John GodGames Emus has shared some videos, showing The Last of Us and Red Dead Redemption running on the PC via emulation thanks to RPCS3. RPCS3 is the best emulator for Playstation 3 and as we can see, Red Dead Redemption runs without major graphical glitches, though performance is still not that great.
On the other hand, this is the first time we see The Last of Us running on RPCS3. As you will see, there are various graphical glitches and performance is awful. Obviously the emulator needs to mature and receive further updates in order to run the game with a higher framerate and with less glitches.
Still, this is really impressive and since Naughty Dog and Rockstar do not plan to release the aforementioned games on the PC, we can only hope that one day we will be able to play them thanks to this Playstation 3 emulator.
Enjoy!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
This level of progress is amazing. Keep it up devs 🙂
Wake me up in 6 years or so when it’s actually stable, and playable.
People said the same thing about Cemu.
Indeed. Not that it’d be any great loss to humanity if we don’t wake up Cilvar for the next six years!
It’d be easier to buy a used PS3 and the games on eBay, play them to completion and then put them back on eBay after you’re done.
or play them on RPCS3 wih whatever resolution you want and at unlocked fps
If they would work flawlessly like that, then that would be the way to go.
some games do run flawless or near flawless already (ssf2thd, vf5, hard corps, etc… all at 1080×60) – all emulation takes time and the more complicated the system, the longer it takes to perfect emulators. Some slow running, glitched games in older releases now run better/great in more recent releases. However, having the whole “it’d be easier/better to play on a real ps3” attitude is somewhat lame/childish. Instead of showing support for something that will benefit PC gamers and preserve ps3 gaming long after the system is decades retired, many posters on here choose to whine and complain…gross
I don’t play pancake games in any capacity so it’s not a concern of my personally. I think emulation is cool strictly from a hardware perspective.
I just think that if we PC gamers really badly wanted to play the handful of good console exclusives out there, we can get cheap, used consoles on eBay or Craigslist, get used games at Gamestop, play the games to completion in a few days and then sell everything off again so you get to experienced the prized “Exclusives” for almost no cost.
If I wanted to play an old console exclusive that badly, I’d just get–or borrow–someone else’s console, buy the game used and return everything after playing through them.
I see many comments saying it’s easier to buy a PS3 and play the games mentioned, but most people who help finance these emulators do not want to play on a console. Will it take time to playable? That’s obvious of course. But no matter, someday it will be playable and it will be possible to run on the PC.
To summarize: Most who support emulators have played these games and are waiting to be able to play the PC again, even though it takes years to happen.
Having higher resolutions/frame-rates and other PC-exclusive perks are what makes emulators sensible. However, if you just want to play these games now in a passable state, getting old, used consoles and games are also an option.
I don’t care either way because I’m not interested in any of the Sony exclusive titles, but at least PC gamers have options now.
I have rdr on ps3 and the sub 720p resolution and the horrid blurry anti aliasing they used on the game on the ps3 version make the game looks like someone smeared vaseline on the screen worse water reflections and lower quality foliage compared to the 360 version use 2x msaa better foliage and higher framerates and textures.
I prefer the 360 emulator to makes progress rdr port on ps3 is dreadful.
At least you could have a higher resolution and a stable 30fps on ps3 emulator but it wont fix the other drawbacks of the ps3 port
Considering you can still find 1st gen games and consoles…
You think it would take a small fortune to acquire one of the 150+ million PS2s out there?
I still have my old PS3 and Red Dead Redemption. It was a fun game back in the day but with its capped 30fps frame-rate regularly dipping into the low 20s it’s borderline unplayable for me now that I’m used to PC gaming. So even though I have the console and the game already I’d still rather wait to play it via RPCS3.
The rate at which they are making progress…we should be able to play RDR and TLOU before the end of the year…though ofcourse will need a beast of a rig to run em!
Amazing work!
Very bad performance… Holy Moly.
RDR runs like absolute dog$hit
Yes, but the point is that RPCS3 is improving and is doing so at an impressive rate given the circumstances.
