The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Do you remember when Sony regidtered the trademark "pstwo" ? Now they announced it, it is going to be a better version of the psx, it's going to have better graphics and a new design.
Page:
You're all forgetting one teeny weeny fact; no matter how much more memory they put into the system (if they do in the first place), or if they replace the GPU with a more powerful revision, it won't make a jot of difference if the software (games) isn't programmed to take advantage if it.
In short Cusack, PSTwo is just a new smaller case. The chips are all going to be the same inside. It could theoretically make PS games look better, just like the PS2 did, because it is a PS2.
However, there will not be any PSTwo only games. Nobody would make games for that because not enough people would own one to make it worthwhile, plus as others have pointed out, there would then be compatability problems.
Just a new smaller case.
However, there will not be any PSTwo only games. Nobody would make games for that because not enough people would own one to make it worthwhile, plus as others have pointed out, there would then be compatability problems.
Just a new smaller case.
Cusack wrote:
> It doesn't have to be a new chip, they can simply increase the 32 MB
> ram, or speed up the 300 MHZ processor. I said there will be imroved
> graphics, I didn't say that it will be completely changed.
But neither a faster processor nor extra RAM will in themselves make any difference to graphics.
The only way they will be able to offer better graphics would be to (a) replace the graphics processor with with a newer version, possibly creating problems, or (b) simply increase the graphics memory to allow for more detailed textures.
However, any such change would require significant modifications to the very basics of the system architecture, which would require extensive development and major testing before they could be released on general sale.
Think about it. You'd need to design not only the new, smaller chips, but also a new Operating System; and you'd have to make sure that it's not only bug-free, but also 100% compatable with the previous version. Consoles aren't like PC's - you can't just drop in a new CPU and some extra RAM and expect it to chug along as happily as before.
Either of these options could have a negative effect on both existing games and those currently in development. Any foul-up there and they could potentially kill the PS2 off as a viable platform, drastically shortening its life rather than extending it. And developers won't appreciate the possibility of needing to create two versions of a game for 'the same' machine.
PSone was no more than a miniaturised verion of the original PlayStation, with the largely unused connectors removed; the original PS1 had a parallel port on the back, which was never utilised and disappeared on later models and the PSone. PSone was launched after PS2 and has successfully helped to prolong the life of a great machine which should have died off long ago.
I pretty much expect that PStwo will be no more than an attempt to do the same for the PlayStation 2, with the PlayStation 3 looming large on the horizon. Whether it will be as successful remains to be seen.
> When the ps2 was made, it had a completely different chip from
> that of the ps1
True, but PS2 does include the original PS1 CPU - it uses it as the I/O processor during normal PS2 operations, and hands control over to it when you play a PS1 game. PS2 doesn't emulate a PS1, it has one built in.
> accordingly, the next time this will happen is going to be in
> the ps3, the pstwo just offers improvements to the original ps2, it
> wouldn't be a complete new console, just some improvements.
The first part of that is true - PS3 will be the next major chip change. But the PSone didn't offer any improvements over the original machine; it was just a smaller unit with the unused external features removed; although the internal components were smaller, their capabilities were identical.
Why do you expect the PStwo to be any different? It's most likely to be a similar idea - a smaller machine, probably without the HDD bay, and maybe without the FireWire/USB ports.
If Sony do manage to squeeze in any improvements, without affecting compatability, all well and good - I'll be suitably impressed. But as they've been developing PS3 for at least the last couple of years, I don't honestly think they'll have been looking to add anything to an already successful and established format. Especially not anything that changes the basic functionality of the machine. A re-design is about the best you should be hoping for, I reckon.
> It doesn't have to be a new chip, they can simply increase the 32 MB
> ram, or speed up the 300 MHZ processor. I said there will be imroved
> graphics, I didn't say that it will be completely changed.
But neither a faster processor nor extra RAM will in themselves make any difference to graphics.
The only way they will be able to offer better graphics would be to (a) replace the graphics processor with with a newer version, possibly creating problems, or (b) simply increase the graphics memory to allow for more detailed textures.
However, any such change would require significant modifications to the very basics of the system architecture, which would require extensive development and major testing before they could be released on general sale.
Think about it. You'd need to design not only the new, smaller chips, but also a new Operating System; and you'd have to make sure that it's not only bug-free, but also 100% compatable with the previous version. Consoles aren't like PC's - you can't just drop in a new CPU and some extra RAM and expect it to chug along as happily as before.
Either of these options could have a negative effect on both existing games and those currently in development. Any foul-up there and they could potentially kill the PS2 off as a viable platform, drastically shortening its life rather than extending it. And developers won't appreciate the possibility of needing to create two versions of a game for 'the same' machine.
