Topic: PS games running on PS2

[mjbd]

Since PS2 will play PS games, do the PS games run smoother?  Say a game was designed to run at 30 fps on PS, but due to lack of memory, experience slow down, would this be eliminated on PS2?  Being that the next nintendo hardware will likely have this feature, I am curious to see if games like Mario Sunshine, which suffers a bit on GCN, will run smooth on the next hardware.

[Munky]

I don't think they run smoother, but there is an option to make the graphics better. Not much better, but a little.

[Grey Ninja]

No.  Frame rate issues will NOT be fixed on the PS2.  Overall appearance will be improved through the use of bilinear filtering and a higher resolution, but the game will run the exact same way.  The reason for that is that the emulated CPU cannot be overclocked, as that would screw up the timing in games.  Console games are not designed like PC games, where a timer will simply add frames when the game is running too fast.  Console games will update once every CPU cycle in the interest of efficiency, since all the hardware will remain the same through the life of the system.  When a game is running on a successor console, the hardware of the previous console must either be emulated, or present in the next console for the games to run, and the specifications of the previous console must be met EXACTLY as they were, or the games won't run right.

The PS2 uses the same CPU as the PSX for the IO controller on the PS2 I believe, and the SPU is exactly the same as the PSX's, it just has more memory.  This means that the PS2 hardware actually incorporates the PSX hardware into the PS2 design, and that's what is actually running the game.

The GBA is another good example.  It has 2 CPUs, one from a GBC, and one for the GBA.  When you put a cart in, a switch is pressed, and the hardware will activate the appropriate CPU for playing the game.

Word has it that the PS3 will not include the PS2 hardware though, and will emulate the hardware through software.  This will likely break compatability with a lot of games, but we shall see.  Likely they will focus on emulating the popular games properly, and let a few of the lesser known ones slide, so it won't matter much anyways.

[mjbd]

Ok, that makes sence.  Wishfull thinking I suppose.  It would make sense to use software instead of hardware to aquire backwards compatabilty.  It would have to be more cost effective.  I would assume that could be done by loading the emulation disk, then switch to the game.  Knowing nintendo, it will be an option.  Buy the emaulation disk for 39.99.  

[Grey Ninja]

Actually, I am thinking that the next Nintendo console wouldn't be backwards compatable, as it would open up the console to piracy that much easier.

As for which option is cheaper, that's really a tough question.  If you hire a group of people to make a program that will run every game available on an older system, that's going to cost you one hell of a lot of money.  About half the cost of one full game I would estimate.  If you include the legacy hardware in the new console, that will also cost you money, but it only adds a few dollars to the price of the system.  The GBC's CPU can be manufactured at EXTREMELY low prices now, so it would make sense to simply throw it in rather than go through the hassle of making an emulator and testing it with every game.  The PS2 solved that problem by integrating the PSX hardware into vital parts of the PS2.

[mjbd]

To be honest, this is one thing nintendo could do to attract consumers but not stray away from games themselve (like playing DVD's).  This is a big one to parents, I dont know why, but they feel that if they buy a new system that doesnt play the old games, it somehow makes those old games useless.  The big thing for me is space and convenience.  I am pretty much out of space as it is, no room for more consoles.  With the Cube, N64, and SNES its rather cluttered, it would be nice to be able to store the cube in the closet, and have the new hardware play my old Cube games.  

[Grey Ninja]

Quote
Originally posted by: mjbd
it somehow makes those old games useless

Erm... my GameCube ain't going anywhere.  I can't imagine why I would have GameCube games, but no GameCube.

[vudu]

i think he's talking about the sheer convenience of being able to play old games on your new system.  

yeah, i don't plan on getting rid of my n64 ever (same goes for my nes and snes).  but there simply isn't enough room for it under my tv.  thus, it goes into storage in my closet.  so when i want to play an old game, i have to take it out, plug it in, and play away.  it's not too hard, but it does require 5-10 minutes of setup time.  if i was just looking to play a half hour of goldeneye, it's a bit of a pain.

so as far as my vote goes (and i think most people probably agree with me) if backwards compatibility is something nintendo can put in without sacrificing improvements/costs for the new system, go for it.  otherwise, i'll just have to suck it up when i want to break out ikaruga.

[Infernal Monkey]

Quote
Originally posted by: Grey Ninja

Quote

I can't imagine why I would have GameCube games, but no GameCube.

Maybe someone will develop a new toaster in the future. It'll be able to play GameCube, PS2 and Xbox games all at the same time. Plus, if you buy a special add-on, you'll be able to cook toast, as well! You'll need a DVD remote for that, too, however.

Plus 47.8 batteries. And a new power pack. Imagine the fun of playing Halo crossed with Mario crossed with GTA. Toaster could provide it.*

*Toaster cannot provide anything.

[Bartman3010]

I guess the next console could use some of the GCN's features. Heck, the US hasnt gotten as many add-on's for a Nintendo console like the GCN. (Game Boy Player, Broadband Adapter etc.) it'd be sad if we couldnt use any of these features on the next console. I wouldnt mind if we had to use a boot disc to play the GCN games.