Also, RDR runs very poorly on a real PS3 (slightly less poorly on a real Xbox 360) so even if RPCS3 one day achieves near-perfect PS3 emulation then the game will still run poorly. Maybe it’ll be possible to tweak settings on a per game basis like is possible on many other emulators so to help improve performance.
wait another 2 years to play a decade old game is rather pointless
already replayed RDR on XB1 BC and tbh that game had a really linear campaign, no sense of freedom at all
multiplayer is dead and considering TakeJoo is bombing RDR2 with microtransactions the franchise is good as dead
the RPCS3 emulator works for Demon’s souls and Persona (though FPS experinces may vary with hardware) but it’s no ideal
all these old games need a proper PC port, emulator is only half a solution
the Nintendo Emulator were pretty successful because their architecture is very easy to emulate (based on Radeon R600/R700)
if the next Playstation console uses a regular GPU instead of a crappy APU then emulation will be MUCH easier to make and far less demanding than the RPC3
eitherway, consoles are dying as the markets shifts to a more PC centeric gaming
It may be “rather pointless” to you but you don’t speak for everybody else so therefore you cannot state such a thing so categorically.
Again, “the franchise is good as dead” is merely that of you stating it may be such a thing to you but that doesn’t make it so for everybody. Millions of gamers will doubtlessly buy RDR2 and if it’s as good or better than RDR, even with micro-transactions (that’ll presumably only affect RDR Online, anyway), then it sure as hell will be the opposite of what you’re claiming.
I don’t disagree with the remainder of your comment albeit that I suspect that consoles will be around for some time yet. Whether they do so in their present form factor or evolve into something akin to a digital set-top box where games are streamed from Sony and Microsoft’s servers like a modern-day equivalent of OnLive/Gaikai remains to be seen.
Streaming is never gonna work because of not everyone has a solid connection
B: input delay
as for RDR2, i can assure you that the diversity industry has shaken Rockstar to the very core so if not microtransactions, then political correctness will destroy the game (a reminder that Rockstar is a BRITISH company and Take2 is owned by jews who screw other jews)
(this was their price for GTA V when steam changed it’s currency laws for “rest of the world accounts” they changed it back to “normal” price after 2 weeks)
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/927857a06698c93dccf2829413a1ff1d9ac83e321fc4a704f8f4230b8f3ff606.png
even without political correctness, the game is a console exclusive for two years and will probably run like $hit while at it
the publisher is a shekel collecting mega jewlord who doesn’t care about gaming nor the company’s already declining reputation (when they tried to ban mods for GTA V the game got rightfully downvoted to oblivion)
eitherway, game is exclusive to conslows and i don’t you or other hardened PCgamers cucking themseleves to consoles just to play this mediocre cowboy game
If RDR2 is blighted with SJW pandering then I certainly won’t be buying it when, not if, it comes to PC. Not that I’m expecting it to be akin to Blazing Saddles either, haha!
20 years later and I play some N64 games for the first time. Speak for yourself.
point taken
but remember that the games of old are MILES better than the crappy cash-grabs they pump out nowadays
Impressive rate? How, long, exactly, has it taken to get to this point?
Feel free to email the RPCS3 team for an answer to your peculiar question.
It’s not peculiar. You’ve been talking about the rate and how impressive it is, so you should be aware of how long it’s taken to get this far. If it’s taken five, six years to get to this point, it won’t be viable any time soon; not sure that would be considered “impressive,” as you claim.
Odd that you dodge the question, though. I wonder why that is.
The point isnt really how long it takes. The point is that PC gamers will be able to play this iconic game with significantly better visuals and better framerates than was previously possible. And it may take 5 years it may take 10, playing old games is a blast and you’d be surprised how much you can visually achieve with Reshade on older games. I replay 10+ years old games from time to time and RDR and other PS exclusives will be no exception.
The rate of progress lately is impressive for rpcs3. Maybe not if you look at the entire time-line. But it’s the current progress that matters now.
But you kinda HAVE to look at the timeline to determine if it’s impressive or not, don’t you?
It sounds impressive to say you ran a marathon… but it’s less impressive when you reveal that it took you two weeks to pull it off.
Well, with RDR, Rockstar just simply didn’t want to port the game despite how well it would have sold in its day.
As far as Last Of Us goes, outdated Japanese business men don’t want to make money or see a point in it. That’s what I’ve always assumed at least since they’d make a killing doing most of the first party games.
If that’s what you assume, then that explains why you’re not running a multi-billion dollar company.
At the point that when you’ve sold a game for five years(Like The Last Of Us) that spending a few million off the hundreds of millions you’ve gained from the product to make a viable PC Port and a few more millions of dollars wouldn’t really be a problem since you’re operating from the Profit you’ve received from the original sales.
There’s zero reason why other than they don’t want their first party games on other platforms due to how they have to sell Playstations. Money is not the issue.
