See, this is what sony needs to learn from. THIS is how you do backwards compatibility, not this " well mos tof the top 100 should work for the most part" non committal BS.

I bet on Microsoft this time around in this generation's console wars.

Even if PS5 got a better SSD to load graphics instantly the games from third party developers won't be better on the PS5.

They always use the lowest common denominator when hardware is so close in performance, they will develop for XBOX Series X and then just port it over to PS5.

Maybe some PS5 first party titles will use the enhanced features but it will not be enuf to beat Microsoft.

Microsoft have their own cloud infrastructure for gaming, Mixer streaming that will be heavily integrated with XBOX Series X and PC AND if you buy XBOX Series X game you will get the PC version free.

Also Sony is buying it's cloud infrastructure capacity for gaming from Microsoft, so Microsoft got a massive upper hand this time around.

TheinsanegamerNSee, this is what sony needs to learn from. THIS is how you do backwards compatibility, not this " well mos tof the top 100 should work for the most part" non committal BS.

Microsoft has decades of experience in backwards compatibility, Sony is relatively new in the game.

FourstaffMicrosoft has decades of experience in backwards compatibility, Sony is relatively new in the game.

*Looks at the Ps2 with full backwards compatibility with the ps1, and the OG PS3 with full PS2 and PS1 backwards compatibility*

*looks at the 360 which only offered backwards compatibility on a tiny selection of Xbox games*

*microsoft has decades of experience, sony is relatively new*

Oi captain, you sure about that? You could make the argument that MS has more experience thanks to windows, but that sure didnt help the 360 play OG Xbox games, and even Xbone compatibility is highly selective with the 360. MS has only used the VM-for-game-engines method since the Xbone came out, not even a decade ago.

TheinsanegamerN*Looks at the Ps2 with full backwards compatibility with the ps1, and the OG PS3 with full PS2 and PS1 backwards compatibility*

*looks at the 360 which only offered backwards compatibility on a tiny selection of Xbox games*

Gonna have to correct you on that. The PS2 had full PS1 compatibility because it had the actual PS1 cpu inside. The launch PS3 models also had an actual PS2 SOC inside for backwards compatibility.
The Xbox 360 and Xbox One does not have this advantage and relies on emulation, wrappers, re-compilation, and hypervisor layers to mention the techniques they use.
With that said Sony eventually relied on the same methods as Microsoft for backwards compatibility because the consoles architectures between generations were so vastly different (and the PS2 SOC was quickly removed to save on costs). Things are different now though since we will now have two console generations sharing architecture.

Yes, the original PS3's had the chip used in the PS2 within and it used a form of software emulation to make it work with the PS3 system itself.

While it was backwards compatable it didn't actually work with all PS2 titles, I have at least one PS2 game that it doesn't work with and the list of PS2 games it works with is kinda short, shorter than you'd think TBH.

It also has a chip for PSX games too inside.
I can't say about the slim models but all the original fat models regardless have the PSX chip and I've yet to see or note any PSX games that will not work with it.

Speaking of the new Xbox, I'd not get hopes way up over it, therre may be some limitations on how backwards compatable it will be once released but you'd have to think it probrably won't be a problem period.
Time will tell once it's out.

BonesYes, the original PS3's had the chip used in the PS2 within and it used a form of software emulation to make it work with the PS3 system itself.

While it was backwards compatable it didn't actually work with all PS2 titles, I have at least one PS2 game that it doesn't work with and the list of PS2 games it works with is kinda short, shorter than you'd think TBH.

It also has a chip for PSX games too inside.
I can't say about the slim models but all the original fat models regardless have the PSX chip and I've yet to see or note any PSX games that will not work with it.

Speaking of the new Xbox, I'd not get hopes way up over it, therre may be some limitations on how backwards compatable it will be once released but you'd have to think it probrably won't be a problem period.
Time will tell once it's out.

the 60GB PS3 was 100% backwards compatible thanks to carrying a full PS2 inside, the software compatibility that was only about 70% compatible was used on the 80GB model.

The PSX controller was used for the blu-ray drive's controller, so all PS3s can play all PS1 games.

