Quantcast
Ps3 Pro

Forums - Sony Discussion - Ps3 Pro

Tulipanzo said:
I feel it would have ultimately been detrimental.
The main issue with the PS3 was not a lack of power, but how byzantine the architecture was to develop for, and a more powerful model would not have helped things
.

An easier to develop for model might have helped, but that's still asking developers to program an "easy PS3" and "bastard hard PS3" version of any given game, which is just unrealistic. After all development costs for the cell were already high enough before asking devs to put in extra work on top.

The reason why the PS4 Pro gets supported is the easier x86.

Hence why I would think a Pro would mostly just be a stronger GPU (so the Cell could be more used like a normal CPU instead of having also to do all those GPU tasks, simplifying and streamlining greatly the programmation of games), and bigger RAM and VRAM. The problem with this approach would be that the base PS3 Pro would practically have to be a different port of any given PS3 game.

Also, PS4 and XBO would probably not have come out before 2015 if there would have been some mid-gen upgrade for them.



Around the Network

Ps3 pro with more ram and a more powerful cell would be amazing
Exclusive games would look better but in the 3rd partie the 360 would still win



REQUIESCAT IN PACE

Might as well just convince Sony to make the PS4 BC with PS3. That would be even better. 1 Console that does it all.



No. Mid-gen upgrades are not a good idea, it makes people who invest from the beginning question their decission. Consoles are not phones (hell, changing phones every 2-4 years is a dumb thing as it is).



You know it deserves the GOTY.

Come join The 2018 Obscure Game Monthly Review Thread.

I wish the Super Slim was slimmer than it was.
PS1 and PS2 slim models are really small and compact.
PS3 Slim/SS and PS4 Slim are still pretty big.



Around the Network

It depends on how much better the ps3 mid-gen upgrade is. If it can play all the next generation games (ps4 in this case) but at a lower resolution then it is a good deal.



Sure, since the day I bought my FullHD TV I wished for a 1080p-PS3.



Main thing I wanted was backwards compatibility. If they had a PS3 pro that also played PS2 games, then I probably would have gotten it. Wouldn't have bothered without the BC though.



Probably not. Despite ~having to get a new PS4 after PS4 Pro was already launched, I ended up getting the slim model because I just didn't see the Pro being good enough to justify the extra cost. I also strongly dislike the idea of mid-gen upgrades. Simplicity is one thing I like about consoles, and we're getting further and further away from that and mid-gen upgrades are not helping at all.



Bofferbrauer2 said:

Hence why I would think a Pro would mostly just be a stronger GPU (so the Cell could be more used like a normal CPU instead of having also to do all those GPU tasks, simplifying and streamlining greatly the programmation of games), and bigger RAM and VRAM. The problem with this approach would be that the base PS3 Pro would practically have to be a different port of any given PS3 game.

What GPU tasks was the Cell doing?