Support NeoGAF

[Panajev2001a]

I predict people will bitch around here, for some reason, when Sony announces the PS3 will not have PSOne compatibility.

If that happens, I will be there... worse... much worse than I am being now.

Why ? Because if you think what must come to make PlayStation 2 backward-compatibility in PlayStation 3 a reality then you would realize what a stupid crime not having PlayStation 1 backward-compatibility would be.

 

[Kobun Heat]

Probably Nintendo didn't do it just because the DS is a rush-job response to PSP.

Aaaaaaand this thread somehow just got even more retarded.

EDIT: PS1 backwards compatibility isn't an issue either. If Sony includes it in the PS3 it'll be a neat little barely-used novelty feature. The ultra-hardcore will care, but the other 99% of PS3 owners will barely notice that it's gone.

 

[Crazymoogle]

They are using the same ROM interface the GBA used in the DS (plus one port for the new ROM technology by Matrix).

But not exactly the same. The GBA actually uses a physical switch triggered by the cartridge to switch between Z80 and ARM modes, and only one can be active. GBA architecture doesn't really offer "backwards compatibility" - it just squeezes in what is basically the GB/C architecture onto the motherboard, including voltage switches since legacy titles need 5V for carts/link.

To be honest, I'm not surprised at the change. Quad-mode (DMG/GBC/GBA/NDS) support would require an unprecedented amount of testing and engineering to work properly, and if they could even fit it all on the motherboard, I have to think there would still be cost concerns (since it's never 'just' the CPU. It's the additional electronics and pathway accomodations that determine the actual cost). Sony is dumping PS1 compatibility hardware from the PS3 for the same sort of concerns (although they get away with software compatibility for other reasons).

Nintendo had a lot of guts putting tri-mode compatibility into the GBA, but the problem only gets exponentially worse from there.

DMG/GBC support is still technically possible, but I really don't think Nintendo could do it without time for another hardware rev (nuking a 2004 release) and more cost bleeding on the 1st generation product. Marketing wise, it makes more sense for the GB/GBC to be shelved now with a compatibility cartridge (or a push for remakes) later.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Aaaaaaand this thread somehow just got even more retarded.

EDIT: PS1 backwards compatibility isn't an issue either. If Sony includes it in the PS3 it'll be a neat little barely-used novelty feature. The ultra-hardcore will care, but the other 99% of PS3 owners will barely notice that it's gone.

You seem to be missing the point.

It would be quite close to engineering idiocy than engineering excellence (the excellence which SCE and Toshiba have got me accustomed to so far, since the PSOne days).

In order to emulate PlayStation 2 you need to emulate its I/O CPU, which is the PSOne CPU.

Even if you decided to leave out the GTE emulation, in the case of a software emulator for the I/O CPU of PlayStation 2, adding it in (given the fact Sony is the maker of PSOne and also owns PSOne emulation technology) is not this impossible task.

If they decide to take the the I/O CPU and embed it with the EE or the EE+GS chip, then disabling backward-compatibility with the PSOne is even more stupid IMHO.

 

[human5892]

You seem to be missing the point.

It would be quite close to engineering idiocy than engineering excellence (the excellence which SCE and Toshiba have got me accustomed to so far, since the PSOne days).

In order to emulate PlayStation 2 you need to emulate its I/O CPU, which is the PSOne CPU.

Even if you decided to leave out the GTE emulation, in the case of a software emulator for the I/O CPU of PlayStation 2, adding it in (given the fact Sony is the maker of PSOne and also owns PSOne emulation technology) is not this impossible task.

If they decide to take the the I/O CPU and embed it with the EE or the EE+GS chip, then disabling backward-compatibility with the PSOne is even more stupid IMHO.

Yeah, I was going to say something about this (in a less-technically proficient manner, of course ). If Sony keeps building smart and making the BC hardware integral for the overall hardware, then theoretically all future Sony systems should be tremendously easy to make BC.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Sony is dumping PS1 compatibility hardware from the PS3 for the same sort of concerns (although they get away with software compatibility for other reasons).