RexterGonna have to correct you on that. The PS2 had full PS1 compatibility because it had the actual PS1 cpu inside. The launch PS3 models also had an actual PS2 SOC inside for backwards compatibility.
The Xbox 360 and Xbox One does not have this advantage and relies on emulation, wrappers, re-compilation, and hypervisor layers to mention the techniques they use.
With that said Sony eventually relied on the same methods as Microsoft for backwards compatibility because the consoles architectures between generations were so vastly different (and the PS2 SOC was quickly removed to save on costs). Things are different now though since we will now have two console generations sharing architecture.

Well to correct me there you'd have to point to where I said the PS2/3 DIDNT use the old hardware (hint: I never said this). My point was that Sony is not new to backwards compatibility, they've been doing it for decades. They did it in a different manner then MS does it, but lets not pretend that Sony has never done backwards compatibility.

In previous consoles before PS4 and Xbox One, they use highly customized processors and GPUs. So jumping from one gen to another typically introduces difficulties or considerable effort to back port games. With the current gen consoles, that changed because if you look at it, these consoles are basically running x86 hardware, which I suspect will make back porting a lot easier. I may be wrong, but I will leave it to experts' advise.

We PAL users didn't have PS2 hardware on our PS3 60GB; it was done via emulator. The real backwards compatibility was only NTSC users' treat. :(

Better just have both PS2 & PS3 on my shelf. :D

TheinsanegamerNSee, this is what sony needs to learn from. THIS is how you do backwards compatibility, not this " well mos tof the top 100 should work for the most part" non committal BS.

When I got a launch 360, I recall some original Xbox games were officially listed as BC, but they crashed pretty consistently on the 360. I can’t recall the titles anymore, but one was a game with ATVs in it. Get halfway into a race and it would lockup. With the PS3, Sony had full BC with the original console thanks to the PS2 Emotion Engine being included in the console. It made the PS3 more expensive, so Sony removed it and relied on emulation in later models. With XboxOne, BC was added over time, to the point that it just wasn’t much of a selling point. Many original sports games never received BC support, no doubt because EA didn’t want anyone enjoying old titles when a slightly improved version could be had for $60. I remember this because EA only ever made one PGA tour game for PS4/XboxOne, and it was pretty much garbage compared to the previous generation titles. You had to keep your old console around if you wanted to play at Augusta National, for example.

BC has really never been what I’d call ideal. PS5 and XSX keep the same CPU architecture, so this issue may finally be solved. However, are these new generation consoles really a new generation? I kinda get the impression they are more being marketed as premium variants of the current crop, and that PS5/XSX games will also play on PS4/XO consoles, just with lesser graphics.

Let’s not forget Nintendo here. I think they just want you to have a wall of consoles anymore.

Darmok N JaladLet’s not forget Nintendo here. I think they just want you to have a wall of consoles anymore.

Game Boys are the exception here.

FourstaffMicrosoft has decades of experience in backwards compatibility, Sony is relatively new in the game.

It's nothing to do with experience and everything to do with a company, Sony, that wants to strictly control its past IP's and licensing deals with publishers.

..every backwards compatible game is an opportunity for lost revenue in 'remaster' sales. Nintendo is the same, its a 'Japanese' thing.

I hope game developers take advantage of the extra power and add 4k textures to older games and ray tracing too. Looks like I'm gonna get me an xbox this Christmas and play with the family Christmas morning.

This isn‘t just a Japanese thing—Halo CE has been reworked and resold how many times now? All of these companies will milk their most popular franchises if the opportunity to make money is there. If people pay, why wouldn’t they?

I think the best you can hope for on BC is just a stable experience. Most studios aren’t interested in going back to rework old titles, unless they still have a way to make more money on them. It’s just how businesses are run, and I can’t think of many studios that go back and spend developer time on a game that has essentially run its course. I can see them doing a “remastered edition” of classic games, for those that wish to see the classics with advanced visuals, but they will want you to pay again. Hopefully MS and Sony built something into their API where this can be automatic with generational hardware bumps. Even if it’s just as simple as upscaling or higher FPS. Hoping studios will revisit legacy titles is a long shot, IMO.

See Sony, this is how you do marketing for your next gen console. Keeping your mouth shut just doesn't work.

fynxerI bet on Microsoft this time around in this generation's console wars.

