Next-gen backwards compatibility Page 2

  • Page

    of 4 First / Last

  • Luckyjim 20 Nov 2012 13:43:45 2,831 posts
    Seen 15 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    BC's a godsend in the first few months of a new console's life - Wii, PS3, 3DS and Vita come to mind. Being able to go through some of the games you missed and late in the cycle classics is great for offsetting the inevitable first-year drought. However, once a new console gets into its stride I tend to lose interest in BC.
  • JinTypeNoir 20 Nov 2012 14:36:17 4,365 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    It's also really hopeful when a sequel is announced on the new platform that had games available on the older platform. A really good example this generation was Golden Sun: Dark Dawn, while the game went out of its way to accommodate new players, it was substitution to playing the first two games, using the GBA port in the DS fat or the DS lite. People who liked Rhythm Heaven Gold could go check out the GBA original, same for Mario & Luigi. If you were tracing the origins of Final Fantasy through the remakes, then up until IV you were good just owning a DS Lite and so on and so forth. Makes it so much easier to collect more games in the series if you like one or to expand your knowledge of a certain developer's games.
  • Deleted user 20 November 2012 18:07:01
    Psychotext wrote:
    vizzini wrote:
    So the likelihood that Sony will abandon the valuable R&D of the Cell BE is unlikely. Especially as they bought back the fabrication plant totally from Toshiba last year for half a billion dollars, and they and IBM did tests on a Cell BE 2 a few years ago. Most likely planning ahead for next-gen.
    Right now everything is pointing towards Sony using an AMD solution. Cell is dead.

    Some good investigation here: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=498008
    That is the rumour mill, and designed to gauge response from consumers like us. My money is firmly on that leak being for the 720's proposed hardware SKUs. Sony always have a clear vision, and don't do the hedged bet with multiple SKUs, which is a Microsoft MO, in software and hardware. Even buying DLC while in game, is Microsoft all over.

    But the reality, is that the system in the article provides a fraction of the performance Sony will get from (just) four Cell BE processors. The Cell BE CPUS are very cheap for them, small and power efficient, and better suited to ray tracing. They are also automatically compatibility will all Sony's existing SDK tools and software. They'd have to be idiots to build such an overwhelmingly xbox type system with such modest performance compared to the ps3.

    Check the, "AMD not doing to well" thread on EG. Would Sony really go with a company that might get bought out? Microsoft on the other hand might just buy AMD wholesale, as there are strong indicators they are moving into hardware with Windows 8.
  • Psychotext 20 Nov 2012 18:54:14 52,768 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Ignore the story and read the thread (and others like it). It's not about rumours at this point, it's about developers discussing particular architectures. Don't forget that the dev kits actually exist now.

    If they use a cell (they wont) it'll be in there in the same way that the PS3 used to have PS2 hardware in it.
  • Deleted user 20 November 2012 20:54:49
    @Psychotext

    I don't doubt the wealth of truth in the article. I just think that a search and replace for the word Sony &Playstation with Microsoft & 720 reveals the true story. It is perfect trojan horse rumour sales pitch to endorse it with Sony's name, to make it seem like it is better than it is.

    Sony currently show off GT5 in one of their Japanese stores on their 25,000 4K TV, using 4 Playstation 3s outputting at 4K. Do you really think they'll build a new Playstation with half that performance they currently wow customers with? How will that meek next-gen hardware drive the visuals of their new TV sales pitch? And why would they pay much more for a CPU, which is a poorman's Cell BE.

    They've sold 70Million PS3s to retail, still haven't even done a SRP of 130 where the bulk of Playstation sales happen, and are now on target to exceed PS2 sales this generation. The Cell BE technology strategy was designed to stop them losing large sums of money in R&D at the start of PS4's life, and so far the technology has been a huge success. By contrast the EmotionEngine was fast and energy efficient, but became irrelevant when the big leap from 800MHz to 3.4GHz processor speeds, made higher clocked (1.2GHz iirc) versions inadequate for PS3.

    PS4 will get shown at the coming E3 if we are lucky, whereas Microsoft are in need of a new console very soon (based on sales/price falloff). Microsoft using a poorman's Cell BE CPU(from AMD) with a new GPU is smart for them, as it would be enough to let them exploit the advances in PS3's developer techniques, while having a GPU fast enough to pitch as a next-gen system above the PS3, and before PS4 launches.

