SCEA CEO Jack Tretton wants you to buy both a PS3 and a PS2...to save money
By Nilay Patel 
posted October 18th 2007 8:02PM
posted October 18th 2007 8:02PM
While we're not going to complain about the launch of the cheaper 40GB PS3, we are still kind of miffed that it isn't backwards-compatible with our huge library of PS2 games -- especially since newer PS3s retain compatibility through software emulation and not specialized hardware like earlier models. Not to worry though, because Sony Computer Entertainment America CEO Jack "Daniels" Tretton is here to dazzle you with mathematics: according to Jackie, the consumer actually benefits from Sony's move to cut emulation, because now you have the opportunity to buy both a $399 PS3 and a $129 PS2, for a grand total of $528, which is -- wait for it -- less than the original 60GB PS3's price of $600! Of course, what Mr. T here is forgetting is that most people would prefer a single, $399 PS3 with backwards compatibility (and rumble, for good measure), but really, once you get spinning that fast it's awfully hard to stop.[Via Joystiq]
Why are you so intent on defending Sony's poor decisions?
Can you defend their reasoning for not including rumble and now deciding to add it in?
You don't need to tell us that Sony is right. We are not robots. It sounds like the majority of the people posting, and other people writing blogs, feel that Sony is again backing up on their claims that BC is a core business philosophy and that all Playstations will always be able to play consumers library of Playstation games. You can provide all the quotes and interviews you want, most of us still don't like this. I want to get rid of my PS2, not keep it when I upgrade.
Do you keep your old TV under you new TV when you upgrade? No, you get rid of it.
Do you still have a portable CD player to play your CD music collection? No, you get rid of it when you rip them all to your computer and put them on your mp3 player.
So why would I want to have an 8 year-old tech sitting under my 1080p LCD tv?
I was not defending their poor decision. I am pointing out the fact that Nilay and others here on Engadget always do a negative spin regarding the PS3 or any other product Sony puts out.
As for the PS3, the 80GB SKU still has BC compatibility. This 40GB is a great choice for people like me who NEVER owned a PS1 or PS2, so saving some money on something i dont have use for is great.
I think that a highly paid corporate suit knows what we want better than we do, Engadget.
Hmm must be the Jobsian effect eh!
Yeah, sounds like a CE-Oh no he didn't, eh Engadget?
Exactly. Hey Jack Mayoffer, now that the PS3 has finally hit the PS2 launch price (that pesky $399 psychologal console seeling price) its time to cut the PS2 ambilical cord so that Devs can shift full FOCUS to making PS3 games! Learn a trick or two from the MS. But you wont will you? No you will continue to be like that monkey with his fist in a gourd greedly grasping at old fruit while a Lion chews on his BACK! The moral of the story need not be spelled out here...
I told you guys a few weeks ago that the new ps3 would not be backwards compatable to ps2 and ps1 games...I suppose ill get low ranked again for muttering the obligatory "I told you so"
Actually he does. Patel is guilty of very sloppy journalism.
The PS3 requires a chip called Graphics Synthesizer (essentially the PS2 graphics card) without which it will not be able to run PS2 games. One of the things Sony did towards being able to take $100 off the price is to remove the Graphics Synthesizer chip. The more expensive unit ($499) has the Graphics Synthesizer chip and hence provides backwards compatibility by emulating the PS2 CPU in software. The PS2 graphics card has never been emulated in software on the PS3. Patel, learn to do your homework.
Actually he does. Patel is guilty of very sloppy journalism.
The PS3 requires a chip called Graphics Synthesizer (essentially the PS2 graphics card) without which it will not be able to run PS2 games. One of the things Sony did towards being able to take $100 off the price is to remove the Graphics Synthesizer chip. The more expensive unit ($499) has the Graphics Synthesizer chip and hence provides backwards compatibility by emulating the PS2 CPU in software. The PS2 graphics card has never been emulated in software on the PS3. Patel, learn to do your homework.
If its just a software thing, couldn't someone pull the software off a PS3 with the compatibility and put it onto one of the new ones? Sounds like a job for some hackers...
The original PS3 contained the Emotion chip...basically it had a PS2 within the PS3, it's not just a software thing.
Couldn't you just get one and then mod it in then? This is just a really stupid setup. People don't want multiple systems laying around. It just seems like they are trying to move the more expensive stuff by disabling their lower end. Crap is all Sony is nowadays.