“Money is not the issue.”
Uh, money IS the issue. They want to sell PS4s for that very reason. Hardware in the wild means a bigger base for software sales, and software sales is where the money is.
Tell me: how’s the Windows Store doing?
The Microsoft Store’s (lack of) success is in no way equivalent to the install base of all Windows PCs.
And yet, with the conversation being about gaming, the Windows store is more relevant than the number of Windows pcs.
the conversation being about gaming, the Windows store is more relevant than the number of Windows pcs
If PC gamers bought games only through the Microsoft Store, then you’d have a point. Have you heard of GOG? Steam? There are millions of potential sales being passed up by Sony.
The point of the Windows Store is so Microsoft gets more money from software sales on PC. Obviously, you’d expect Sony to do the same thing, but with Steam and GOG around, that means Sony would have to resort to the same sort of deep cuts in order to compete. Less profit that way, especially if they’re having to develop a separate version of the game to run on PC.
And, of course, less reason to buy their consoles, where they can make even more money off software. Odd that you didn’t say anything about that.
Many PC gamers would pay full price on release, and less profit eventually is better than none at all.
Apparently you think that there are PC gamers who have been dying for years to buy a Playstation but haven’t, and if Sony releases on PC, then they never will. That doesn’t seem realistic.
Apparently, you’re not really reading the comments you’re responding to…
Defending a poor argument on your part does not constitute a lack of reading on mine.
That would require a poor argument to exist; it doesn’t. On the other hand, you don’t seem to have a firm grasp on the content of the comments you say you’re reading, so if you are, in fact, reading them, then it’s your comprehension skills that need serious attention.
comprehension
Absurd ad hominem doesn’t help your case. Just because you refuse to disavow a poor argument doesn’t mean that I can’t read, no matter how many times you repeat it.
First, you equated the sales from the Microsoft Store with the entire install base of Windows PCs. Then, you offered this:
And, of course, less reason to buy their consoles, where they can make even more money off software.
Of course, if Sony were to release games simultaneously, that would likely hurt console sales. But releasing (e.g.) Red Dead Redemption for PC now would only make money for Sony. (Delayed releases on PC may generate even more sales from people who buy initially for the console and then double dip for PC.)
So, I’ll ask again: Which PC gamers have been dying for years to buy a Playstation just to play its exclusives but haven’t? And how many of those who are likely never to buy a Sony console would buy Sony’s games if made available on PC?
You’re going to die on that hill, but it doesn’t have to be that way.
Since you don’t get the point of the original comment, it is a lack of comprehension, after all.
The honest reader will decide for himself.
Thank you so very much for proving my point about you not comprehending the original comment.
I never cited the Windows Store as a measure of PC gaming; that was a ridiculous “interpretation” you came up with on your own and ran with as if it were truth.
If you were an “honest reader,” you’d have taken the whole of the comment you responded to into consideration. If you were an “honest reader,” you’d have taken even that fragment in the context of the comment it was a response to. And what was the subject of the comment that prompted said response?
Sony porting their first party games to PC.
With that in mind, it makes PERFECT sense to reference the Windows Store, as that is a PC-centric storefront fielded by a console maker. The proprietors of Steam and GOG do not make and sell consoles populated with exclusive games, so there was never any point at which your responses made sense.
But you’re not an “honest reader,” are you?
I never cited the Windows Store as a measure of PC gaming […] Windows Store, as that is a PC-centric storefront fielded by a console maker
Then why cite the Microsoft Store? Is Microsoft killing Xbox console sales with delayed releases of its exclusives on PC? You’re undermining your own argument.
I was making the point that Sony’s offering their first-party exclusives on PC several years after their release on Playstation would not only not hurt the console’s sales, but it would result in more profit from sales on PC.
Not sure why you don’t see this.
Stop. Just stop.
Every comment you make bring some now, outlandish twist into the conversation. You’re not discussing or debating. You’re not even thinking rationally.
You’re just not very good at this. And that’s okay. There are other things you can be good at. But here, talking about games, you fail miserably.
Every comment you make brings some new, outlandish twist into the conversation
Just because you’re wrong on delayed releases for PC, made a self-defeating analogy (that I mistook for something less embarrassingly inapt), and can’t admit that you’ve erred doesn’t mean that I’ve “twisted” anything.
Space defended the profits to be made with delayed releases on PC, you mentioned the Windows store in contradiction, and I pointed out what I thought was your error. It never occurred to me that you would offer as proof of poor console sales evidence of poor PC game sales.
