF vague statements, it isn't mentionned anywhere...

To be fair, the info on the PS4 specs is anemic to say the least...

 

[DBT85]

They would never do that they're making so much money off of the HD remasters. I would expect them to continue making PS2 HD remasters well into next gen.

As I posed a few pages back. They might well be making some money on the HD remasters (I don't know that we know how much). However, they can't hope to remaster 1% of the top PS2 games ever released (AFAIK 2000+).

On the other hand, if they could in some way get PS2/PS3 BC working on the PS4, they have a decades worth of games that people WILL keep buying digitally, even when they own a damned disk that works. How many people that love FFVII bought the PSN version so that their precious disk can sit on a shelf and never get ruined.

If the choices are a) take a risk that a dev will do a good remaster and that people will buy it, or b) just pop the game up on the PSN for download, the latter is the better option in my armchair analyst eyes. They lose no money to retail, there is no risk, they can add key classics to PS+ as incentives. Plus they aren't restricted to only releasing a few key select titles, they can drop on the oddball games that maybe didn't sell as well but still were critically acclaimed. Plus you get the Steam effect, people buying shit because its on sale and because its a few clicks and they own it.

That is of course all dependant on them getting BC with either the PS2 or PS3 running on the PS4. On one hand, they don't bother (perhaps due to costs of integration) and just release 5 remasters every year for the next 5 years. On the other hand, they do get BC working for PS2/PS3 games. The hardware costs more up front but they can now just dump games onto the PSN whenever there is a slow week of PS4 releases.

Nothing to stop them still doing remasters on titles that they feel deserve them.


I've said before that I don't really mind either way for BC. I don't tend to go back and play old games. I don't have the time to play all the new games that I want to play. I'd pay the extra for it if it was needed, but I wouldn't boycot a system that doesn't have it (as some have vehemently claimed across the boards).

To put it in perspective, if the PS4 comes out with PS2/PS3 BC but it costs me £50-£80 more than I was expecting, I'll buy it and be happy that I can still play my PS3 backlog on it and move my PS3 upstairs. If the PS4 is released with an addon to do PS3 BC (as patented) then I wouldn't buy it (the addon) day 1. I may never buy it.

I am not getting any hopes up, I'm not expecting it and that way I won't be surprised if it doesn't happen.

Yep. The do have full software emulation for about 40 PS2 titles now on the PSN Store though.

I think it's interesting that none of those titles (that I know of) are games that stretched the PS2 that much. The PS3 seems capable of some PS2 emulation but not on the games that made the PS2 sweat.

 

[Nachtmaer]

I said this before in some other thread but wouldn't it be relatively easy to pull off software emulation for PS2 games nowadays? If a few guys working on PCSX2 can do it, then Sony can as well and they know the exact hardware they're dealing with. Sure, it requires a lot of CPU power to brute force it but I was able to play some games on my old C2D machine. Considering PCSX2 is just based off reverse engineering and Sony's documentation (which I assume doesn't have all the details), I'm sure Jaguar can do it.

I think the bigger question would be whether Sony actually wants to do it instead of being able to. Why give away "free" PS2 games when you can make people buy them again wrapped up in an HD title?

 

[Bittercup]

I said this before in some other thread but wouldn't it be relatively easy to pull off software emulation for PS2 games nowadays?

I think the bigger question would be whether Sony actually wants to do it instead of being able to. Why give away "free" PS2 games when you can make people buy them again wrapped up in an HD title?

Yes PS2 backwards-compatibility shouldn't be a problem. PS3 is the tricky one.

I don't think they would earn more money by hoping third party devs making HD ports instead. There are still only relatively few HD ports so far and most of the big PS2 games are missing. I don't think HD Ports are that lucrative some believe.
And backwards-compatibility doesn't really stop HD ports. The original games are most of the time not 16:9, lower resolution than 720p/1080p, lack trophies. Or like with the Splinter Cell Trilogy which is based on the PC version instead of the inferior PS2 version. There are still reasons why people would be interested in a HD port.
And if developers don't want to or have the time or manpower to make a HD port, with backwards-compatibility they could simply sell the games on PSN without further work required.

