Linux returns to PS3. Yes, that's both fat & slim models.

[Ziggy]

What I don't get is that if people are able to create PS2 emulators for the PS3, why the hell can't Sony do this and release it in a firmware update/download from PSN? Probably because they wouldn't be able to get 100% perfection, so they wouldn't want to release something like that... but they could just make a compatibility list and have it grow with future updates. How many more PS3's would sell if ALL PS3's could play PS2 games? I get making the cheaper consoles and taking the PS2 hardware out. But if emulation is purely software than how would that cost them any more money to manufacture a console? Maybe I'm missing something and don't fully understand, but I just wonder why.

Maybe because they were not built for stacking. Future consoles should be built like Legos.

Not a horrible idea. Maybe the controllers could stack like Lincoln Logs.

[ZeroAX]

Um guys PS2 emulation on the PS3 was never 100% software. At one point they removed either the emotion engine or the graphics card/chip (I'm not sure which) and instead emulated it to achieve PS2 support. But then they needed to further reduce cost, so they removed the other remaining component and apparently "they couldn't" emulate it.
more like didn't bother...

[dsheinem]

Um guys PS2 emulation on the PS3 was never 100% software. At one point they removed either the emotion engine or the graphics card/chip (I'm not sure which) and instead emulated it to achieve PS2 support. But then they needed to further reduce cost, so they removed the other remaining component and apparently "they couldn't" emulate it.
more like didn't bother...

This is what I understand too. Everyone who got mad at them for taking out PS2 support didn't realize that it was more than just stripping the machine of software - they actually removed some physical hardware components to cut costs. Remember, for a VERY long time PS3s were selling at a loss.

[EvilRyu2099]

Um guys PS2 emulation on the PS3 was never 100% software. At one point they removed either the emotion engine or the graphics card/chip (I'm not sure which) and instead emulated it to achieve PS2 support. But then they needed to further reduce cost, so they removed the other remaining component and apparently "they couldn't" emulate it.
more like didn't bother...

This is what I understand too. Everyone who got mad at them for taking out PS2 support didn't realize that it was more than just stripping the machine of software - they actually removed some physical hardware components to cut costs. Remember, for a VERY long time PS3s were selling at a loss.

That's exactly the case, and now for two years they have been making profit on each PS3 sold, but it's pretty much too late to revert back to the original hardware.. They are selling well and finally making good profits, so no need to change back when this generation may last 3 more years if that.. Plus I'm not sure if the PS3 has the hardware capabilities tp run an emulator at 100% since you need a pretty good computer to run a good ps2 emulator on your HDD..

[Opa Opa]

What I don't get is that if people are able to create PS2 emulators for the PS3, why the hell can't Sony do this and release it in a firmware update/download from PSN?

Probably because they wouldn't be making money on the titles that are being sold used? ...I think...
Or maybe because they think that once a new system comes out we automatically forget about the previous one and just focus on the new stuff. (Not being entirely serious...)

Not a horrible idea. Maybe the controllers could stack like Lincoln Logs.

Nah. Controllers should be made out of something like playdough. That way people can shape it to the right size and form so they can't complain about the design.

[Ziggy]

Plus I'm not sure if the PS3 has the hardware capabilities tp run an emulator at 100% since you need a pretty good computer to run a good ps2 emulator on your HDD..

Then whats all this talk about a PS2 emulator on the PS3? Surely some one wouldn't bother creating an emulator if it could never run at 100 percent, right?

[Hatta]

This is what I understand too. Everyone who got mad at them for taking out PS2 support didn't realize that it was more than just stripping the machine of software - they actually removed some physical hardware components to cut costs. Remember, for a VERY long time PS3s were selling at a loss.

Not sure why that matters. Removing features without lowering prices is the same thing as a price hike. It's going to piss people off. If Sony was selling at a loss, that's their problem. They should have introduced the console at a sustainable price so they wouldn't have to raise prices later.

Then whats all this talk about a PS2 emulator on the PS3? Surely some one wouldn't bother creating an emulator if it could never run at 100 percent, right?

It happens. See SNES on the Dreamcast or DS for instance.

[JordanPlayer]

What I don't get is that if people are able to create PS2 emulators for the PS3, why the hell can't Sony do this and release it in a firmware update/download from PSN?

The simple reason why is because they want to make more money. First it was cutting out pieces of hardware to reduce the cost of the system so they would make more money selling the console. The reason there was software emulation in the beginning was because backwards compatibility was a big selling point. After a bit people noticed quite a few compatibility issues with PS1 and PS2 games but Sony wasn't going to start dumping money and time into getting the emulator near 100% compatibility... because they had a better idea. Why not release ported PS1 games on PSN so that they can actually make money from these old games; I think right now there are something like 120+ PS1 titles available (which I honestly am not sure they would be there if backwards compatibility existed). On top of this Sony and others have also started re-mastering PS2 games; God of War Collection, Prince of Persia Trilogy, Sly Cooper Collection, Ico + Shadow of the Colossus, and I'm sure more to come. Bottom line was why spend a lot of time and resources perfecting software emulation when we can port PS1 games to PSN and re-release our best PS2 series in HD.

That sounds like a big Sony bashing but I love my PS3. I actually look forward to the remastering/collections since I got a PS2 only about a year ago and don't have a huge library of games (and the collections so far have sold for $40 at retail); however I avoid the PS1 classics on PSN and buy the discs to play on a slim PS2.

[EvilRyu2099]

What I don't get is that if people are able to create PS2 emulators for the PS3, why the hell can't Sony do this and release it in a firmware update/download from PSN?

The simple reason why is because they want to make more money. First it was cutting out pieces of hardware to reduce the cost of the system so they would make more money selling the console. The reason there was software emulation in the beginning was because backwards compatibility was a big selling point. After a bit people noticed quite a few compatibility issues with PS1 and PS2 games but Sony wasn't going to start dumping money and time into getting the emulator near 100% compatibility... because they had a better idea. Why not release ported PS1 games on PSN so that they can actually make money from these old games; I think right now there are something like 120+ PS1 titles available (which I honestly am not sure they would be there if backwards compatibility existed). On top of this Sony and others have also started re-mastering PS2 games; God of War Collection, Prince of Persia Trilogy, Sly Cooper Collection, Ico + Shadow of the Colossus, and I'm sure more to come. Bottom line was why spend a lot of time and resources perfecting software emulation when we can port PS1 games to PSN and re-release our best PS2 series in HD.

That sounds like a big Sony bashing but I love my PS3. I actually look forward to the remastering/collections since I got a PS2 only about a year ago and don't have a huge library of games (and the collections so far have sold for $40 at retail); however I avoid the PS1 classics on PSN and buy the discs to play on a slim PS2.

I don't mind it either, plus any PS3 is fully backwards compatible with PS1 games... I'm sure in the future, the PS4 will be fully backwards compatible with PS1, PS2, and PS3 games with HD releases on the future PSN of those classic games for people whom didn't own certain games on the older consoles..

[AppleQueso]

Have you not noticed the amount of HD ps2 ports popping up? That's why there's no software b/c support.