Oh, but you have twisted things.
you have
I misunderstood only that you were citing proof of PC game failure as evidence of console failure. It never occurred to me that you would do so.
I did use “console sales” to refer to console game sales; an ambiguity that we cleared up pretty quickly.
The main point is still true: Delayed releases on PC would result in more profit without harming a console’s install base.
Don’t think that it isn’t obvious that you’re trying to deflect.
I don’t have a need to deflect.
You did, though. And while you now admit your misunderstanding… sorta… it’s telling that there’s no revisiting that whole train of thought.
What, exactly, would I be deflecting from?
You did […] admit […] no revisiting […] What</i.
There's no need to "revisit that whole train of thought" on my part, since my point was and is true, regardless of whether you were citing "Windows store" rather than all PCs (you were not) or "Windows store" — poor PC sales as evidence of PC ports hurting console sales. (You were. LOL.)
It never would have occurred to me that you would make so obvious an error, so I interpreted your reference to be a less-embarrassing one. You should have let it go.
Oh, and one last thing: RDR has nothing to do with Sony aside from being a game on their console. They don’t get to decide if there’s a PC version.
Rockstar, of course. You’re correct.
So, did they ever sell any games on PC? Did those sales hurt their console sales? (I was thinking of the GTA series when I referred to double dippers.)
Rockstar doesn’t sell consoles…
Rockstar doesn’t sell consoles
“Console sales” here meant “sales of games for consoles.”
Sure, sure.
A lot more sure than citing poor PC game sales as evidence of poor console sales.
It’s almost like you enjoy being so hopelessly off-base.
It’s almost like you enjoy being so hopelessly off-base
Says the person who cites the Microsoft Store as evidence that releasing also for PC hurts consoles.
You still can’t seem to grasp… anything, can you?
It’s cute that you keep running with your ignorant interpretations, though.
Thanks for admitting that you’ve got nothing to stand on, Mr. “Poor PC Sales Prove Console Trouble.”
If you’re going to be wrong, you might as well go all out. Kudos to you for sticking with it.
That’s ironic.
The honest reader will decide.
You’ve said that before, but given you don’t seem to know what an honest reader is, I wonder why you keep using it the phrase.
I wonder why you keep using the phrase
Because it’s true.
“but given you don’t seem to know what an honest reader is, I wonder why you keep using it the phrase.”
True or not, it doesn’t do you any good if you don’t grasp it. I guess you think it makes you sound smart or something, but using it while being in the wrong… well, I’m sure you can figure that much out.
while being in the wrong
Says the person who cited the “Windows store” as proof of PC ports’ hurting console sales, a gross error in logic that no honest reader would expect.
Every time you try to deflect from that, you highlight it.
That circular “logic,” though…
It’s funny, because you’re still misinterpreting the comment, and despite being told that, you’re still running with that misinterpretation. Funnier, because when you say I’m trying to deflect and you bring it back up, you only put your own error on display once more.
You said that the point of “Windows store” was that “you’d expect Sony to do the same thing […] Sony would have to resort to the same sort of deep cuts in order to compete. Less profit that way […] less reason to buy their consoles […].
I’ve said from the beginning that delayed releases on PC would not hurt Sony’s console sales and would result only in increased profits, since many PC gamers would pay full price for their exclusives on release, and many more would buy them later at a discount. Less profit per sale is still profit.
You offered an example of a console manufacturer selling its games on PC to prove that a console manufacturer shouldn’t sell its games on PC. Satya Nadella, the Jack the Ripper of unprofitable activities, is selling some of his console games on PC, but you know better.
I told you this wouldn’t go well for you.
Let’s quote the entire comment and not take anything out of context, shall we?
“The point of the Windows Store is so Microsoft gets more money from software sales on PC. Obviously, you’d expect Sony to do the same thing, but with Steam and GOG around, that means Sony would have to resort to the same sort of deep cuts in order to compete. Less profit that way, especially if they’re having to develop a separate version of the game to run on PC.
And, of course, less reason to buy their consoles, where they can make even more money off software. Odd that you didn’t say anything about that.”
That’s the whole of what I said, with no convenient cuts from you in an attempt to imply something other than what was actually said.
“I’ve said from the beginning that delayed releases on PC would not hurt Sony’s console sales and would result only in increased profits, since many PC gamers would pay full price for their exclusives on release, and many more would buy them later at a discount.”
Here, you lie. It wasn’t until two days after you jumped in that you mentioned delayed releases… unless you’re also SpaceKnotzy? Furthermore, you’ve offered nothing to back up the claim that it won’t hurt console sales or software sales; on the other hand, it seems PC gamers are notorious for waiting for sales and the like, hence my mentioning the “deep cuts” Sony’s hypothetical store would need in order to compete with the other storefronts.
“You offered an example of a console manufacturer selling its games on PC to prove that a console manufacturer shouldn’t sell its games on PC.”
To prove? No, not necessarily. But I did offer an example of a failing situation in order to show that it’s not at all the slam dunk you think it will be.
” Satya Nadella, the Jack the Ripper of unprofitable activities, is selling some of his console games on PC, but you know better.”
I know the Xbox brand isn’t doing well in either the console or PC space; if moving those games to PC was his idea, it was a poor one.
“I told you this wouldn’t go well for you.”
I bet you say that to all the girls.
out of context […] convenient cuts […] attempt to imply […] It wasn’t until two days […]
How absurd; I used ellipses to indicate omitted elements, and your entire comment is directly above. There was no “attempt to imply” that you said anything other than what you said.
(Only the illiterate and the mendacious can call directly quoting someone and indicating omitted portions of their statement posted directly above an attempt at deception.)
I didn’t explicitly state delayed releases immediately because that was the context of the conversation. I replied to your comment to SpaceKnotzy, who said:
At the point that when you’ve sold a game for five years (Like The Last Of Us)
That was a day before I replied to you. It’s clear that your whining about my not understanding the conversation I’m in is another case of your projecting.
No, not necessarily. But I did offer an example of a failing situation in order to show that it’s not at all the slam dunk you think it will be.
You’re such a lying coward; you offered, “Tell me: how’s the Windows Store doing?” in response to SpaceKnotzy’s “when you’ve sold a game for five years (Like The Last Of Us).” You offered a console maker’s selling PC ports as evidence that delayed PC ports damage console sales.
It’s obvious that you’re pathologically desperate to deflect from your error, but you can’t retcon this.
I mean, you’re trying really hard, and I have to give you credit for that.
“You’re such a lying coward”
And then you go and show EXACTLY what I’m talking about by trying to link part of one comment with part of another, which utterly destroys context. It’s impressive that you’re so dedicated to the long con, but you’re not fooling anybody… except maybe yourself. Those “honest readers” you speak of can see right through you.
you’re trying really hard […] you’re so dedicated to the long con […] you’re not fooling anybody […] “honest readers” […] can see right through you.
You’ve got projection and unintentional irony down pat.
Its a start, But in other words its still better to use PS NOW until performance gets better on RPCS3.
ps now? hahaha, thats for chumps.
Its a start, But in other words its still better to use PS NOW until performance gets better on RPCS3.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/10b4b1f926a4bf9d52045855eeb093195a132ee0684bc752e47b337e448823b1.jpg
“we”???? You speak ONLY for yourself. The are tons of ps3 and xbox360 games (and some first xbox games too) that PC gamers should have access to, but were denied for one reason or another.
You come across as super whiny, being a permanent buzzkill is a negative personality trait that you are supposed to hide, not expose others to. Let me put it this way, your personality is a sneeze that you REALLY need to cover.
I am so glad I’m a PC Gamer who knows that we used to get screwed with releases left and right before Steam took off, so therefore I can enjoy console games without that super dorky/nerdy/virgin PC Master Race b.s.
Overreaction, much.
So jensson’s comment was just fine?
Your reading comprehension seemingly needs urgent attention.
Sure.
Calm down, virgin. lol
Clickbait? Do fools like you even bother to learn what things mean at any point in your life or do you just use words as you see fit with a random definition to fit your comment? In case you can’t follow, there is nothing clickbait about the title of this article.
Yeah, Bloodborne is none of those things. And double standards much? You are envious that Sony won’t bring their current gen GDDR5 PS4 games to older ddr3 PCs but then instantly crap on them with mundane and overused complaints that never stopped said games before from getting 10/10 scores, millions upon millions of units sold and countless GOTY awards.
Stay jealous of another system’s games you can’t play.
Hey, I found a peasant.
Sony has “GDDR 5 games” on its console! ?
I’ve not laughed so hard at a console peasant for a very long time. It’s like they read (or mostly likely view a video because reading is an effort for them) a Sony press release spouting the usual disingenuous hyperbole and they have no idea what any of it means but what they do know is that ‘5’ is a bigger number than ‘3’ so it must be better in every way!