 

[Brad Grenz]

They give away "free" PS1 games right now, but they still do good business selling PS One Classics on PSN. I fully expect full backwards compatibility with PS1, PS2 and possibly PSP on the PS4. If they can get PS3 support working as well, all the better. People have an exaggerated sense of the HD remake business impact. Those are cool and all, but you'd much rather be able to sell your entire digital back library to your whole installed base than be forced to spend not insignificant amounts of money "remastering" a tiny subset of titles. Sure, people can go out and buy armfuls of PS2 shovel ware at their local flee market or game shack, but PSN releases can also significantly undercut the collector pricing of all the rare and highly sought catalog titles. Hell, a number of years ago I sold my original black label copy of Final Fantasy VII for about $80. It only costs $10 for me to play it on my Vita and PS3 today. Same will be true of PS2 games like Suikoden V, etc.

 

[Respawn]

Yeah but that has to do more with the devs

and not the hardware? PS3 has proven itself no matter how we try and spin it.

 

[systemfehler]

$40 isn't nothing, it equates to $600 million over the first 15million consoles sold.

Assuming Sony pays for everything - with off shelf hardware I think the loss won't be as significant as with the PS3.

 

[Manmademan]

$40 isn't nothing, it equates to $600 million over the first 15million consoles sold.

$40 IS nothing, since unlike last gen Sony has a direct means to recover the cost. including ps3 BC means selling psn and ps3 content for 19.99 a pop or whatever, or additional incentive for ps4 owners to shell out for PS plus at 50 dollars a year.

keep in mind digital downloads cut retailers and distributors out of the picture, so a downloaded ps3 or psn title is significantly more profitable than a retail title of the same cost.

There's also HOME to think about which continues to be inexplicably profitable. maintaining a ps3 and ps4 separate versions of that make no sense.

the situation here is a lot different than with ps2 BC, as Sony didn't have all this in place when the ps3 launched. ps2 BC just meant users got to play games they already owned, or pick up cheap used titles at Gamestop, neither of which directly generated revenue and made less sense to include given cost reduction was a huge issue for the ps3

 

[thuway]

Offering PS3 BC would allow the sale of a plethora of titles on the PSN store and for dirt cheap prices. Buying the Uncharted games for $14.99 a pop on the PSN store in 2015, to a person who has never played them, should be a plan. Without a doubt, BC is something that should be carefully thought out.

 

[Manmademan]

Offering PS3 BC would allow the sale of a plethora of titles on the PSN store and for dirt cheap prices. Buying the Uncharted games for $14.99 a pop on the PSN store in 2015, to a person who has never played them, should be a plan. Without a doubt, BC is something that should be carefully thought out.

given the PS plus model, Sony could literally give away ps3 and psn games for free and BC would still pay for itself several times over

 

[thuway]

given the PS plus model, Sony could literally give away ps3 and psn games for free and BC would still pay for itself several times over

BC is a little bit of a nightmare to implement, but not impossible if they planned on it from the get-go.

 

[Sorc3r3r]

Offering PS3 BC would allow the sale of a plethora of titles on the PSN store and for dirt cheap prices. Buying the Uncharted games for $14.99 a pop on the PSN store in 2015, to a person who has never played them, should be a plan. Without a doubt, BC is something that should be carefully thought out.

Going by history Sony has always supported BC in their new systems(from ps2 to psvita), they stopped it with the 1st revision of the ps3 instead.

So there should be more than possibility to have a bc enambled PS4.
Maybe the premium sku?

 

[Manmademan]

BC is a little bit of a nightmare to implement, but not impossible if they planned on it from the get-go.

not really. ps2 BC was near perfect in launch ps3s, and psp BC in the vita is very good. The only issue is whether or not including the hardware to do so makes financial sense.

the ps3 was so horrendously expensive to make thanks to the blu ray drive that cost reduction was a bigger priority than maintaining BC, especially since ps2 BC didn't directly generate much revenue, if at all.

This won't be the case for the ps4.

 

[Moosichu]

Man, if BC was included I would be SO happy (PS+ user here). I think the compute module idea is an interesting one. Sony may lock-out disc BC and make it download only though :/ . On the other hand I wouldn't mind so much if PS+ allowed you to play PSOne, 2 and 3 discs. (As a way of recouping BC costs)

 

[Respawn]

The PS3's wifi is so terrible. I have to hook it up with an ethernet cable just to stream 720p video to it from my laptop. Ugh. Why couldn't they have added better wifi to it with the super slim ? Christ, Microsoft not only added internal wifi to their slim, but it supports wireless N and is pretty good.

sigh

Not sure what your setup is but I stream 1080p vids from my Linksys gigabit router to my PS3 no problem. Im also on a 58+ gb connection. Downloads and gaming are quite damn good. The wifi in the PS3 isnt some half ass piece of hardware. There are many variables involved when it comes to data and how data is going through those ports. Having a background in IT and working in the field is a plus I guess.

