Most probably but cant they work it out? Having something they can work on less like PCSX2
Sly Cooper PS5 & PS3 Comparison - PlayStations NEW PS2 Emulator
- Thread starter Box
- Start date
I don't know but...
PCSX2 is dual licensed GPLv3 and LGPLv3 (correcting after checked some file sources... they use both depending the file).
So it means if Sony do any optimization or change like you said they need to share these in LGPL too.
I always thought Sony choose to use FreeBSD under BSD license in PS4/PS5 because it is really free to use as proprietary software without the restrictions of GNU licenses.
So thinking about that probably Sony can't use a well know PS2 emulator under these licenses... because for a proprietary / closed software it is very hard to use GNU open source software even if using the Lesser GPL.
Maybe they could use one in BSD license? That can makes things easier... in fact I believe internal Sony emulator is created with base in BSD libraries.... maybe they are even using some emulator core in BSD license.
Last edited:
Normally because these emulators were made by people working for free and as part of it have some license that to use them commercially, something that would create them legal issues from the publishers of the games and the platform holder of the emulated platform.
Some of these emulators use libraries and other external stuff whose license also prevents to be used in commercial products or require to also provide people for free the extra work they could do on top in their own version.
In addition to this, these emulators aren't coded to run in PS4 and PS5: they are made to run on PC, mobile, etc. And the developers of these emulators normally don't have experience developing for console and aren't a PS5 certified dev company: the console platform holders mandate a certain things to become a certified dev, like certain security measures regarding the usage of their devkits, internet connection with their server (for Sony you are required to have static internet IP in your office, can't use the dynamic IP most people have at home or the office).
In addition to this, these emulators have certain bugs, performance issues or innacuracies specially when you enable extras like extending to 16:9, increasing the resolution etc.
And well, more things I may forget. In any case, the contractor company who made the PS1, PSP, PS2 emulators for PS4 and PS5 has one of the main PCSX2 coders.
Having the PS1, PSP and PS2 emulators done, the amount of games included in the PS4 and PS5 stores depends on whoever owns the IP/ worldwide publishing rights of these games.
Which in some cases involved different publishers or distributors depending on the country), plus also the licenses used to make these games. As an example, the license to use real cars, weapons, sports teams, licensed music tracks, license of certain movie/comic/real athlete etc. pretty likely was temporal or limited to certain platforms and expired, so they'd need to renegotiate it again.
In some cases, there are also licenses related to the tools, middleware, libraries or even typefonts they did use, or royalties for certain devs or whatever else, like musicians. And sometimes these people are dead, bankrupt, are no longer in the business or don't want to license that again or were sold to someone else they can't find.
In some cases they need to spend a good amount of money just to verify, check, negotiate and pay whatever needed to rerelease a game for another platform.
They also have to write the store metadata for the game and to localize it to many languages, make the related store/marketing art assets: game cover at certain resolution, screenshots, maybe a trailer, etc.
Then inside big companies (like a big publisher or Sony) there's a lot of burocracy, paperwork, meetings, approvals required, budget assignation, a producer to manage everything, legal stuff, etc.
And since almost nobody buys emulated games, that money and effort normally isn't worth it.
Last edited:
If they can't provide accessibility and high-quality emulation of the PS1\2 library, then what can we say about PS3... Sony doesn't care about their own heritage, they'd rather port their system seller to torrent and get miserable crumbs than try to remaster a collection of relatively well-known IPs from PS1\2\3.
For PS1\2 games, I use SteamDeck and additionally customize CRT shaders, and the final result looks great.
I think when SD2 comes out, I'll be able to enjoy PS3 games as well.
For PS1\2 games, I use SteamDeck and additionally customize CRT shaders, and the final result looks great.
I think when SD2 comes out, I'll be able to enjoy PS3 games as well.
What is the actual minimum requirement to run most PS3 games without framerate drops on PC?
Because I have the feeling PS5 hardware is not up to the task.
This can already be handled by a handheld PC for $600-700, which is less powerful than the PS5. And this is GoW 3 and GT6, a games from the second half of the generation that squeezed everything out of the PS3.
There is a drop in frames below 60fps now, but the games are absolutely playable and look great). And you should keep in mind that performance is affected by user settings, which may not be optimal.
So the only reason why PS5 doesn't provide PS3 emulation is because Sony doesn't care.
While GPU power of PS5 is way ahead… both of these handheld had CPUs better than PS5’s CPU that is what matter most in emulation.
I was reading the docs from the RPCS3 and it recommends to have AVX512 and PS5’s CPU as being old doesn’t support it.
I found this doc that is updated regularly.
PS5’s CPU is a mobile underclocked variant of 3700X with only access to 7 cores… it should be at C-Tier or below in the list… C-tier says OK performance but below recommended.
B-tier is what they call around PS3 performance… A and S are above PS3’s performance.
Last edited:
What license issues? It's Sly Cooper, they own the IP, the developer and the hardware it's on
They'd need to go through a licensing process to republish any of these games on the store anyway
For some reason, I didn't really check it out. But in this case, we have a fan project that uses reverse engineering, and Sony itself, with all the data on PS3 and CELL, could have made a more productive solution.
He was talking about the emulator... not the games.
To Sony use already well know open source emulators.
There is a big issue here... companies hates to use GLP based open source software because it license.
That is the reason Sony choose to use FreeBSD as base of all their OS since PS3 instead some Linux core.
And it is the reason why they don't use some already know PS2 emulator... because most of them if not all that have 100% compatibility are GPL or similar licenses.
I will not enter in the good and bad of the GPL like licenses but to private companies it open to many issues and they tend to no use software / library based on it.
OP
OP
Linux is also open source i don't understand why Sony wouldn't go with that.
I miss when Ps2 and 3 and Linux
This is correct. We actively avoid GPL at my work because it is viral. BSD, Boost, MIT, etc. licenses are ok.
Not knocking GPL btw, it's a good way to protect open source from private companies if that is the goal of the project.
Because Linux is under GPL.
PS3 used a FreeBSD based OS.
PS2 used an in house OS.
Private companies avoid GPL like licenses because any enhancement / modification you do over the source you had to open to public… and that open a private company to have to deal with tons os lawsuits if they do not open their changes to public even if they changes are critical to secure their business.
The use of GPL like licenses is more a headache to private companies than useful.
So they prefer to use software based in BSD, MIT, and similar licenses that indeed give actually more freedom to do what you want to keep the source you changed closed as proprietary.
GPL is a lawyer license… it is created by lasers and looks like a contract… you have really to understand it very well to avoid break any part of it and be target by people that do nothing instead to open lawsuits to get money from companies.
GNU saw this issue and released a less restrictive license called LGPL but it is still more restrictive than BSD, MIT, etc… it is a mid-term between GPL and BSD.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Linux for PlayStation 2 - Wikipedia
I was talking about how you could actually install linux on the ps2
I got it now... sorry for the misunderstanding.Linux for PlayStation 2 - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
I was talking about how you could actually install linux on the ps2
In that case the use of Linux is all in owner responsibility and he has just to follow the license the distribution he chose uses.... basically all related end-user license allow them to install and use the software so it is not a issue here.
The license issues should exists if Sony choose to release it own OS based in Linux with their own modification to work... in that case all the source code Sony created over the original source code (yes to deal with PSN security and PlayStation related stuffs... including how they do PSN account authentication and game license check ups) should have to been public.
A private company can't take that risk.
It is easier to a private company work with BSD, MIT, etc licenses... and that is what Sony choose.
So any GPL, LGPL, or similar licenses software/libraries can't be used by Sony.