Vae VictusIn regards to the 'every playstation redesign has been worse than the one before' removing ports on the console is a cost cutting measure, and it isn't limited to Sony. All game companies do it. It's how they can afford to sell the redesigned consoles cheaper. They remove components that arent being used. Hell, Nintendo did that with the Gamecube not too long after it was released. As for backward compatibility, yeah I'm firmly on the side of those who think all consoles should have it as standard. How exactly does it prevent the brand moving forward? You are giving customers the option to play their old games on your system, not limiting the system to playing only old games. There is no impact at all on 'developer rescources', the older games already exist. All that is required is the necessary software to run those games, and they could shit out a patch for that. Hell, it used to be a standard feature, so if you look at it that way, removing backwards compatibility would have actually cost more in terms of effort than just leaving it alone. And the PS2 is out of production now. Did they ever think that maybe people would buy the PS3 just to play all their games on one system? Actually I think they did. Let me share my own theory on why they removed backwards compatibility. How much do old PS2 and PS1 games cost on Amazon? Not a whole lot usually, unless they're rare. Now, how much do those same games cost on PSN? Also, bear in mind that buying physical copies of old used games gets Sony no extra cash. But removing backwards compatibility and forcing you to buy those games over PSN? Its all about the bottom line. Game companies want your money at the end of the day.
Happy winter holidays!
All that is required is the necessary software to run those gamesThat is only true if the new console is powerful enough to emulate the old one (perfectly!) in real time. Otherwise, you need help from the hardware. In extreme cases like the GBA, you outright embed the old hardware in the new one (even the game type detection was done via a physical switch rather than reading the cartridge's memory!).
Mage of LifeBut you don't meed to emulate everything, you just need code that can correctly interpret the older game data. Simulating is easier than emulating.
War ALWAYS changes. Man does not.I think the term "latest Wii" is referring to the Wii Tablet Controller Edition, or Wii U to give its official Nintendo name, not an update to the original Wii system. "All game companies do it. It's how they can afford to sell the redesigned consoles cheaper. They remove components that arent being used." Eh, no. I was using the ports that Sony deleted from the PS One in particular, and I wasn't alone. My PS3 is a Frankenstein's Monster built from the carcasses of several consoles that Sony made deliberately WORSE whilst the first generation version was still in production. My first PS2 was one of the versions designed to be used with the hard disk and net adaptor but Sony never bothered their arses to actually sell the hard disks and net adaptors in Europe.
edited 31st Oct '12 6:51:41 AM by TamH70
Happy winter holidays!The problem is that game "data" is not all data and scripts: It's also raw executable code for a different processor with an often incompatible opcode set (or worse, instruction set)! Edit: Plus, console software is design to exploit the hardware at its maximum, meaning it's the most likely to depend on quirks or behavior not in the initial specification. Like changing a scaling-rotating hardware's settings between scanlines.
edited 31st Oct '12 6:57:54 AM by Medinoc
There was a version of the PS3 with some backwards-compatibility, so it was clearly possible. Also, the PS2 had arguably the best catalogue of any games console, wider support for backwards compatibility would have made the PS3 a more attractive offer.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.
loves violin music, - "Latest Wii" actually refers to a recent revision of the original Wii that Nintendo produced that lacks support for Gamecube perhiperals, as noted earlier. It was originally sold in Europe, then shortly released in the rest of the world.
edited 31st Oct '12 7:06:07 AM by NeoChaos
If I go to the zoo and tell the alligators to blow me, does that make me tough? No, it makes me hilarious. - Rudy Kelly
Mage of LifeThey actually removed physical parts from the design when they took out backwards compatibility, so it clearly jsn't possible with more recent designs. It is still something they could add in a new model, albeit with a significant redesign.
edited 31st Oct '12 7:10:53 AM by Swampertrox
War ALWAYS changes. Man does not.Wasn't aware of that monstrosity's existence. Thanks for the clarification. Wow, Nintendo really CAN be as stupid as Sony then.
Ah OK, I didn't know that. It's still annoying - my PS2 works fine, but extra cables everywhere blargh. I don't know. On the one hand, allowing people to use their PS2 catalogue on a PS3 would have helped sales... but the sales of old games over the PSN may well make them more money than selling more consoles would have.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.
Happy winter holidays!Uhm, they do that routinely. It's the first time they did it on a video console, but it was also the first time a Nintendo video console had backward compatibility in the first place... Of course, the DS was already not 100% compatible with GBA games, lacking both a communication port and a wireless emulation thereof.
edited 31st Oct '12 7:26:01 AM by Medinoc
War ALWAYS changes. Man does not.It took ages for backwards compatibility for gen one Game Boy games to be removed from the new iterations of the Game Boy Color and Game Boy Advance. It took at least two generations for the Game Boy Advance capability to be removed from the DS. I am aware of the lack of backwards compatibility on the home console front other than the ability which seems to have been removed from the last generation of the classic Wii console.
Vae VictusEh, no. I was using the ports that Sony deleted from the PS One in particular, and I wasn't alone. Apologies, it was a poor choice of words to suggest that the ports literally were not being used. But when consoles are redesigned one of the first things they look at is ways to cut costs and streamline the manufacturing process, which they do by removing components that they deem unnecessary, or which arent commonly used. I mentioned the Gamecube had two of it's ports removed not long after it's release (Digital AV port and Serial port 2). According to The Other Wiki, Nintendo found that the digital AV port was used by less than 1% of its consumer base. If something is being made use of by only a tiny portion of the consumer base, then the company is wasting money that could be better spent elsewhere. Not that I agree with all changes of this nature. I think it's stupid how they removed the on/off switch from both the PS2 and PS3. And the less said about the PS2 external modem the better. But It does make sense from a business perspective.
The system doesn't know you right now, so no post button for you.
You need to Get Known to get one of those.
TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from firstname.lastname@example.org.