PS3 Game suggestions

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

hooflung

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2004
1,190
1
0
would be nice if it was fully compatible with all ps1 and 2 games. i'm hoping the PS4 has full backwards compatibility but i'm not holding my breath

I have never played a PS1 game that wouldn't work but the PS1 is software emulation, thus, not all games are or ever were guarenteed to work. The PS2 is the only one that guarantees BC since it actually has a PS1 chip on board. However, not all games will work through Component cable depending on how an HD TV recieves its 480i signal.

The PS1 sends a 240p signal (therfore so does the PS2 when running PS1 titles). Most TV's will just take this in as 480i. However, I have found that, especially when using Component cables, that my Vizio 42" wouldn't accept the Metal Gear Solid Signal over component because 240p is an unsupported resolution. Only running it through s-video or composite would the TV see it as 480i. You can run it through a PS3's HDMI all day long and it will work 100% because the PS3 will upscale. PS2 will not. Not all TV's have this problem of "signal out of bounds".

Backwards compatibility isn't an exact science. And they don't market it as such.
 
Last edited:

Ross Ridge

Senior member
Dec 21, 2009
830
0
0
The PS1 sends a 240p signal (therfore so does the PS2 when running PS1 titles). Most TV's will just take this in as 480i. However, I have found that, especially when using Component cables, that my Vizio 42" wouldn't accept the Metal Gear Solid Signal over component because 240p is an unsupported resolution.

This is a common misunderstanding. There's only one NTSC colour display format (using a total of 525 scanlines, of which 486 make up the visible raster) and North American versions PlayStation 1 use this format, and only this format. A "240p" signal is no different than a 480i NTSC signal, it's just one where the two interlaced fields happen to be the same. A TV channel broadcasting a blank black screen would be in "240p", and so would bethe blue screen video mute on VCRs.

This 240p thing is just an invention of the AV manufacturers so they have something else to blame other than the crappy video decoder chips they sometimes choose to use.

By the way, there are some PSX games, like Chrono Cross, that use an high enough of render resolution on some screens that the two interlaced fields aren't always the same. On the other hand most PlayStation 2 games don't use high enough resolutions, so most PS2 games use what you call 240p as well.
 

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
472
126
I finally picked up the Uncharted two pack and I'm loving Uncharted 1. Can't wait to finish and get to part 2 which is supposed to be even better.
 

brybir

Senior member
Jun 18, 2009
241
0
0
Thought I would share my first impressions of the PS3 versus my experience with the PC. I bought a few of the games recommended used from Amazon and they are on the way in the mail. However, this weekend I went out and rented Rage from Redbox to see how it was. The review said about 10-12 hours of gameplay, and I had the weekend free, so seemed perfect.

That said, Rage was an alright game but here are my thoughts both of the game and playing on a PS3:

1. Rage reminds me or borderlands meets Fallout. Going up to do the "mutant TV" with the crazy pseudo-clown reminded me a ton of that gal from Borderlands (Mad Moxxie?) and there were just a ton of similarities. If you set me down and told me I was playing borderlands 2, I would have believed you at first, at least until I realised there was no real RPG advancement in skills and levels etc. In the end, I felt like the game was 1/3 borderlands, 1/3 fallout, and 1/3 something else. I'm not sure that it worked for me overall as I wanted more RPG elements at times (levels, skills etc), then I wanted more exploration (ala Fallout) and then at other times just wished I had more ammo and bigger guns (probably what Rage was going for). All of this just left me feeling like the game was lacking all the time.

2. I do not have a natural ability to use the analog sticks to aim a weapon. I have the hardest time aiming accurately on those things even with adjusted sensitivity. I think the PC is a hands down winner for precise shooting and targeting.

3. I became bored with Rage about 5 hours in. I didn't buy the story at all (I hate the authority because some crazy doctor living in a hole in the desert says they are bad?!) but the shooting was pretty good when you actually get in there. Pretty much what I expected.

4. The open world seems cool, until I realised it is just a way to get from one rail shooting linear area to another.

5. Id should make a racing game, I really enjoyed the vehicle stuff for the most part, sometimes more than the shooting.

6. I am glad I did not buy Rage. If I had spent $60 for 11 hours of gameplay and a terrible ending, I would have been pissed. I mean, Borderlands had a terrible ending as well. Just another in the long list of similarities!

7. Aliasing was pretty bad at points and the texture pop-in is very noticable once you notice it. Not a big fan of that but it was not a deal breaker as long as I could convince myself not to look for it.

8. Sitting on the couch playing is better than sitting on my office chair playing a game and much more social. I played the game with the GF sitting in the room and talking with her and she did not get mad the way she does when I play a PC game and don't pay attention to her

9. Streaming Netflix is great and I am very happy with my PS3 in that regard.



So I guess overall I give the game a C and the PS3 an A! I think someone above said stick to FPS and strategy on the PC and do the other stuff on the PC, and I think that might be good advice!
 
Last edited: