They don’t have it for the same reason Sony later removed it from the PS3: letting users run arbitrary code on your console provides a massive attack surface for piracy and jailbreaking exploits.
The PS3, be it the early PHATs or even the super slims were technically amazing machines but, at least in the beginning, they still were way to expensive for the reduced quality in most cross party titles compared to the 360. Was probably a no-brainer upgrade though, if you could sell your PS2 to replace it with a brand spanking new PS3 without losing access to your games.
Also, the amazing first party titles Sony put out over the years (that actually took advantage of the PS3’s over-designed processor) make it worth buying even today, as you can get it for less than 50€ in good condition and it’s easily jailbreakable.
Just maybe don’t sell your first born for one that is backward compatible with PS2 today. Just buy a used PS2 as well (most of them are jailbreakable just as easily) or just emulate it.
No doubt, the 360 had the PS3’s number earlier on - due in no small part to the lack of documentation for the Cell architecture making it much harder to program for, let alone optimise.
SCE America I think was credited with the mid-cycle turnaround thanks to a lot of Western-developed exclusives (Naughty Dog were a real MVP), which is why the PlayStation identity seems to have largely switched from Japanese to American from the launch of the PS4.
I’m a bit of a tech hoarder, and still own my original PSP, PS1, PS2 and PS3s… so luckily my first-born is at no risk just yet. 😅
I can confirm, PS2 emulation works mostly flawless on my CFW PS3 without native backwards compatibility. There is absolutely no point in buying an older energy-hungry hot-running PS3.
It’s not about whether or not it’s possible via emulation on CFW, but rather the precedent that hardware-level backwards compatibility was a key feature.
It’s a damned shame that such official support was dropped moving forward, and IMO should have been taken as an early sign that gaming as a hobby was going to go downhill.
At the time, backwards compatibility was attained by putting a miniature PlayStation 2 inside the console. It really wasn’t sustainable for the future.
It really wasn’t sustainable for the future maximising shareholder profits.
Maintaining PS3 backwards compatibility at launch was well within Sony’s operating profits. It was an international decision, which they proceeded to gaslight customers into believing want necessary or even wanted!
Speak for yourself, man. I am more than happy that my Playstation 5 doesn’t have a Playstation 3 and a Playstation 2 bolted into its insides. That would make for a gargantuan console with tons of electronics waste.
I specified one generation of hardware backwards compatibility; beyond that software emulation would be more than sufficient.
The PS5 is backwards compatible with all but ~6 PS4 titles. Sure that’s entirely because of the shared x86-64 architecture, but it makes the PS4 stand out like a sore thumb for its lack of direct generational backwards compatibility.
By the end of the PS3’s lifecycle the Cell processor has been die-shrunk multiple times, reducing power consumption, heat output and PCB space required. It could then share the rest of the PS4s existing IO chips and circuitry.
There was literally no reason for backwards compatibility to be removed beyond corporate greed. Blindly accepting it, and actually trying to justify that as a good thing is one of the key reasons this hobby has gone down the toilet.
The launch PS3 was arguably Sony’s last great console (namely hardware backwards compatibility); I choose to die on this hill. 🫡
deleted by creator
They don’t have it for the same reason Sony later removed it from the PS3: letting users run arbitrary code on your console provides a massive attack surface for piracy and jailbreaking exploits.
This bad boy can run so many PS2 games
Runs 0 for most buyers.
And XMB was their last good interface design. Each one since just gets progressively more wtf.
Hard to improve on perfection, but they had to keep their UI designers employed I suppose?
The PS3, be it the early PHATs or even the super slims were technically amazing machines but, at least in the beginning, they still were way to expensive for the reduced quality in most cross party titles compared to the 360. Was probably a no-brainer upgrade though, if you could sell your PS2 to replace it with a brand spanking new PS3 without losing access to your games.
Also, the amazing first party titles Sony put out over the years (that actually took advantage of the PS3’s over-designed processor) make it worth buying even today, as you can get it for less than 50€ in good condition and it’s easily jailbreakable.
Just maybe don’t sell your first born for one that is backward compatible with PS2 today. Just buy a used PS2 as well (most of them are jailbreakable just as easily) or just emulate it.
No doubt, the 360 had the PS3’s number earlier on - due in no small part to the lack of documentation for the Cell architecture making it much harder to program for, let alone optimise.
SCE America I think was credited with the mid-cycle turnaround thanks to a lot of Western-developed exclusives (Naughty Dog were a real MVP), which is why the PlayStation identity seems to have largely switched from Japanese to American from the launch of the PS4.
I’m a bit of a tech hoarder, and still own my original PSP, PS1, PS2 and PS3s… so luckily my first-born is at no risk just yet. 😅
I can confirm, PS2 emulation works mostly flawless on my CFW PS3 without native backwards compatibility. There is absolutely no point in buying an older energy-hungry hot-running PS3.
It’s not about whether or not it’s possible via emulation on CFW, but rather the precedent that hardware-level backwards compatibility was a key feature.
It’s a damned shame that such official support was dropped moving forward, and IMO should have been taken as an early sign that gaming as a hobby was going to go downhill.
At the time, backwards compatibility was attained by putting a miniature PlayStation 2 inside the console. It really wasn’t sustainable for the future.
It really wasn’t sustainable for
the futuremaximising shareholder profits.Maintaining PS3 backwards compatibility at launch was well within Sony’s operating profits. It was an international decision, which they proceeded to gaslight customers into believing want necessary or even wanted!
Speak for yourself, man. I am more than happy that my Playstation 5 doesn’t have a Playstation 3 and a Playstation 2 bolted into its insides. That would make for a gargantuan console with tons of electronics waste.
I specified one generation of hardware backwards compatibility; beyond that software emulation would be more than sufficient.
The PS5 is backwards compatible with all but ~6 PS4 titles. Sure that’s entirely because of the shared x86-64 architecture, but it makes the PS4 stand out like a sore thumb for its lack of direct generational backwards compatibility.
By the end of the PS3’s lifecycle the Cell processor has been die-shrunk multiple times, reducing power consumption, heat output and PCB space required. It could then share the rest of the PS4s existing IO chips and circuitry.
There was literally no reason for backwards compatibility to be removed beyond corporate greed. Blindly accepting it, and actually trying to justify that as a good thing is one of the key reasons this hobby has gone down the toilet.
Miss using it as a SACD player. Tough to find one now that isn’t insanely priced.