Are you saying there is bc?
I Rather pay for Oculus than BC
I maintain that this architecture is entirely unfit for regular emulation, so I'm not seeing how that is going to work, especially if no backwards compatibility hardware has been listed in any document we've seen.
I Rather pay for Oculus than BC
I was talking with someone in the hardware industry and he said it's definitely possible. We'll see though.
Exactly! Someone who finally understands. $599 is chump change if Rift is included.
Exactly! Someone who finally understands. $599 is chump change if Rift is included.
Did he explain any general approach to how they would go about simulating six 3.2 GHz floating point processors with eight 1.6 GHz integer processors and a DX11 GPU while also handling RSX emulation and not having it run terribly?
The problem with only premium models having something like that is that they'll never integrate the PS3 games properly into their web store / operating system (for PSN games etc). Would be a crying shame.
I was talking with someone in the hardware industry and he said it's definitely possible. We'll see though.
Bank on it: Sony will totally side step the idea of comprehensive local BC on one device by painting cloud services as the logical last step for compatibility across both devices and generations of software. They'll say 'enjoy your Playstation any time any where' and that this is 'next-gen' while compatibility tied to one box is 'last gen'![]()
Just ignore the relatively limited legacy catalog selection in the first couple of years...
Do you really believe it will sell for that price? If the base box costs $400 then I can see it $699 (700).
Yeah if the solution is to just run it off of cloud servers then there's no hardware problem.
Not entirely true.Of course they could. PS3 (Second Gen Ones) had a PS2 software emulator. They probably won't because they want to sell you the HD remakes.
It costs $300 on it's own. Surely the bundle will cost cheaper. Regardless, I don't want to pay extra for BC. If it's software-based, then good. If it requires hardware then no thanks.
Did he explain any general approach to how they would go about simulating six 3.2 GHz floating point processors with eight 1.6 GHz integer processors and a DX11 GPU while also handling RSX emulation and not having it run terribly?
I hope BC is not included. Just buy a PS3 or PS2 cheap later.
if the consumer version would have the same specs as the devkit, yeh, possible but it wont. It will propably set you back 500 dollarsthe rift is going to be $299? Man i just expected it to be more, especially with their revisions they mentioned.
the rift is going to be $299? Man i just expected it to be more, especially with their revisions they mentioned.
The devkit is $300. They have said that the retail version could cost more.
the rift is going to be $299? Man i just expected it to be more, especially with their revisions they mentioned.
I hope BC is not included. Just buy a PS3 or PS2 cheap later.
The only local solution I can see at all is the same I've been saying from the start: have a Cell (or at least 6 SPEs) in there. And even that doesn't make it easy, and I don't think they want to spend on it.Did he explain any general approach to how they would go about simulating six 3.2 GHz floating point processors with eight 1.6 GHz integer processors and a DX11 GPU while also handling RSX emulation and not having it run terribly?
What you really want then is a PC. Looking at these consoles, I guess even MS and Sony figured that outIt's nicer to have one unit that does everything instead of multiple boxes.
It shouldn't be anymore expensive than a devkit. Nothing ever is.
It's nicer to have one unit that does everything instead of multiple boxes.
The only local solution I can see at all is the same I've been saying from the start: have a Cell (or at least 6 SPEs) in there. And even that doesn't make it easy, and I don't think they want to spend on it.
What you really want then is a PC. Looking at these consoles, I guess even MS and Sony figured that out![]()
Will the HDD sizes alone separate the multiple versions then?
Is there any word on what plans Sony has for the controller? While the DS2 was great for the PS2, I felt it was old for this generation. I definitely preferred the 360 controller simply for the offset sticks. Will Sony continue to ignore this design?
I wonder if a game's categorisation within the PS Store might be giving some hints as to how the transition to PS4 will be handled? I noticed in the new store that when you click in to a game to buy it says what format it is, sometimes they say PSN and sometimes they say PS3.
Normally I would have just put this down to the fact that if a game also came out as a retail disc on PS3 then it was listed as PS3, however there have been cases where a game is listed as both PS3 and PSN (I can't remember which).
What if all those games tagged as PSN have been tested on Orbis and will be playable, but those tagged just PS3 will not? That way when people complain, Sony can point to the fact that those games clearly only promised PS3 compatibility.
Alternatively it could just be some licensing quirk or just some kid that populates the store makes it up when he adds stuff.
The PS3 had such a substantial library that attempting local BC might be a huge factor in purchasing a PS4.
There's a new controller. http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=508909
Bank on it: Sony will totally side step the idea of comprehensive local BC on one device by painting cloud services as the logical last step for compatibility across both devices and generations of software. They'll say 'enjoy your Playstation any time any where' and that this is 'next-gen' while compatibility tied to one box is 'last gen'![]()
Just ignore the relatively limited legacy catalog selection in the first couple of years...
We expecting any info today?
We expecting any info today?
Hypothetically couldn't Microsoft even the playing field or improve their stance by switching to the same type of ram as the orbis?
indeed. the loss of studio liverpool still hurts. wipeout just won't be the same again.![]()
Are you saying there is bc?
I maintain that this architecture is entirely unfit for regular emulation, so I'm not seeing how that is going to work, especially if no backwards compatibility hardware has been listed in any document we've seen.
Did he explain any general approach to how they would go about simulating six 3.2 GHz floating point processors with eight 1.6 GHz integer processors and a DX11 GPU while also handling RSX emulation and not having it run terribly?
indeed. the loss of studio liverpool still hurts. wipeout just won't be the same again.![]()
Hmm...lol.
god no. I'd much rather have a hardware solution.