The hardware might be avoided, but you still need to emulate the CPU core of the PSOne to have working PlayStation 2 backward-compatibility.

I suspected that they would go for full PSOne Hardware emulation.

The Broadband Engine would emulate SPU2 (in the case they cannot use the console's sound DSP), PlayStation 2 I/O CPU ( RISC core, GTE, MDEC, etc...), etc... and the PlayStation 3's GPU would emulate the GS (in the case they do not include the full EE+GS chip) with the EE acting as the main processor in the PlayStation 2 backward-compatibility mode.

I would expect the Direct Rambus Memory Controller in the EE to be replaced with an XDR memory controller: down-clock the RAM to provide 800 MHz data rate ( 100 MHz * 4 * 2 ) using one channel for the data destined to be emulated.

They seem to be using 256 Mbits XDR chips now, which means a nice 32 MB .

If they include a modified EE+GS chip (new memory controller) they can use it as PlayStation 3's I/O CPU.

Another possibility is to have the Broadband Engine talk directly to the XDR memory and keep the old memory controller in the EE. You would also include the 32 MB of Direct Rambus DRAM to be used as I/O RAM.

The latter is the strategy they followed with the PlayStation 2 design.

The former would be a more cost savvy option IMHO: changing the memory controller in the EE might be cheaper than adding 32 MB of PC3200 in the PlayStation 3 motherboard.

The latter would be definately better as it would increase the over-all RAM of the system.

Crazymoogle,

I would prefer if they included the full EE+GS chip as I am afraid that making sure that PlayStation 3's GPU could emulate the GS (which is the strategy they mirrored with PSOne's backward-compatibility mode in the PlayStation 2 as far as the GS and PSOne's GPU are concerned) would end up limiting the new GPU in terms of features, flexibility and speed.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Yeah, I was going to say something about this (in a less-technically proficient manner, of course ). If Sony keeps building smart and making the BC hardware integral for the overall hardware, then theoretically all future Sony systems should be tremendously easy to make BC.

The idea is: emulate in software the system of two generations ago and use hardware to emulate the system of the last generation.

 

[0wn3d]

Noooo!

Including GBA backwards compatibility without GB/GBC backwards compatibility? That makes absolutely no sense to me, because if GBA could play all the prior GB/GBC games, then so should DS with GBA backwards compatibility!! I seriously hope that is a mistake and it can play GB/GBC games.

 

[Crazymoogle]

The idea is: emulate in software the system of two generations ago and use hardware to emulate the system of the last generation.

Which unfortunately doesn't work in the DS case. Without the actual hardware, no cartridge support and no link support is possible for DMG/CGB - the pin outs may be the same but the voltage isn't. The only alternate method is to develop a "piggy back cart" which would essentially be a CGB without the screen that plugs into the NDS.

 

[GaimeGuy]

People Always Need A Reason To Bitch About Nintendo™

 

[Panajev2001a]

Which unfortunately doesn't work in the DS case. Without the actual hardware, no cartridge support and no link support is possible for DMG/CGB - the pin outs may be the same but the voltage isn't. The only alternate method is to develop a "piggy back cart" which would essentially be a CGB without the screen that plugs into the NDS.

Ok, I want that .

 

[fugimax]

Ya...I really don't see the point to this thread.

Do you really expect that in, say, 2020, PS5/Xbox 4/N7/whatever will be compatable with stuff from the 90s? I doubt it. All backwards compatability does is add cost to the development and manufacturing of a product. And as a gamer who owns all the older consoles that are emulated/supported by the current consoles, I'd rather:

1. The new consoles be cheaper by not wasting time on backwards compatability.
or
2. The companies pocket the money and put it to use somewhere else.

It really is a waste to me, and probably most of the people in this forum. I think it's more something people like to know is there, but rarely use. (This, of course, is a blanket statement and I'm sure there are people who use their PS2's to play PSOne games quite often.) My point is just that it's really not a selling point that's going to make or break a deal when buying a new console.