PSone was no more than a miniaturised verion of the original PlayStation, with the largely unused connectors removed; the original PS1 had a parallel port on the back, which was never utilised and disappeared on later models and the PSone. PSone was launched after PS2 and has successfully helped to prolong the life of a great machine which should have died off long ago.
I pretty much expect that PStwo will be no more than an attempt to do the same for the PlayStation 2, with the PlayStation 3 looming large on the horizon. Whether it will be as successful remains to be seen.
> When the ps2 was made, it had a completely different chip from
> that of the ps1
True, but PS2 does include the original PS1 CPU - it uses it as the I/O processor during normal PS2 operations, and hands control over to it when you play a PS1 game. PS2 doesn't emulate a PS1, it has one built in.
> accordingly, the next time this will happen is going to be in
> the ps3, the pstwo just offers improvements to the original ps2, it
> wouldn't be a complete new console, just some improvements.
The first part of that is true - PS3 will be the next major chip change. But the PSone didn't offer any improvements over the original machine; it was just a smaller unit with the unused external features removed; although the internal components were smaller, their capabilities were identical.
Why do you expect the PStwo to be any different? It's most likely to be a similar idea - a smaller machine, probably without the HDD bay, and maybe without the FireWire/USB ports.
If Sony do manage to squeeze in any improvements, without affecting compatability, all well and good - I'll be suitably impressed. But as they've been developing PS3 for at least the last couple of years, I don't honestly think they'll have been looking to add anything to an already successful and established format. Especially not anything that changes the basic functionality of the machine. A re-design is about the best you should be hoping for, I reckon.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> All PS2 does with PS1 games is attempt to smooth some of the textures.
> On some (few) games it's fairly noticeable (one of the early Tomb
> Raider games - can't remember which - looked noticably 'cleaner').
> For the most part, though, you couldn't tell the difference. And
> some games actually looked worse.
>
> The other option, though, certainly speeds up the load time of many
> PS1 games.
>
> The PStwo is likely to be re-cased and smaller version of the PS2,
> nothing more. Better graphics would mean new chips, which
> could lead to compatability problems with older PS2 games, in
> the same way that some old PS1 games don't work on PS2 (albeit mostly
> older, obscure Japanese titles).
>
> The other thing is that, like PS2 with PS1 games, any 'revised' PStwo
> will only have the graphics on the original game disc to work with,
> and so will be very limited to any improvements it can make. Better
> graphics require more data, which simply won't exist, and the machine
> won't be able to create from nothing.
>
> I also recall reading a while back, when 'PStwo' was first mentioned
> in the magazines, that the new model might be missing one or
> both USB ports and/or the FireWire port, because of it's possible
> smaller size, and the fact that they were hardly made use of.
> However, given the more recent releases of things like Eye-Toy and
> the SOCOM headset, this may have changed.
It doesn't have to be a new chip, they can simply increase the 32 MB ram, or speed up the 300 MHZ processor, I said there will be imroved graphics, I didn't say that it will be completely changed. When the ps2 was made, it had a completely different chip from that of the ps1, accordingly, the next time this will happen is going to be in the ps3, the pstwo just offers improvements to the original ps2, it wouldn't be a complete new console, just some improvements.
> All PS2 does with PS1 games is attempt to smooth some of the textures.
> On some (few) games it's fairly noticeable (one of the early Tomb
> Raider games - can't remember which - looked noticably 'cleaner').
> For the most part, though, you couldn't tell the difference. And
> some games actually looked worse.
>
> The other option, though, certainly speeds up the load time of many
> PS1 games.
>
> The PStwo is likely to be re-cased and smaller version of the PS2,
> nothing more. Better graphics would mean new chips, which
> could lead to compatability problems with older PS2 games, in
> the same way that some old PS1 games don't work on PS2 (albeit mostly
> older, obscure Japanese titles).
>
> The other thing is that, like PS2 with PS1 games, any 'revised' PStwo
> will only have the graphics on the original game disc to work with,
> and so will be very limited to any improvements it can make. Better
> graphics require more data, which simply won't exist, and the machine
> won't be able to create from nothing.
>
> I also recall reading a while back, when 'PStwo' was first mentioned
> in the magazines, that the new model might be missing one or
> both USB ports and/or the FireWire port, because of it's possible
> smaller size, and the fact that they were hardly made use of.
> However, given the more recent releases of things like Eye-Toy and
> the SOCOM headset, this may have changed.
It doesn't have to be a new chip, they can simply increase the 32 MB ram, or speed up the 300 MHZ processor, I said there will be imroved graphics, I didn't say that it will be completely changed. When the ps2 was made, it had a completely different chip from that of the ps1, accordingly, the next time this will happen is going to be in the ps3, the pstwo just offers improvements to the original ps2, it wouldn't be a complete new console, just some improvements.
The PS2 did make PS1 graphics look better (but with old games it was down to luck really, as new ones were made to be compatible with it).
FF9 looked quite a lot better when played on PS2.
FF9 looked quite a lot better when played on PS2.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> All PS2 does with PS1 games is attempt to smooth some of the textures.
> On some (few) games it's fairly noticeable (one of the early Tomb
> Raider games - can't remember which - looked noticably 'cleaner').
> For the most part, though, you couldn't tell the difference. And
> some games actually looked worse.
This is what I was talking about. I didn't say it was noticable, I said it made slight graphical improvements.
Alastair, you can go on thinking you're Oscar Wilde all you like, but we've seen what pretty much everyone thinks of you in the media forum.
> All PS2 does with PS1 games is attempt to smooth some of the textures.
> On some (few) games it's fairly noticeable (one of the early Tomb
> Raider games - can't remember which - looked noticably 'cleaner').
> For the most part, though, you couldn't tell the difference. And
> some games actually looked worse.
This is what I was talking about. I didn't say it was noticable, I said it made slight graphical improvements.
Alastair, you can go on thinking you're Oscar Wilde all you like, but we've seen what pretty much everyone thinks of you in the media forum.
All PS2 does with PS1 games is attempt to smooth some of the textures. On some (few) games it's fairly noticeable (one of the early Tomb Raider games - can't remember which - looked noticably 'cleaner'). For the most part, though, you couldn't tell the difference. And some games actually looked worse.
The other option, though, certainly speeds up the load time of many PS1 games.
The PStwo is likely to be re-cased and smaller version of the PS2, nothing more. Better graphics would mean new chips, which could lead to compatability problems with older PS2 games, in the same way that some old PS1 games don't work on PS2 (albeit mostly older, obscure Japanese titles).
The other thing is that, like PS2 with PS1 games, any 'revised' PStwo will only have the graphics on the original game disc to work with, and so will be very limited to any improvements it can make. Better graphics require more data, which simply won't exist, and the machine won't be able to create from nothing.
I also recall reading a while back, when 'PStwo' was first mentioned in the magazines, that the new model might be missing one or both USB ports and/or the FireWire port, because of it's possible smaller size, and the fact that they were hardly made use of. However, given the more recent releases of things like Eye-Toy and the SOCOM headset, this may have changed.
The other option, though, certainly speeds up the load time of many PS1 games.
The PStwo is likely to be re-cased and smaller version of the PS2, nothing more. Better graphics would mean new chips, which could lead to compatability problems with older PS2 games, in the same way that some old PS1 games don't work on PS2 (albeit mostly older, obscure Japanese titles).
The other thing is that, like PS2 with PS1 games, any 'revised' PStwo will only have the graphics on the original game disc to work with, and so will be very limited to any improvements it can make. Better graphics require more data, which simply won't exist, and the machine won't be able to create from nothing.
I also recall reading a while back, when 'PStwo' was first mentioned in the magazines, that the new model might be missing one or both USB ports and/or the FireWire port, because of it's possible smaller size, and the fact that they were hardly made use of. However, given the more recent releases of things like Eye-Toy and the SOCOM headset, this may have changed.
Oh there was a predictable reply...
Avoiding the issue? You said the PS2 made a difference to the PSONE visuals but it did jack sh*t to the visuals.
You may think you are funny trying to reply with smart ass comments but in terms of factual information you are once again blowing wind and following through with your usual pathetic hilarity.
Avoiding the issue? You said the PS2 made a difference to the PSONE visuals but it did jack sh*t to the visuals.
You may think you are funny trying to reply with smart ass comments but in terms of factual information you are once again blowing wind and following through with your usual pathetic hilarity.
ÂLŠ†ÂÎR wrote:
> Ho ho. Yes the PS2 made such a huge difference to the PSONE
> visuals...
Didn't say it made a big difference at all, I was just showing you what seemed to be his original point was because you missed it by a mile.
And now you're avoiding the issue. Quel surprise.
> Ho ho. Yes the PS2 made such a huge difference to the PSONE
> visuals...
Didn't say it made a big difference at all, I was just showing you what seemed to be his original point was because you missed it by a mile.
And now you're avoiding the issue. Quel surprise.
No No No, this is how it is supposed to work:
Game developers design games for ps2 normally, these games work as well on pstwo, in addition there will be exclusive pstwo games that won't work on ps2. I know that nobody beleives this, but we'll see, and I didn't make that up, It's all over the internet, with all the details I've mentioned.
Game developers design games for ps2 normally, these games work as well on pstwo, in addition there will be exclusive pstwo games that won't work on ps2. I know that nobody beleives this, but we'll see, and I didn't make that up, It's all over the internet, with all the details I've mentioned.
Page: