Official Playstation 3 Thread.

[Dyne]

Well, no not exactly. The PS1 chip was incorporated into the PS2 chip somehow. This is actually going to be an add on to the motherboard.

its the i/o bus. i.e. a seperate chip.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlaySta...specifications

I/O Processor

• CPU Core: Original PlayStation CPU (MIPS R3000A clocked at 33.8688 MHz or 37.5 MHz)
• Sub Bus: 32 Bit
• Connection to: SPU and CD/DVD controller.
• Interface Types: 2 proprietary PlayStation controller ports (250KHz clock for PS1 and 500KHz for PS2 controllers), 2 proprietary Memory Card slots using MagicGate encryption (250KHz for PS1 cards, up to 2MHz for PS2 cards), Expansion Bay (PCMCIA on early models for PCMCIA Network Adaptor and External Hard Disk Drive) DEV9 port for Network Adaptor, Modem and Internal Hard Disk Drive, IEEE 1394 (only in SCPH 10xxx - 3xxxx), Infrared remote control port (SCPH 5000x and newer) (2), and 2 USB 1.1 ports with an OHCI-compatible controller.

i dont see how this would be any different with the ps3.

Since I already own a Ps2 can I get a PS3 without the stupid Ps2 chip and save $129.99?

they're only including the emotion engine and the graphics sytnthesizer. and while i'm sure that makes up a good portion of the current ps2 price it doesn't make the entire price (ie shell, drive, motherboard, other chips, packaging). so they wouldn't slash off $129.

[EvilMog]

they're only including the emotion engine and the graphics sytnthesizer. and while i'm sure that makes up a good portion of the current ps2 price it doesn't make the entire price (ie shell, drive, motherboard, other chips, packaging). so they wouldn't slash off $129.

Obviously. I was just using the current PS2 price point as a random figure.
PS3 - PS1 and PS2 capabilities -$100= BETTER.

[James]

Disagree entirely. Not having to keep an extra console around is worth a bit of extra cost. I still pop in the occasional PS1 game after all these years, so backwards compatibility is a feature I actively want.

James

[Andy]

Obviously. I was just using the current PS2 price point as a random figure.
PS3 - PS1 and PS2 capabilities -$100= BETTER.

Fuck that. 360 may have shitty backwards compatibility and a weak lineup to revisit, but there are tons of PS1 and PS2 games I still want to play when I get my PS3. Hell, FFXII, Yakuza, and Okami are essentially going to be PS3 launch titles for me.

[EvilMog]

Thats why I said thats what I want. Not what everyone else should want too.
I use to think I wanted backwards compatablity but when I really thought about it I used my PS2 to play Ps1 games about .001% of the time. If it could save me $100+ on a new console I would be all for dumping old game use.

[Diff-chan]

Thats why I said thats what I want. Not what everyone else should want too.
I use to think I wanted backwards compatablity but when I really thought about it I used my PS2 to play Ps1 games about .001% of the time. If it could save me $100+ on a new console I would be all for dumping old game use.

I agree. It's kind of slick for the early adopters but by the time I own a PS3 all value will be rung from the PS2 library. The only games Im looking to play on PS2 are FFXII and Yakuza.

edit: but there's NO WAY it costs $100 to put a PS2 in there. $30, $40 at most. Sony makes a ton of cash on PS2 hardware nowadays, one of the advantages of owning all the IP and manufacturering of the system (and the reason why Microsoft cant drop the price of Xbox 1 without losing major dough).

[kingoffighters]

Backwards compatibility is overrated (at least by the vocal minority). It might be a good bullet item in the back of the box for the mom n pops, but for me, I don't care. Make the system the best it is for this generation, not last.

[Giga Power]

Backwards compatibility is overrated (at least by the vocal minority). It might be a good bullet item in the back of the box for the mom n pops, but for me, I don't care. Make the system the best it is for this generation, not last.

This is pretty much how I feel. I always keep all my games/systems anyway.

[StriderKyo]

Backwards compatibility is overrated (at least by the vocal minority). It might be a good bullet item in the back of the box for the mom n pops, but for me, I don't care. Make the system the best it is for this generation, not last.

People are burning straw Kutaragis in effigy because the save-$100-retard-pack PS3 doesn't support $4000 tvs.

Even though nobody really cares, If they left out BC you'd see everyone bashing them over it. Besides, BC creates a sense of continuity and brand loyalty bridging one gen and the next.

[Joust Williams]

Wow...it just keeps getting worse and worse for this piece of junk