Sony and MS have been oscillating like this forever, PS2 was more successful than Xbox, 360 was more successful than PS3 and then PS4 was again more successful than Xbox One. Call it a conspiracy theory but this doesn't seem like a coincidence.

fynxerI bet on Microsoft this time around in this generation's console wars.

Even if PS5 got a better SSD to load graphics instantly the games from third party developers won't be better on the PS5.

They always use the lowest common denominator when hardware is so close in performance, they will develop for XBOX Series X and then just port it over to PS5.

Maybe some PS5 first party titles will use the enhanced features but it will not be enuf to beat Microsoft.

Microsoft have their own cloud infrastructure for gaming, Mixer streaming that will be heavily integrated with XBOX Series X and PC AND if you buy XBOX Series X game you will get the PC version free.

Also Sony is buying it's cloud infrastructure capacity for gaming from Microsoft, so Microsoft got a massive upper hand this time around.

Hello Unreal Engine 5. It is designed to perform best on PS5.

ARFIt is designed to perform best on PS5.

Not really, you can't design an engine for a specific platform. At least not these days with hardware that is more or less the same in terms of capabilities.

Vya DomusNot really, you can't design an engine for a specific platform. At least not these days with hardware that is more or less the same in terms of capabilities.

You can. You can't run in the same way engines for PC/console on a smartphone.
The difference will be like standard quality on PS5, next but lower will be ultra-high on something like Navi 21 and Ryzen 9 3950X, and next will be medium on something like Navi 23 and Ryzen 5 3600X.

Epic promises Unreal Engine 5 will have similar capabilities on both the PS5 and the next Xbox, but the demo video runs on a PS5, which immediately makes me wonder whether Epic thinks PS5 is the best hardware. Epic's Tim Sweeney won't make any direct performance comparisons, but during a conversation on Zoom he says that Unreal Engine 5 takes advantage of next-gen SSD storage speeds. "[Unreal Engine] Five now is optimizing for next-generation storage to make loading faster by multiples of current performance.

Not just a little bit faster, but a lot faster, so that you can bring in this geometry and display it despite it not all fitting in memory, taking advantage of next generation SSD architectures and everything else. Sony's pioneering that with the PlayStation 5 architecture. It's got a god-tier storage system, which is pretty far ahead of PCs."

www.cnet.com/news/epic-unreal-engine-5-i-got-first-look-ps5-now-im-believer/

ARFYou can't run in the same way engines for PC/console on a smartphone.

Of course you can, you just lower the resolution for shadow maps, reduce particle emissions and resolutions, etc. Tell me how you write an optimized shader for PS5 and how it would be different for Xbox when the GPU hardware is of the same make.

TheinsanegamerNSee, this is what sony needs to learn from. THIS is how you do backwards compatibility, not this " well mos tof the top 100 should work for the most part" non committal BS.

This is what losers do, open up the floodgates of content we've already seen.

Sony doesn't need to do this, they just give us new content. In spades. Every gen. Not that I disagree backwards compatibility should be a thing for them too, but let's not forget the market reality here. You get nice things because they need you to pony up something with dollar signs on it.

Vya DomusOf course you can, you just lower the resolution for shadow maps, reduce particle emissions and resolutions, etc. Tell me how you write an optimized shader for PS5 and how it would be different for Xbox when the GPU hardware is of the same make.

It is because all platforms use the same basic graphics IP, it's just unified across the platforms for easier migration.
But that doesn't mean other platforms on completely different CPU and graphics IP can't and don't exist.

ARFHello Unreal Engine 5. It is designed to perform best on PS5.

and why exactly would that occur ? dx12 ultimate not suited for rdna 2 somehow ?

ARFIt is because all platforms use the same basic graphics IP, it's just unified across the platforms for easier migration.
But that doesn't mean other platforms on completely different CPU and graphics IP can't and don't exist.

The "completely different" CPU and GPU might vary in the number of cores/CUs , cache/memory and clocks but the architectures don't vary that much to the point where you'd have to change the code for optimization purposes. All GPUs share the same sort of wavefront architecture, the CPUs have support for the same kind of SIMD, etc.

Nice you buy new console generation to play old console game LOL