And Panajev, I know your beef with Nintendo not including GBC compatability in DS is more of a technical than practical one, but come on. Your point is about as valid as someone bitching that Jaguar didn't play Atari 2600 games.

 

[TheGreenGiant]

I'm sure the DS can easily run GB GBC games with minimum port time. But why would you want it. I'm sure you're one of the hundreds who paid for Nintendo's famicom releases. The only titles on the GBC range I can think of I would want to play are

a) Megaman (but I believe a gba collection is being worked on)

b) The capcom zeldas.

that's all. Everything else has been bettered.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Ya...I really don't see the point to this thread.

Do you really expect that in, say, 2020, PS5/Xbox 4/N7/whatever will be compatable with stuff from the 90s? I doubt it. All backwards compatability does is add cost to the development and manufacturing of a product. And as a gamer who owns all the older consoles that are emulated/supported by the current consoles, I'd rather:

1. The new consoles be cheaper by not wasting time on backwards compatability.
or
2. The companies pocket the money and put it to use somewhere else.

It really is a waste to me, and probably most of the people in this forum. I think it's more something people like to know is there, but rarely use. (This, of course, is a blanket statement and I'm sure there are people who use their PS2's to play PSOne games quite often.) My point is just that it's really not a selling point that's going to make or break a deal when buying a new console.

And Panajev, I know your beef with Nintendo not including GBC compatability in DS is more of a technical than practical one, but come on. Your point is about as valid as someone bitching that Jaguar didn't play Atari 2600 games.

About your first point: I already said that I do think that software emulation should cover backward-compatibility with consoles that are older than one generation.

 

[cybamerc]

Panajev2001a:

Looking forward to the sequel to this thread entitled: "Why Sony.... ? Why ????/ ( Sony PSP and PS1/PS2 backward-compatibility related)"


TheGreenGiant:

> that's all. Everything else has been bettered.

Not Tetris.

 

[Speevy]

There are less than 10 games that you'll be missing, and they'll probably be re-released or updated.

 

[Link316]

they're probably saving this feature for the DS SP

 

[Panajev2001a]

Panajev2001a:

Looking forward to the sequel to this thread entitled: "Why Sony.... ? Why ????/ ( Sony PSP and PS1/PS2 backward-compatibility related)"

Get the consoles right [self-censored].

 

[Laurent]

Useless whine. The Nintendo DS isn't supose to replace your GBA anyway, it's Nintendo's super shady secret third pilar!

Supose the GBA would have been NES backward compatible. Then how would Nintendo make money with retro games like The Legend of Zelda, Baloon Flight, Donkey Kong or Super Mario Bros for their 20th birthday?

Backward compatible for the last generation = Good
Backward compatible for every generation above = Useless

IMO of course...

 

[fugimax]

---Off topic ----
I wish topics could be group locked.

Aka, if > 80% of readers of a thread agree it is ridiculous (through a voting thing), it gets automagically locked.

I, of course, don't really wish this, but it's always good to oppress your fellow man.

-------------------

Back on topic, I think a main reason for not supporting older consoles as we move on is going to definitely be a hardware issue, not a software one. Such as PS3, is the blue-ray drive Sony is putting in even capable of reading CDs? I haven't kept up with that tech, so I'm not sure, but my point is that *eventually* there will be some optical media transition that breaks backwards compatability. Whether it be physical size, laser-type, or just plain piracy protection.

Expecting companies to always keep backwards compatibility on their spec-sheet is only limiting what they can do.

 

[cybamerc]

Get the consoles right [self-censored].

?

It's a PlayStation. Shouldn't it play PlayStation games then?

DS isn't even a Game Boy so consider GBA backwards compatibility an added bonus from the friendly folks at Nintendo.

 

[Arcticfox]

90% of my GameBoy collection is original/color games and not advance games, and while I was never planning on getting rid of my GBA, this is an unnecessary inconvenience. Of course it wont stop me from buying a DS once a good number of system selling games are out.

Maybe someone will make a Gameboy emulator for the PSP

 

[jarrod]

Mmm, this just paves the way for a glorious Link's Awakening DS remake.

