By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Sony is looking at remastering PS3 titles the same way Disney remasters movies

VanceIX on 16 July 2014
foxtail said:
novasonic said:

This. PS2 and PS1 are old enough that the PS4 should be able to emulate them with little to no problems, but the x86 PS4 and Xbone will never be able to play the PPC based PS3 and 360 games natively. Unless you enjoy playing games at 3fps. Using x86 architecture was a good financial choice because it's cheap, but if they had used PPC there would be full 7th gen backwards compatibility and every game would run at 1080p 60fps.

The original Xbox was x86 and the X360 was PPC and it managed to do backwards compatibility through software emulation.  Is the reverse really so impossible?

They also could have just added a Cell chip to the PS4 like the early PS3 models which had an Emotion Engine chip for PS2 backwards compatibility.

The leap from Xbox -> Xbox 360 was very big compared to Xbox 360 -> Xbox One. It was much easier to emulate the weaker Xbox overall, and even then the support for games was pretty bad, with only a few games 100% compatible with the 360, since each game had to be optomized.

And adding in the Cell chip would raise the price by another $100 right there.



                                                                                                               You're Gonna Carry That Weight.

Xbox One - PS4 - Wii U - PC

Around the Network
theprof00 on 16 July 2014
ikki5 said:

So i take it this is why (or at least one of the big reasons) there was no backwards compatibility.

 

See, there is one thing though with this. I can understand Disney remastering it's classics... like someof them at 20+ years or older and they were wonderful movies for both kids and adults. in 20 yers, there is a whole new generation and new technology. I doubt a lot of people have VCRs anymore to wathc the really old classics so remastering them, cleaning them up works great. As for Sony here... they are "remastering" games that are a year old simply because they sold well and they know people will buy them and it takes them less time and a lot less money to make them and they know they will probably make more over all than the orignal did espeically for games like TLOU. It is just... odd. If it was some of their PS1 games, yeah, by all means, go ahead and remaster those but games that are a year to5 years old? No.

Ok, so maybe if you read what he said, he said "remastering some games from previous generations". Perhaps he wasn't talking specifically about TLOU. It's my guess that TLOU was ALWAYS meant to be put on ps4, hence why they would invest in a massive game like that, released in the last year of a console while microsoft fell asleep for three years.

He's talking about games from the ps2 era or possibly ps3, but I'd reckon it's more from the earlier works. Sony has been highlighting their ps4 as the next ps2 so I wouldn't be surprised.

Don't take this OP as an excuse to start some silly argument about TLOU. He was clearly not talking specifically about that game.

But if you want to continue whining that Sony has a game that users are waiting hand over fist to buy a second time exactly one year later, cry to someone else.

EDIT: We are a sales site. Our community is supposed to handle sales and the market with objectivity. If you want to complain, go to ign or gamefaqs about how it's ruining the industry or how it's unfair or underhanded. Here, every member should have seen this coming and said "yep, well executed strategy". Not to praise Sony at all..it's just stating facts. We are a facts website. Every facet of this game was handled perfectly. It will probably be in the top 3 highest selling playstation titles in the last 10 years.



theprof00 on 16 July 2014

Personally, I would love if they remade ico and sotc. Have just started playing sotc by the way :D



binary solo on 16 July 2014
ikki5 said:

So i take it this is why (or at least one of the big reasons) there was no backwards compatibility.

 

B/c only matters to people who owned a last gen console because it allows them to dump or sell their last gen machine but still be able to play all their last gen favourites. For people who never bought a last gen console there is little or no interest in playing last gen games on new gen hardware. And in the context of the OP Andrew House isbaddressing the PS4 audience who never owned PS3. It's sensible and justified to bring listen content to nexgen hardware for that purpose, so long as it doesn't slow down the release of new gen original content for the much bigger audience that has owned the last gen machine.

People should only criticise remastering if it is actually being used in lieu of releasing new content. In most cases the teams put on remastering duty are not the same teams that develop new content, so there's really no problem.

I would be up for a remastered Heavenly Sword if they use the PS4 TLOU the engine for it.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

VanceIX on 16 July 2014
theprof00 said:
ikki5 said:

So i take it this is why (or at least one of the big reasons) there was no backwards compatibility.

 

See, there is one thing though with this. I can understand Disney remastering it's classics... like someof them at 20+ years or older and they were wonderful movies for both kids and adults. in 20 yers, there is a whole new generation and new technology. I doubt a lot of people have VCRs anymore to wathc the really old classics so remastering them, cleaning them up works great. As for Sony here... they are "remastering" games that are a year old simply because they sold well and they know people will buy them and it takes them less time and a lot less money to make them and they know they will probably make more over all than the orignal did espeically for games like TLOU. It is just... odd. If it was some of their PS1 games, yeah, by all means, go ahead and remaster those but games that are a year to5 years old? No.

Ok, so maybe if you read what he said, he said "remastering some games from previous generations". Perhaps he wasn't talking specifically about TLOU. It's my guess that TLOU was ALWAYS meant to be put on ps4, hence why they would invest in a massive game like that, released in the last year of a console while microsoft fell asleep for three years.

He's talking about games from the ps2 era or possibly ps3, but I'd reckon it's more from the earlier works. Sony has been highlighting their ps4 as the next ps2 so I wouldn't be surprised.

Don't take this OP as an excuse to start some silly argument about TLOU. He was clearly not talking specifically about that game.

But if you want to continue whining that Sony has a game that users are waiting hand over fist to buy a second time exactly one year later, cry to someone else.

He's talking about the PS3 era, not the PS2.

 "but there's an opportunity with some of the remastering or re-imagining from PS3 franchises that will potentially find an audience that hasn't played them in the previous generation because they skipped that generation."

It is much easier to port over some already good looking games from the PS3 era, increase the resolution and framerate while tweaking the textures, and then putting the game out, compared to practically remaking a PS2 game to make it look presentable for the 8th gen.

But yes, you are right, he isn't specifically talking about TLOU.



                                                                                                               You're Gonna Carry That Weight.

Xbox One - PS4 - Wii U - PC

Around the Network
KLXVER on 16 July 2014
binary solo said:
ikki5 said:

So i take it this is why (or at least one of the big reasons) there was no backwards compatibility.

 

B/c only matters to people who owned a last gen console because it allows them to dump or sell their last gen machine but still be able to play all their last gen favourites. For people who never bought a last gen console there is little or no interest in playing last gen games on new gen hardware. And in the context of the OP Andrew House isbaddressing the PS4 audience who never owned PS3. It's sensible and justified to bring listen content to nexgen hardware for that purpose, so long as it doesn't slow down the release of new gen original content for the much bigger audience that has owned the last gen machine.

People should only criticise remastering if it is actually being used in lieu of releasing new content. In most cases the teams put on remastering duty are not the same teams that develop new content, so there's really no problem.

I would be up for a remastered Heavenly Sword if they use the PS4 TLOU the engine for it.


So in other words, Sony care more about the people who didnt own a PS3...Got it!



theprof00 on 16 July 2014
VanceIX said:
theprof00 said:
ikki5 said:

So i take it this is why (or at least one of the big reasons) there was no backwards compatibility.

 

See, there is one thing though with this. I can understand Disney remastering it's classics... like someof them at 20+ years or older and they were wonderful movies for both kids and adults. in 20 yers, there is a whole new generation and new technology. I doubt a lot of people have VCRs anymore to wathc the really old classics so remastering them, cleaning them up works great. As for Sony here... they are "remastering" games that are a year old simply because they sold well and they know people will buy them and it takes them less time and a lot less money to make them and they know they will probably make more over all than the orignal did espeically for games like TLOU. It is just... odd. If it was some of their PS1 games, yeah, by all means, go ahead and remaster those but games that are a year to5 years old? No.

Ok, so maybe if you read what he said, he said "remastering some games from previous generations". Perhaps he wasn't talking specifically about TLOU. It's my guess that TLOU was ALWAYS meant to be put on ps4, hence why they would invest in a massive game like that, released in the last year of a console while microsoft fell asleep for three years.

He's talking about games from the ps2 era or possibly ps3, but I'd reckon it's more from the earlier works. Sony has been highlighting their ps4 as the next ps2 so I wouldn't be surprised.

Don't take this OP as an excuse to start some silly argument about TLOU. He was clearly not talking specifically about that game.

But if you want to continue whining that Sony has a game that users are waiting hand over fist to buy a second time exactly one year later, cry to someone else.

He's talking about the PS3 era, not the PS2.

 "but there's an opportunity with some of the remastering or re-imagining from PS3 franchises that will potentially find an audience that hasn't played them in the previous generation because they skipped that generation."

It is much easier to port over some already good looking games from the PS3 era, increase the resolution and framerate while tweaking the textures, and then putting the game out, compared to practically remaking a PS2 game to make it look presentable for the 8th gen.

But yes, you are right, he isn't specifically talking about TLOU.

I had trouble with that paragraph initially. It's very confusing. Does he mean ps3 era or the previous generation?

Secondly, while I understand your logic as I obviously thought that conclusion myself, I was dissuaded by the way he also says 're-imagining', which is vastly different.



episteme on 16 July 2014

Hopefully not like Sony themselves in the movie section...
DVD -> remastered DVD -> first Blu-ray in 1080p -> "Mastered in 4K" Blu-ray in 1080p -> Blu-ray in true 4K



VanceIX on 16 July 2014
theprof00 said:
VanceIX said:

He's talking about the PS3 era, not the PS2.

 "but there's an opportunity with some of the remastering or re-imagining from PS3 franchises that will potentially find an audience that hasn't played them in the previous generation because they skipped that generation."

It is much easier to port over some already good looking games from the PS3 era, increase the resolution and framerate while tweaking the textures, and then putting the game out, compared to practically remaking a PS2 game to make it look presentable for the 8th gen.

But yes, you are right, he isn't specifically talking about TLOU.

I had trouble with that paragraph initially. It's very confusing. Does he mean ps3 era or the previous generation?

Secondly, while I understand your logic as I obviously thought that conclusion myself, I was dissuaded by the way he also says 're-imagining', which is vastly different.

He means PS3 era, since he wants the PS4 to appeal to those who skipped last generation.

And from what I got out of it, he wants a Disney-like model, in which the content and look is the same, but post-editing is done to the content to get it up to standards. A lot of people refer to that as Disney "re-imagining" their movies, but they really aren't. In this case, I think re-imagining is just a softer word for remastering.

Re-imagining would be more like building the game again from scratch.



                                                                                                               You're Gonna Carry That Weight.

Xbox One - PS4 - Wii U - PC

KLXVER on 16 July 2014
the-pi-guy said:
KLXVER said:

So in other words, Sony care more about the people who didnt own a PS3...Got it!

Of course.  

If you didn't have a PS3, that means you are a new customer.  Selling your console to the same 80 million people is still 80 million.  Those 80 million will more than likely upgrade, so instead you work on selling to new customers.  


Sounds like Sony to me