    Think about where each platform holder are this generation, then read the stories again assuming it is Microsoft. Do they make sense like that? They make perfect sense to me.
  • PenguinJim 21 Nov 2012 09:34:54 5,444 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    vizzini wrote:
    Sony currently show off GT5 in one of their Japanese stores on their 25,000 4K TV, using 4 Playstation 3s outputting at 4K. Do you really think they'll build a new Playstation with half that performance they currently wow customers with? How will that meek next-gen hardware drive the visuals of their new TV sales pitch?
    Couldn't they... use four of them... again? >.<
  • crashVoodoo 21 Nov 2012 09:40:22 3,821 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    PenguinJim wrote:
    vizzini wrote:
    Sony currently show off GT5 in one of their Japanese stores on their 25,000 4K TV, using 4 Playstation 3s outputting at 4K. Do you really think they'll build a new Playstation with half that performance they currently wow customers with? How will that meek next-gen hardware drive the visuals of their new TV sales pitch?
    Couldn't they... use four of them... again? >.<
    its not just the cpu you also got the 4 nvidia chipsets producing the visuals. should they also put 4 of them in too ?

    a Nexus a day keeps the apple away

  • Deleted user 21 November 2012 11:06:19
    crashVoodoo wrote:
    PenguinJim wrote:
    vizzini wrote:
    Sony currently show off GT5 in one of their Japanese stores on their 25,000 4K TV, using 4 Playstation 3s outputting at 4K. Do you really think they'll build a new Playstation with half that performance they currently wow customers with? How will that meek next-gen hardware drive the visuals of their new TV sales pitch?
    Couldn't they... use four of them... again? >.<
    its not just the cpu you also got the 4 nvidia chipsets producing the visuals. should they also put 4 of them in too ?
    @CrashVoodoo

    GT5 doesn't stress the 4 RSX cards with 4times the vertex or fragment shader workload when doing 4K.

    So no, they don't need 4x RSX GPUs, especially when they ray-trace/photon trace the next-gen mostly on a Cell BE 2 cpu. They'll need just enough VRAM/eDRAM for 4K triple buffering, four times the polygon throughput, and eight times the z-buffer performance. But everything else can be done on a Cell BE 2.

    In graphics card requirements to accompany a Cell BE 2, they need less than a Nvidia Gtx 280, and that is easily in budget for a console.
  • Deleted user 22 November 2012 14:55:25
    @doctor_fraud

    Believe what you will. But the fact still remains that the PS3, unlike the Wii and 360 arcade has never reached a price at which the normal PS2 customer base bought over 50% of the consoles. The PS2 cost much less at this point. So the reason this generation will be at least 2years longer for PS3, is that hardware will be very capable for everyday tasks for much longer, and reaching the mainstream price point is taking more time.

    PS4 R&D is different to PS1, PS2 or PS3 development. The $500m R&D on the Cell Broadband Engine processor was very much to avoid needing to throw out the baby with water at the start of a next-generation(ala PS1, PS2), and instead steal a huge performance and price lead on the opposition in the follow up console. It has worked as planned, but the yen situation, success of 360 shilling and marketing, and Apple success with Emperor's new cloths have made it financially more precarious until now.
  • PenguinJim 22 Nov 2012 15:00:22 5,444 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Until now. Yes. Now Sony are UNSTOPPABLE!

    (Don't look at EG's front page, vizzini. And please never stop posting.)
  • GiarcYekrub 22 Nov 2012 15:32:27 3,576 posts
    Seen 25 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Haven't they said the Vita is based on a more traditional PC architecture because the PS4 will be using it and they wanna develpers to use cross play

    Ahh heres the article http://www.edge-online.com/features/forget-price-cut-what-vita-really-needs-ps4/
  • javvyman 22 Nov 2012 15:39:07 705 posts
    Seen 5 days ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    vizzini wrote:
    @Psychotext

    I don't doubt the wealth of truth in the article. I just think that a search and replace for the word Sony &Playstation with Microsoft & 720 reveals the true story. It is perfect trojan horse rumour sales pitch to endorse it with Sony's name, to make it seem like it is better than it is.

    Sony currently show off GT5 in one of their Japanese stores on their 25,000 4K TV, using 4 Playstation 3s outputting at 4K. Do you really think they'll build a new Playstation with half that performance they currently wow customers with? How will that meek next-gen hardware drive the visuals of their new TV sales pitch? And why would they pay much more for a CPU, which is a poorman's Cell BE.

    They've sold 70Million PS3s to retail, still haven't even done a SRP of 130 where the bulk of Playstation sales happen, and are now on target to exceed PS2 sales this generation. The Cell BE technology strategy was designed to stop them losing large sums of money in R&D at the start of PS4's life, and so far the technology has been a huge success. By contrast the EmotionEngine was fast and energy efficient, but became irrelevant when the big leap from 800MHz to 3.4GHz processor speeds, made higher clocked (1.2GHz iirc) versions inadequate for PS3.

    PS4 will get shown at the coming E3 if we are lucky, whereas Microsoft are in need of a new console very soon (based on sales/price falloff). Microsoft using a poorman's Cell BE CPU(from AMD) with a new GPU is smart for them, as it would be enough to let them exploit the advances in PS3's developer techniques, while having a GPU fast enough to pitch as a next-gen system above the PS3, and before PS4 launches.

    Think about where each platform holder are this generation, then read the stories again assuming it is Microsoft. Do they make sense like that? They make perfect sense to me.
    Couldn't believe anybody could come out with such idiotic fanboy drivel...then I saw Vizzini's name on the post.
  • Psychotext 22 Nov 2012 15:42:39 52,768 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    lol, bless you Vizzini. Those consumers who you think are going to buy a PS3 when the price drops enough already bought a Wii, forgot about it, and then got an iPad.

    Besides the fact that once you take inflation into consideration, the price difference between the PS2 at 70m and the PS3 at 70m amounts to about 10.
  • jabberwoky 22 Nov 2012 17:13:05 441 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    If one does proper bc and the other doesn't, guess which one will sell the most.
  • ResidentKnievel 22 Nov 2012 17:34:03 5,867 posts
    Seen 33 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    The one with the waggle controller?

    [code]Armoured_Bear wrote:
    Unlike yourself, I don't have a weird obsession with any platform.[/code]

  • LeoliansBro 22 Nov 2012 17:34:52 41,840 posts
    Seen 20 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I like to think vizzini is the crackling sound that comes off the top of his head when he thinks of Sony.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Deleted user 22 November 2012 18:35:59
    @Psychotext

    Article on the front page about credit agency ratings is about Sony not Playstation. If Playstation was all Sony did, then the business would currently be in decent shape, hence why Kaz got promoted after turning the Playstation business round.

    So the Verge's Microsoft next console xbla SKU article didn't sound anything like the GPU only console described as PS4 sku in your linked article?

    Inflation? Does that really happen in console hardware at mass market pricing? Spectrum/C64 were 130 at mass market pricing :).

    Psones sold massive at under 130, Playstation 2's sold over half its numbers under 130, but PS3's aren't going to sell massive when they hit 130? Why? They are still currently too expensive to gift for family, needing blu-ray players. But the 12GB slim at 150 on Amazon will see good Christmas Sales for Playstation.
  • Psychotext 22 Nov 2012 18:38:14 52,768 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I didn't mention the front page at all, and inflation affects everything you dope.
  • Deleted user 22 November 2012 18:50:58
    Inflation changes profitability versus hardware timed depreciation, but the mass market selling price doesn't change. 130 or less is the magic figure, hence why the 360 arcade kept US sales going well at that much lower entry point. And the mass market have mostly been affect by the world recession, so the magic number might actually be lower now (110?).

    Playstation 3's base model (with HDD) is still well above mass market pricing, so we'll compare predictions in 18months :)

    Yeah, the other should ahve been directed at someone else.
  • Deleted user 22 November 2012 18:58:56
    doctor_fraud: Plus the casual gamer that you think will buy the PS3 will buy a 360 as it will be cheaper/better.

    With no sales moment left from kinect(sales are off a cliff now), and no new franchises to keep the buzz around it. They have a much smaller work ing set of consoles, and online players to upsell to for 3rd parties like EA to worry if Fifa, BF, PGA Golf, Madden, etc are co-branded with Playstation, rather than xbox.
  • LeoliansBro 22 Nov 2012 19:10:44 41,840 posts
    Seen 20 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    vizzini: what does this phrase mean?

    Inflation changes profitability versus hardware timed depreciation

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • LeoliansBro 22 Nov 2012 19:13:26 41,840 posts
    Seen 20 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Hang on, I think I have this.

    You think that inflation and hardware development are in alignment, such that the one offsets the other?

    So the cost of being cutting edge in 1980 is the same as being cutting edge in 2012, in actual monetary terms ignoring inflation. So 400 would buy you something amazing in 1980, and 400 would buy you something amazing in 2012 - the money is worth less in real terms, but technology has made it cheaper so the advances are more affordable?

    Why?

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Deleted user 22 November 2012 19:13:43
    I'm impressed you distilled it down to just one sentence that made no sense.

    Edited by Aargh. at 19:13:53 22-11-2012
  • LeoliansBro 22 Nov 2012 19:15:16 41,840 posts
    Seen 20 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    If Playstation was all Sony did, then the business would currently be in decent shape
    Also this is frankly tosh - I could find you half a dozen Economist articles pointing to the games division being a massive anchor on Sony profits and the fact that there has yet to be a turnaround.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Deleted user 22 November 2012 20:06:32
    @doctor_fraud

    Except that more people in general play 3rd part games on a free-online service where more actual working consoles are connected. The sub-HD CoD is definitely the most prominent exception to that rule.

    @LeoliansBro

    Economist? Go on then, lets see if they are shill or analyst.

    But that is like saying because Microsoft's value dropped by 50% from its peak a decade ago, the Windows licensing business is an anchor. Or how about IBM nearly dying and still haven't got back their PC market share. IBM have been a top blue-chip investment through these troubled times.

    The purpose of any company, is to stay in business, and provide returns on investment in the medium to long term for investors. Nothing of credence suggests that Playstation won't do that this generation, as the cost of making items(Cell/ARM/Blu-ray/LCD/OLED/CMOS) that go into Playstation branded hardware depreciates, and the prices of those consumer products remain stable in the long tail of sales, to increase profitability for Sony.

    Playstation as a going concern is healthy, regardless of whether the planned Cell R&D windfall is realised in the PS4 hardware. So no, the Playstation brand isn't an anchor to Sony for the foreseeable 18months.
  • Page

    of 4 First / Last

Log in or register to reply