 

[DBT85]

Going by history Sony has always supported BC in their new systems(from ps2 to psvita), they stopped it with the 1st revision of the ps3 instead.

So there should be more than possibility to have a bc enambled PS4.
Maybe the premium sku?

I imagine it's in all of them or none of them. If they all insist on different SKUs I want them to be different because of pack ins or HDD size, not console specific differences like we saw as the start of this generation.

not really. ps2 BC was near perfect in launch ps3s, and psp BC in the vita is very good. The only issue is whether or not including the hardware to do so makes financial sense.

the ps3 was so horrendously expensive to make thanks to the blu ray drive that cost reduction was a bigger priority than maintaining BC, especially since ps2 BC didn't directly generate much revenue, if at all.

This won't be the case for the ps4.

This is my thought regarding revenue. At the PS3 launch PSN was nothing close to what it is now and selling people PS2 games on the service never came up at all. Now they have a functional online ecosystem to sell everyone PS2/PS3 games. If the PS4 can do PS2 BC then it'll be like shooting fish in a barrel.

They don't even have to lock out disk BC. I don;t have any of my PS2 games any more but I would almost certainly buy FFX and FFXII without even thinking about it. Knowing full well that I'll probably never play them lol.

 

[Nachtmaer]

And if developers don't want to or have the time or manpower to make a HD port, with backwards-compatibility they could simply sell the games on PSN without further work required.

They give away "free" PS1 games right now, but they still do good business selling PS One Classics on PSN.

Yeah, I didn't think of it that way. Besides having up to PS2 (or perhaps even PS3) BC being a reason to buy a PS4, even if it's for not too many people, selling unported or HD games on PSN would be extra money for Sony.

I find it amusing when people think they can live without PS3 BC but still want to have all their PSN titles to be transferred over as if they run on magic fluff. I can see why some would just consider it a bonus to have their (disc) PS3 games working on a PS4 but the whole online content has become a big factor for having support on the PS4. As someone pointed out earlier, not having BC would mean that Sony needs to start from scratch with their PSN titles. Perhaps in the long run it might end up costing more money than coming up with a form of BC, be it with some plug-in module or a more expensive SKU. A lot of people think that Gaikai might come into play here but I don't see that happening. There are way too many people whose internet can't handle that because of download caps or limited bandwidth.

 

[Jhriad]

The PS3 started with hardware compatibility with PS2, then moved to software compatibility (supposedly - the whole software BC thing was weird), then removed even software compatibility. Why would you remove software compatibility - something that costs nothing - other than for business and strategy reasons?

I'm surprised how common a misconception this is. I know it has already been said but I'll repeat it; There was only ever partial software compatibility with the entire PS2 catalog. EE was removed but GS was left in because the PS3 couldn't emulate the bandwidth of the GS. When the GS was removed the only titles that could still run via emulation were those that didn't take advantage of the bandwidth offered by the GS. Those titles are the few PS2 classics that are on PSN unchanged. (this is my understanding of the situation)

I said this before in some other thread but wouldn't it be relatively easy to pull off software emulation for PS2 games nowadays?

I think the bigger question would be whether Sony actually wants to do it instead of being able to. Why give away "free" PS2 games when you can make people buy them again wrapped up in an HD title?

PS2 BC should be able to be implemented in the PS3 because it has the bandwidth required to emulate the GS fully.

I think it's interesting that none of those titles (that I know of) are games that stretched the PS2 that much. The PS3 seems capable of some PS2 emulation but not on the games that made the PS2 sweat.

See above about the bandwidth of the Graphics Synthesizer in the PS2.


Given all the rumors abound about the hardware and only that one (I think) had the part that gives us hope of some form of the Cell being included I have my doubts. I'll remain hopeful but I'm still not expecting it. Still hoping to be wowed by Sony but this next generation is looking like the gen that I make the jump to PC exclusivity.