Actually PS3s sold in Europe do use software to emulate PS2 compatibility. I live in the UK and my PS3 doesn't work with all PS2 games because the software isn't compatible with all games.
I think the American PS3s did come with an emotion engine installed though.
shaun: I read somewhere that while the PS2 CPU component is emulated in software, the console still retains an original PS2 GPU (graphics) chip. That second part is gone in the 40Gb - and Sony don't want to reimplement that role in software if it were even possible.
@Vanillacide
You are wrong in saying that the UK PS3s have Emotion Engine and also in saying that the Emotion Engine is a graphics chip. The Graphic Synthesizer was the PS2 graphics chip.
To clear up the misinformation in this thread the situation is this. The US 60GB and 20GB models had both the PS2 Emotion Engine and Graphics Synthesiser and thus play PS2 games in hardware. The UK 60GB model and US 80GB model retained the Graphics Synthesiser but do not have the Emotion Engine which is now emulated in software. The new 40GB models lack both the Emotion Engine and Graphics Synthesiser. Apparently the Graphics Synthesiser cannot be emulated in software without specific alterations for each individual game which is why the new 40GB PS3s lack any sort of backwards compatibility.
Just as I was hoping he'd shut the f'up...
we are still kind of miffed that it isn't backwards-compatible with our huge library of PS2 games -- especially since newer PS3s retain compatibility through software emulation and not specialized hardware like earlier models"
20GB and 60GB PS3 - Contained both PS2 CPU and GPU making running PS2 and PS1 games a breeze
EU 60GB PS3 and all 80GB PS3 - Contained only PS2 GPU this allowed them to cut costs a bit but still most games were playable because they only had to emulate the CPU
40GB PS3 - Has no PS2 parts, emulation would require a small update for every game much like Xbox360s to run and Sony says that would take to much time on what they are currently working on. Things like the 2.0 Firmware and Home, while we won't see them for a bit does not mean Sony is working hard to make them kick ass.
You can't really say what you had in there comment. If the 80GB had full software emulation they would be fools not to included it, they cut costs on the 40GB model by taking out the PS2 GPU and that is why the 40GB model does not play PS2 games.
This is probably the first time I can say this but... I'm glad I'm a early adopter I have full backwards compatibility with the 60GB model that I bought here in Canada.
Right now I play more of my Xbox360 but being the RPG fan that I am I know my PS3 is going to get lots of use in 2008/2009 when the RPGs start flowing in.
sure Sony, because even your own HDTV's have an endless supply of inputs for all my gaming consoles. thank goodness I bought the original 60gig PS3 with the PS2 chip for 100% backward compatibility.
well atleast I already have a ps2. Maybe ill be the 80gb ps3. When I saw the price reduced a hundred dollars I went crazy.
It's nice for you, but I don't have a PS2, and now I won't be getting a PS3.
The PS3's business strategy is awful, there is no way for them to be the number 1 console with that price especially if you have something so revolutionary and relatively cheap called the Wii, Period
sorry alan but the wii games are pathetic. People love to complain about the PS3 lineup but the wii lineup is much worse. Al their games are aimed at children under the age of 14 or so. I have a wii and I have one game for it. Sure Paper Mario is fun and actually quite revolutionary in the control aspect. However, it lacks any real depth and in the end (just like the wii) its nothing more than a novelty. The PS3 finally has hit or is near the 1 year mark which is when you see games start to pour in. Folklore,Lair and Heavenly Sword are all FANTASTIC. They easily blow anything on the wii (multiplatform or 1st party) out of the water. With that said the wii is also at the one year mark but I still see the problem of no adult oriented content as a major drawback. In fact im going to give my wii to my 8 year old cousin for christmas. Which is the wii's target audience. The PSP has better games than the wii.
That's not true, the Wii is also for people above 80 years old. Basically anyone with slow reflexes is an ideal candidate for a Wii.
