Is there some way to get PS2 BC into newer model PS3s?

[Chuplayer]

I was just wondering about it. I've heard about the fill rate on the emotion engine being insanely high so it's impossible to emulate on the PS3, so are these newer consoles damned?

I was thinking about maybe Sony creating an external device for the PS3 that would essentially be a PS2, but I have no idea where they would put it. I don't believe the PS3 has expansion ports like the Genesis, and there is no cartridge port like in the TurboGrafx. I doubt two USB ports would be sufficient for data transfer. Those miscellaneous card ports most likely aren't good enough either, and don't the newer consoles not come equipped with them?

Maybe they could work in some sort of passthrough device for the hard drive port? I don't know if that would provide sufficient data transfer capabilities though.

[kendrick]

Even with the software-only CPU emulation, the second run of backward-compatible PS3 units depended on the presence of the hardware GPU. Unless the PS3 has some sort of direct bus interface for expansion, it's not likely that a plug-in BC unit would ever be released.

I'm voting with my wallet. Backward compatibility is very important to me, and I'm not willing to buy a PS3 in the absence of a compelling exclusive without those functions. Sony claims that the PS3 will have a ten-year retail lifespan, so if we get a price drop and new backward compatibility functions at the same time in the next three years, that's when I'll buy it.

[Endymion]

I'm sure with sufficient motivation you could mod a PS2 into a PS3, but you would certainly eliminate the PS3 in the doing.

Seriously, the RSX fill rate wipes the floor with the PS2s. That is not the issue. What was going on with the early PS3s was not even emulation of a PS2. It was activating the PS2 hardware chips to make these games function. The PS2 CPU was emulated in the later revision while the Graphics Synthesizer chip was still used, as kendrik points out. It is absolutely not impossible to emulate the GS. This is happening already with PCSX2. But PCSX2 is very much a work in progress and a lot of time and effort has been spent in getting it where it is today. If you translate this to salaries, this is probably too much to justify for questionable gain in a platform that is already running in the market. It definitely hurts the PS3, I think, that it lacks this compatibility now, but the real reason this is gone is due to a lot of bad planning, many of it at least as old as the PS2 design, the rest shows what Sony (poorly) chose to concentrate on with the PS3 during its design phase.

It ain't over til it's over but I think you can all but stick a fork in the PS3 as far as compatibility goes. I'll be very surprised if anything new happens here.

[phreak97]

what's different in the backwards compatible ps3s? is there something major in the hardware? or is it just software?

[Endymion]

what's different in the backwards compatible ps3s? is there something major in the hardware? or is it just software?

There are two motherboards which are backward compatible. One has the EE+GS chip while the other has only a GS chip. The EE+GS chip has (*almost) fullspeed PS2 gameplay, the GS-only chip slows down when playing some games because the CPU is emulated. This doesn't happen in the EE+GS motherboards because there is no real emulation going on. If you think about Sony's history they did this once before, the PS2 has the PS1 CPU in it as well. The real problems with their whole approach have nothing to do with that though. When running either motherboard via HDMI there is an unavoidable delay of 4 frames each second because all video will be deinterlaced. This happens because the RSX cannot output interlaced video via its digital line, so all 480i is deinterlaced to force a minimum 480p under all circumstances. In addition to making your window of input smaller this gives a very noticeable blur to the entire screen. There are only two ways to get around this: use a PS2 game's built-in 480p mode, this will eliminate all deinterlacing but it will also eliminate any upscaling, alternatively you can use XPloder HDTV Player.

[phreak97]

that wont really affect me because I only have a crt anyway..
if there are backward compatible consoles which dont have the EE, what's the difference between those and the non-bc consoles?

[kendrick]

PS3 units that are backward compatible but lack the Emotion Engine still have the PS2 graphics hardware implemented. The other functions of the PS2 are emulated using software. Currently, it's not feasible to emulate the whole PS2 for some reason, but I can't claim to know exactly why.

[Endymion]

that wont really affect me because I only have a crt anyway..

It depends on the kind of CRT, actually. Is it an HDTV with Y-Pb-Pr? Any upscaling that the PS3 does will afflict the image with deinterlacing and the issues that brings (blur, lag), however it is only the HDMI that has the double-whammy of having 480p as its lowest selectable res.

if there are backward compatible consoles which dont have the EE, what's the difference between those and the non-bc consoles?

Uh... yeah. Kendrick handled this. And so did I, at least twice in the thread already. EE = Emotion Engine, aka the PS2 CPU. GS = Graphics Synthesizer, aka the PS2 GPU. Read the above again with that in mind, make more sense?

[phreak97]

it's not an hd crt, though I would definately like one of those:P I do use component, but only interlaced.

I knew EE was emotion engine, and I assumed GS was graphics something, but I didnt realise the ps2 gpu was seperate and that they had stopped including it, which was pretty much the answer to my question.

so, my understanding is this:

there are three different console versions as far as ps2 playability is concerned;
one which included the ps2 EE and ps2 GS and can play ps2 games.
one which includes only the ps2 GS and can play ps2 games.
and the last which has neither of those two parts and cannot play ps2 games.

I was originally asking what sets the second two apart from each other internally, and it seems to be the GS.