 

[Ashes]

Man, all this effort to get power down, and they go with hardware bc?
Seems like if there is any juice left to spare, it should all go on ps4, underpowered as these consoles are.

External bc incoming or not, the ps4 is more than likely not having ps3bc even if there are good to sound business reasons for it - and not only pr, but psn+ related.

 

[mattp]

Man, all this effort to get power down, and they go with hardware bc?
Seems like if there is any juice left to spare, it should all go on ps4, underpowered as these consoles are.

External bc incoming or not, the ps4 is more than likely not having ps3bc even if there are good to sound business reasons for it - and not only pr, but psn+ related.

but thats the thing
putting a cell on the board would be great for ps4 games, too
could offload all kinds of stuff onto it

 

[H_Prestige]

I think you are assuming way too much - on how easy it is to emulate things, especially since they coded to the metal, and not high level api like directx. And there were some Toshiba units that used Cell too... but I dont think there are any left.

Sony will rather issue Ultra HD versions of PS3 titles and sell them to you for profit, than increase the cost of their console for everyone, which i think is the correct solution. But thats just my opinion, nothing else.

PS3 games are not coded to the metal.

And no, Sony would not rather sell HD remasters. I don't where this idiocy came from. Sony removed ps2 BC because it was making the ps3 too expensive and complicated to cost reduce, not because some conspiracy to sell HD remasters. If ps2 BC were still in, you'd see a ps2 classics section that would dwarf the ps1 classics and generate way more profits for all parties involved compared to the HD remasters so far. It costs too much money and too much time, profits have to be split with retail, and they can only do it for a limited number of games. Sony and every other publisher would MUCH rather just sell the ps1/ps2/ps3 disc images online since they'd get basically the same revenue per title but without any expense. And they can sell their entire catalog that way.

I'm surprised how common a misconception this is. I know it has already been said but I'll repeat it; There was only ever partial software compatibility with the entire PS2 catalog. EE was removed but GS was left in because the PS3 couldn't emulate the bandwidth of the GS. When the GS was removed the only titles that could still run via emulation were those that didn't take advantage of the bandwidth offered by the GS. Those titles are the few PS2 classics that are on PSN unchanged. (this is my understanding of the situation)

Correct. But IIRC, one of the members here claimed to know one of the engineers working on the ps2 emulator and said the list of supported titles is actually pretty damn huge. Including Dragon Quest 8.

 

[Mrbob]

You would imagine Sony has to have some sort of BC solution which they are planning towards. Especially in the digital age of consumers wanting to carry over content purchases from the base device to the new one. Especially true now that they are selling full games on PSN.

I don't see how Sony survives if MS offers full BC for 360 on next xbox and they offer nothing. It would be such a huge hole that would be near impossible to dig out from. If Sony's plan next gen is zero compatibility with PS3, well, good luck.

Sony needs to get back to building Playstation as an all inclusive device.

 

[H_Prestige]

You would imagine Sony has to have some sort of BC solution which they are planning towards. Especially in the digital age of consumers wanting to carry over content purchases from the base device to the new one.

I don't see how Sony survives if MS offers fall BC for 360 on next xbox and they offer nothing. It would be such a huge hole that would be near impossible to dig out from. If Sony's plan next gen is zero compatibility with PS3, well, good luck.

It's pretty hilarious imagining a ps4 without ps3 BC. That would mean everything on psn, short of ps1/ps2 classics and couple of launch ps4 games, would be unavailable to download for ps4 owners. That's a lot of missing content. What would be the sales pitch? "Hey guys, buy our new ps4 so you can log into psn and download fuck all! And while you're there, subscribe to ps+ and get instant access to absolutely nothing!"

 

[astroturfing]

It's pretty hilarious imagining a ps4 without ps3 BC. That would mean everything on psn, short of ps1/ps2 classics and couple of launch ps4 games, would be unavailable to download for ps4 owners. That's a lot of missing content. What would be the sales pitch? "Hey guys, buy our new ps4 so you can log into psn and download fuck all! And while you're there, subscribe to ps+ and get instant access to absolutely nothing!"

it really would be ridiculous. i would get angry every single time browsing the store..

 

[ZaCH3000]

Man, all this effort to get power down, and they go with hardware bc?
Seems like if there is any juice left to spare, it should all go on ps4, underpowered as these consoles are.