Hi John, you are certainly right about the fact that the Wii is a console targeted for a different audience, I don't think it is aimed to be a console for young ones, in my opinion it is targeted to whole families... Certainly the PS3 will have some good games in the months to come but I don't think that everyone has 600$ to spend in a console and comparing the PS3 to the xbox 360, in terms of graphics it looks exactly the same and the xbox 360 has much more games. By the way I owe a 360. Now if we start to speak about games the wii also has and will have more games to come for a more mature audience such as manhunt 2, bully, metroid 3, resident evil 4, and zelda... While the xbox 360 has Halo 3, GTA IV (coming) and a huge variety of other games. Now, we are actually speaking about the businss strategy, they have two consoles against them, one which is the cheapest and most revolutionary one (The Wii) and the other which is also cheaper, in terms of graphics looks almost the same and has a much larger amount of games (Xbox 360). I respect your opinion but I don't share it...
Ohhh I see, so he sees as an opportunity buy BOTH systems TOGETHER. Did I miss something about the PS3 along the way. For some strange reason I thought PS3 was supposed to be an all-in-system with backwards-compatibility from the get go. Now Mr. Jack is saying something different, and I thought era of system stacking was over. On a last note, thats still $28 more than the 60gb PS3 after the price cut. Yes, thats a great benefit.
And isn't the problem the $27 emulation chip? Why not give us the chip for $27 and charge us the $27? Much rather that than to go out and buy two consoles to waste my A/V plug space.
Wait. Why wasn't this part of CE Oh-No He Didn't! series?
If I were anyone buying a PS3 Id just either 1) By a 60 gb at Gamestop or EB-Games and get fully Back Compat or 2) Wait till DualShock 3 in the 40 gb bundle and get it.
Good job Sony! Now I won't ever buy a PS3.
I was going to buy a 60gb at $500, but now I won't be getting any Ps3... Oh well.
Dude.... Do you realize how stupid you sound? Not buying the 60 gig version because the 40 GIG VERSION won't have ps2 emulation?
Kids these days have no logic...
I didn't mean "Because the 40gb doesn't have the emulation, I won't get the 60gb", I meant "I can't get the 60gb at the moment due to lack of funds, and when I will there will only be the 40 and the 80gb, each with limited/no emulation which I will not pay for."
why do you need backwards compatibility if you never owned a PS2?????????
@trentyn
F@#%$NG THANK YOU!!
If you DONT have a PS2... Why do you have PS2 games?
Granted the PS3 has a fairly slim library at the moment, but I still wholly agree, if you dont have a PS2, STFU. If you plan on trading it, buck up and save it, and pay the cash instead of the stupid $20 gamestop would have given you, if that.
If you think your getting more than that, your nuts. I bought Motorstorm the day it came out for $60. Brought it back the SAME day because it sucked some serious @$$, and the best deal I could get was to trade it and another PS3 game for a new PS3 game (so essentially I got $30 for it)... And they turned around and put it back on the shelf for $55 used. But thats Gamestop for you...
You were never going to buy a PS3. If you were it wasnt because you could play PS2 games. Your just hating and complaining for the sake of complaning. I needed hardware emulation because I planned on giving my ps2 away to my little cousin. If you never had a PS2 then why the F would you want PS2 emulation?
Answer: Because your complaning about something you never planned on buying. Your nothing but a tool.
Of course! Why on earth wouldn't I want to be restricted to only the $60 games. Why would I want to pick up any other games, like God of War, FF, Kingdom Hearts, or any of the other games?
Damn. What was I thinking? I'm going to go out right now and buy a PS2 with an extra controller, and a couple games. That way, when I go out and buy a PS3, I'll get the privilage to go and buy more controllers that won't work with it! Sounds like a deal to me.
I wanted to get into some of the games I've been missing out on because I couldn't afford another console. But apparently, I'm a tool for not buying a PS2 when I was perfectly happy with my Xbox.
hey dummy...your wrong again...There is an adapter to use ps2 controllers on the ps3....and your still missing the big point...You can still buy a PS3 with backwards compatability (I was in BBuy yesterday and they had them there)and you can also download classic titles off of the ps netwrok directly to your hard drive....The other big point is the fact that backwards compatability is for people who have big libraries of PS2 titles...Your probably in the minority of people who have never owned a ps2 and now suddenly want PS2 titles when the PS3 has dropped backwards compatability...I think you just want something to complain about or your a die hard MS fanboi...I have more systems than I can count off the top of my head (going back to turbo graffix and NES) and they are (sans MS) all in working condition.... If you really want to play PS1 & PS2 games on your PS3 then shell out the extra bucks for one that uses hardware emulation....If you want to play some PS2 games get the model that has Software emulation....And obviously if you dont need to play any older gen games go with the newer model thats about to drop.....However my dissapointment is with MS...They use software compatability exclusively and most of my obscure titles wont play on the X360...now, it wouldnt be a problem is 2 of my original X-Box xonsoles didnt crap out on me and thus far im on X360 #4....I had 1 PS2 the whole time and my PS3 has given me ZERO problems....In fact as I said earlier once I got my PS3 I gave my PS2 away...And yes your still a tool because your making an argument just to be devils advocate...its obvious you never wanted those games you mentioned before...Tool
I already have a slimline PS2 which I use only to play Contra: Shattered Soldier (though I am trying to find Gradius V).
I don't think I enjoyed Ps2 as much as I did the PS1 back when Singletrac was cranking out Twisted Metal games, Warhawk, and there was Colony Wars, Time Crisis (with Guncon of course) and a bunch of Resident Evil games.
The only games I really liked on PS2 were Time Crisis 2, Grand Theft Auto & GTA Vice City, Need For Speed Hot Pursuit 2 and Tekken 4
Around that time I bought an XBOX and stopped playing PS2 games.
Frankly, I would buy a 40 GB PS3 without caring about the backwards compatibility even if I didn't have a PS2. Thing is, I might as well just buy the better model (60 or 80) so I don't miss out on anything.
Did you miss metal gear, good of wars, shadow collosus and such?.
I already have a slimline PS2 which I use only to play Contra: Shattered Soldier (though I am trying to find Gradius V).
I don't think I enjoyed Ps2 as much as I did the PS1 back when Singletrac was cranking out Twisted Metal games, Warhawk, and there was Colony Wars, Time Crisis (with Guncon of course) and a bunch of Resident Evil games.
The only games I really liked on PS2 were Time Crisis 2, Grand Theft Auto & GTA Vice City, Need For Speed Hot Pursuit 2 and Tekken 4
Around that time I bought an XBOX and stopped playing PS2 games.
Frankly, I would buy a 40 GB PS3 without caring about the backwards compatibility even if I didn't have a PS2. Thing is, I might as well just buy the better model (60 or 80) so I don't miss out on anything.
AND GODDAMN Am I glad I waited till the Dual Shock 3 was released.
Oh snap! Colony Wars was the bomb, yo!!!
Dude's math is off. This is the proper math for those that actually care about backwards compatibility (i.e., people with extensive collections of PS2 games):
$399 (for 40GB PS3 w/out backwards compatibility)
+
$0 (for the PS2 which you already own)
=
$399
But the laser in my PS2 died... so that math doesn't cut it.
I think it's still a little ridiculous that their official stance is "Buy a PS2". Microsoft is at least offering backward compatibility through software emulation.
Most people don't like to have multiple systems from the same family connected. (i.e. a PS1, PS2, and PS3 connected to the same TV). Backward compatibility is convenient because you can use one system to play all your games.
And while many people probably still have their PS2s, having an official stance of "go buy another system to do something that the PS3 used to be able to do" is just bad business.
Is Sony using its public relations to satirize big corporations or something? They can NOT seriously believe what they're saying. This is like reading The Onion. In fact, maybe that's Sony's game. Make their statements so ridiculous that The Onion literally cannot top them.
I remember the last time The Onion _LITERALLY_ topped me. Whoo, boy; I was sore for weeks.
onion... top.. well that's one hell of a bottom. jeebus.
I think I'll just wait until April 2008 when Sony will start giving them away with backwards compatibility and a Wii.
You know ,for a company that does it so much, you would think they would eventually get good at lying to their fans.
This is exactly why I bought an Xbox 360 last weekend. I also own a PS2. Why can't a state-of-the-art game console play games from its own catalog? I can't play my Guitar Hero 1, 2 and 80's games with my $60 wireless controllers? I can't play my GTA games? I can 't play my ebay bought Metal Gear Solid and Oddworld games? WHHY NOT!??!? This kind of myopia will sink SONY soon enough. I just hope that they release Metal Gear Solid 4 for Xbox 360 as well. That's the kind of shot to the dome that SONY needs. Now I just have to figure out which version of Guitar Hero 3 to buy...
If you're into DLC, get the 360 version. If you want a little more feedback from playing like rumble and sound fx, get the Wii version. Since you insert the Wii remote into it, it uses the rumble, accelerometer, and speaker on it for more feedback.
Jack "Daniels" Tretton. Hah!