 

[Laurent]

Maybe someone will make a Gameboy emulator for the PSP

2 cadridges slots = Lots of possibility...

GB Player for Nintendo DS anyone?

 

[BobbyRobby]

Pretty lame. I will miss playing Tetris and Dragon Warrior 1&2/3.

 

[cvxfreak]

I don't like how the DS doesn't play the older games, even though I rarely use them. Hopefully Nintendo makes a GBC Player for the DS for $19.99 or so, because I'd be all over that.

 

[Panajev2001a]

?

It's a PlayStation. Shouldn't it play PlayStation games then?

Get bent with this kind of logic.

 

[wazoo]

How will you react when GBA2 will not play DS software (but it will play GB software ) ??

 

[Panajev2001a]

---Off topic ----
I wish topics could be group locked.

Aka, if > 80% of readers of a thread agree it is ridiculous (through a voting thing), it gets automagically locked.

I, of course, don't really wish this, but it's always good to oppress your fellow man.

-------------------

Back on topic, I think a main reason for not supporting older consoles as we move on is going to definitely be a hardware issue, not a software one. Such as PS3, is the blue-ray drive Sony is putting in even capable of reading CDs?

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/200405/04-026E/

What do you think ?

 

[cybamerc]

Get bent with this kind of logic.

So what it comes down to is that the DS is a Nintendo system and the PSP is a Sony system right?

 

[jarrod]

Pretty lame. I will miss playing Tetris and Dragon Warrior 1&2/3.

We should remakes of those too!

After FF1&2 Advance, I wouldn't mind seeing Square Enix do the same for DQ1&2.

 

[jooey]

Don't worry, they'll re-release Gameboy games to be playable on the GBA/NDS for $19.99 a pop

"Gameboy Series 1: Tetris"....

I always thought that they should compliment famicom mini by releasing "game boy huge" on gamecube.

 

[DDayton]

I -still- say that the DS is the next Game Boy, just with a different name. Nintendo will keep the GBA and the DS running for several more years, but any new system coming out will be a successor to the DS if the DS is successful. Otherwise, Nintendo will pretend that the DS was never meant to be anything other that a "third pillar" and trot out a GBA replacement. Nintendo isn't going to be releasing a "real GBA successor" in the next two years... and the next portable they do release is much more likely to be similar to the DS than not.

 

[andthebeatgoeson]

Wait for the DS SP. Actually, this won't generate the same outcry as the lack of light on the GBA so this won't be addressed.

 

[Pellham]

big whoop, if I want to play my old Gameboy games, I'll just play them on my GBA SP or Gamecube (with the attachment). It's not like i'm throwing it away or anything once I get my DS.
there comes a time when you have to move on, and I think it's a normal decision.

 

[Kobun Heat]

RAAR NUMBERS.

It's one thing to argue that they could do it, or that it would be easy to do it, or that you personally want it, but let's be serious - very, very few people would actually use it. From a marketing standpoint, it's nearly worthless. It's just not needed.

 

[Panajev2001a]

It's one thing to argue that they could do it, or that it would be easy to do it, or that you personally want it, but let's be serious - very, very few people would actually use it. From a marketing standpoint, it's nearly worthless. It's just not needed.

Worthless ? I am sure that "Nintendo DS, with a ready library of more than <X> thousand games" would look good.

 

[Kobun Heat]

Worthless ? I am sure that "Nintendo DS, with a ready library of more than <X> thousand games" would look good.

Well, it's gonna be X-hundred instead of X-thousand.

Again, that's a very minor marketing point. People care about the ability to play GBA games. That will be a big selling point. The news that DS does not play GB/GBC games will be met by the public with nary the blink of an eye.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Well, it's gonna be X-hundred instead of X-thousand.

Again, that's a very minor marketing point. People care about the ability to play GBA games. That will be a big selling point. The news that DS does not play GB/GBC games will be met by the public with nary the blink of an eye.

Not by this individual .

I will get the DS, but this pisses me off.