External bc incoming or not, the ps4 is more than likely not having ps3bc even if there are good to sound business reasons for it - and not only pr, but psn+ related.

In no way shape or form are these consoles underpowered lol. Wait let me stop you, your basing your opinion on the raw numbers. Raw numbers aren't always telling of a console or PCs power. Always remember that PCs are limited by the sheer amount of overhead the CPU, GPU, and memory accounts for.

4GB of GDDR5 is incredible because it will be fully dedicated to gaming with a small allocation of resources set aside for an OS. That leaves a total of 3.5GB of GDDR5 going by current rumors. There isn't a single PC game available, not even Crysis 3 using more than 2GB of VRAM. Here are the requirements for Hi-Performance: http://gamerant.com/crysis-3-pc-system-requirements/. According to Nvidia's website, the GTX 680 comes complete with 2GB of GDDR5: http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-680/specifications. In addition, there is absolutely no possible way Crysis 3 is even fully optimized for the full 2GB of GDDR5 on the 680.

These systems, especially the rumored specs surrounding Orbis are going to a step above everything we've ever seen from video games. There shouldn't be any surprise here. I repeat, both consoles are going to showoff a massive leap in visuals.

 

[Ashes]

but thats the thing
putting a cell on the board would be great for ps4 games, too
could offload all kinds of stuff onto it

Never say never and the ps3 ought to up be for an ultra slim version. Not to 32nm as suggested before but skipping to 22nm.

Depends on what sony engineers are planning.

The problem SEN has, is that with the ps2, they were never going to sell ps2 games to ps3 owners. Unless they actually had the ps2 library digitised, Sony don't make money on used sales.

With the PS4, they have a huge back catalogue of games on psn, that is effectively zero at launch.

I don't mean Ps1, or ps2. I mean games built from the ground up for the digital age. Games that were a success story for PSN. These games could also be used to add value to ps4's instant game collection.

I think with the lack of games on PS4, PSN would do best to sell what are just sitting on their servers. In terms of the money they make per single game: Digital > retail > used games. This is just my guess.

So intertwining all three points above, [a cell shrink, SEN, PSN, used game sales, making money on back catalogue, increasing psn4+'s value proposition], one can make a possible case for bc.

I just don't believe a cell would be thrown in for the computing reasons cited when devs have made no mention of it thus far. You'd think Sony would tell a dev that early on, no?

If bc is in, it'll be walled off - or close enough to walled off that when they rid themselves of it down the line [if they do], they can do so with the same freedom they had with ps3. That's my stance.

 

[Ashes]

PS3 games are not coded to the metal.

They are. If you have information to the contrary I'd love to hear or see it. Mighty interesting find if you can find it.

In no way shape or form are these consoles underpowered lol. Wait let me stop you, your basing your opinion on the raw numbers. Raw numbers aren't always telling of a console or PCs power. Always remember that PCs are limited by the sheer amount of overhead the CPU, GPU, and memory accounts for.

Perhaps somebody else can fill you in on power envelopes. Power has more than one meaning.

er lol.

/awkward.

 

[onQ123]

PS3 CPU & GPU is pretty close to standard PC parts (well closer than PS1 & PS2 ) & the games were written to LibGCM & PSGL (OpenGL ES) APIs so it's not going to be as hard as people think for Sony to get the same code running on new hardware using OpenGL.


they shouldn't run into the problems that they did running PS2 code on PS3 because PS2 had some embedded ram that was 2X faster than the PS3 ram, PS4 isn't going to have that problem because the ram is going to be 8 X faster.

the PPU wasn't anything special the Jaguar cores should easily run the General-purpose code & the codes that was ran on the SPEs could be ran on the GPGPU or Extra Compute unit (if that's real).


looking at how good the PS Vita Emulate PSP games with none of the PSP hardware make me think that Sony has learned a lot about emulating over the years. they even made the PS Vita so devs can make PS3 & PS Vita games using the same code that will run on both.

 

[Ashes]

I doubt it. Psp emulation has been ported to android too, can't be too hard.

 

[SniperHunter]

it won't have BC...forget about it guys

 

[beast786]

compare to all other next gen speculation thread, this is the only sane one. I cringe when I read others.

Great discussin and info here. So thank you to all here.

 

[onQ123]

From VGLeaks