Carrying PSP and DS is one thing... PSP, DS and GBA is too much.

I will pay even $29.99 for a GBC/GB backward-compatibility add-on.

Spread the word.

 

[Kiriku]

Not that I personally care much, but if you want to be able to play your GB/GBC games and GBA games and NDS games on the go, you'll have to bring your GB/GBC/GBA AND your NDS with you to make this possible. Would've been more convinient with only one handheld.

 

[cvxfreak]

Not that I personally care much, but if you want to be able to play your GB/GBC games and GBA games and NDS games on the go, you'll have to bring your GB/GBC/GBA AND your NDS with you to make this possible. Would've been more convinient with only one handheld.

I agree. While I haven't gone the way of the iPod yet, I still have my CD Player in addition to the NDS/GBA and possibly the PSP. I don't want to have to keep track of an extra handheld. =/ Ah well.

 

[MoxManiac]

This is irrelavent to the original topic, but related to the Pana/others debate; hasn't PS1 compatability already been confirmed for PS3?

 

[Panajev2001a]

Sony seemed to confirm it a while ago.

 

[krypt0nian]

Could this topic be more petty?

I have countless Gameboys...I'll give you one if you just fucking stop.

 

[Christberg]

Geez...

Basically, the way I see it I'm with Nintendo on this one. Sure, it'd be nice to be able to play the GBC Zelda titles and Tetris on my DS, but at the end of the day if it means either adding cost in terms of extra traces on the motherboard to house the z80 chip and voltage switch or having somebody write an emulator for it and then test it with over 1000 titles, I'd rather just get the unit this November because for the 3 games I care about it just really doesn't affect me enough to be worth the extra cost and wait.

Regardless of that fact I'm sure some intrepid third party company will make a DS cart that'll play GB/GBC games like Interact or something and it'll be out within a month or two of the unit's launch.

 

[Fatghost]

Well, I do.

This way I cannot trade in my GBA (I hate the shape of GameBoy Color and I do not feel like buying an old GBC for $40) and while that would have not been worth like $200, it would have been a step towards making the DS mine.

Pana, I agree 100%. Same with Xbox2 probably not being backwards compatible with Xbox 1. Support for legacy software should be an industry standard, especially when there are perfect GB/GBC emulators available that could easily run on the DS.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

Sorry guys but Pana does have a point. Backwards Compatibility is a huge incentive for many people. If PS3 didn't support PSX games, I know this forum would go nutty.

The only thing that could be said in Nintendo's favour is that at the very least, GameBoy hardware is some of the toughest stuff in the universe, especially compared to the fragile PSX.

Still this money saving move is crap. Nintendo should at least make an effort to emulate.

 

[RevenantKioku]

Pana has a point, to be sure, but on the other hand, it really doesn't matter.

 

[ghostface]

Not by this individual .

I will get the DS, but this pisses me off.

Carrying PSP and DS is one thing... PSP, DS and GBA is too much.

I will pay even $29.99 for a GBC/GB backward-compatibility add-on.

Spread the word.

So you're willing to carry arounf 3 pieces of hardware, just as long one of them is not a GBA? How small do you think an add-on would be compared to the tiny GBAsp? I don't get this.

And why the hell would you want to carry both systems with you at all times? By what you've posted so far, it seems you wouldn't be satisfied unless you'd also carry around all the games for each system, which I'm sure you have/will have plenty of. i don't know of anyone who does this.

me = confused.

I think you're just bickering/in need of some attention.

And Kiriku, you would only have to carry the GBA and the DS to play the games you mentioned, no?

 

[FitzOfRage]

Regardless of that fact I'm sure some intrepid third party company will make a DS cart that'll play GB/GBC games like Interact or something and it'll be out within a month or two of the unit's launch.

Yeah, that's why I think it's really a non-issue. For the few people that actually care, I'm sure there will be some sort of adapter. I mean I bet even less people cared about playing NES games on the GBA, and there's an adapter for that. There's definitely someone willing ot take Pana's $30 in exchange for providing GB/C compatiblity on the DS.