Such peasantry. It’s somewhat frightening that there really are people in this world who are actually that stupid. These people have the right to vote and even to breed. smh
“You are envious that Sony won’t bring their current gen GDDR5 PS4 games to older ddr3 PCs”
Hey moron, video memory is GDDR5 on pc, IDIOT. The idea that a amd APU laptop design with a TABLET cpu, will compete with pc is ridiculous. We have been hearing this nonsense since the ps4 reveal and as it turned out ps4 and xbone even more are WEAK and pathetic.
“never stopped said games before from getting 10/10 scores,”
and bioshock infinite is a 10/10 game. This idiotic view that high scores mean that the game is great has to end. At this point everyone knows that scores are either paid off or that the reviewers are way too biased for ideological reasons to be ethical and objective.
” millions upon millions of units sold ”
Not really with the exception of a few games like uncharted, not much is going on. In fact i remember the joke back in ps3 days was that no one is buying sony exclusives. Speaking of which, consoles nowdays barely even have any exlusives. Next gen you will get like one exclusive every 2 years. Still the fact they make exclusives and price them the same as any other game is utterly greedy since they already are getting the royalty fees.
“and countless GOTY awards.” Yeah like Horizone Zero Awards….AHAHAHHAHAHAHA but seriously who cares about awards have you not seen how biased the videogame awards were last year?
Lets be honest the pc master race won, it won the console war the exclusive war the graphics war the price war, it even won your exclusives via emulators.
U so jelly cuz PwayStayshun gots da GDDR5 gamez!
Humour aside, it’s somewhat disconcerting that there are people in the world who are genuinely that stupid. These people have the right to vote and also to breed. smh
I admit there are a handful of ps4 games that I’m jealous I can’t play on PC.
I could play them on my ps4 but I’m never going back to 30 fps with horrible AA and motion blur ever again, especially for $60 a pop.
What is normal?
PCGamer?
IGN?
I wonder if you’re just burnt out on gaming so you spend your leisure hours b*tching and moaning on PC gaming sites instead.
A cursory glance at his post history reveals two common themes to many of his comments. He likes to call articles “clickbait” and to call games “crap”. It’s a riveting read! He truly excelled himself in having branded the latest Final Fantasy game as being a “gay hipster emo fest”.
well that last one was pretty accurate
Nah. If they were gay then the car would be a Mustang. ?
You can already play these games on PC via Playstation Now service.
Streamed and displayed in 720p (or less if your broadband is slow) and with tons of extra latency added. All for a laughable price. No thanks.
15 bucks is not that much. Latency is better than 5 fps on the emulator. And 720p is the native resolutions for these games on PS3
15 USD per 30 days, you mean.
So you know for sure that RPCS3 will forever run at 5fps below an actual PS3 for every game, do you? No, you don’t. You just made that up.
Incorrect. Red Dead Redemption’s native resolution on PS3 isn’t 720p. It’s 1152×640.
Some PS3 games, albeit not many, run in 1080p so PlayStation Now can downgrade the visuals while also always harming the gameplay experience.
Oh, and not all PS3 games are available on Sony’s dubious ‘service’. A notable absentee being Demon’s Souls, for example. There are other shortcomings with the service that I could mention.
It will take approximately 2 more years to make games like those on RPCS3 fully playable. By the way, I own PS3, and Playstation Now graphics match PS3’s. I haven’t noticed any downgrade what so ever.
Well, I’ll respectfully defer to what Digital Foundry had to say about PlayStation Now. Such as,
“visual quality is a bit of a mixed bag”
“the compromised nature of the video stream”
“a reduction in image vibrancy, and viewed up-close there’s a noticeable blur”
“With brightly lit environments and fast motion seen in racing games… the video encoding doesn’t cope quite as well”
“artefacts visibly began cropping up in slower moving scenes”
“a sea of artefacts that scrub away clarity and detail”
“150ms latency – about 80ms slower than the game running locally”
That might work better if those comments were about the entire service, rather than performance in different games. And guess what: that’s the same sort of variability you’d get out of an emulator.
Oh dear. Three rapid-fire replies from you to separate comments of mine. All three replies being somewhat challenged in their own way. Feel free to continuing obsessing over me while making yourself appear so foolish.
Huh? What are you even saying? Nothing?
I replied to multiple comments of yours because they’re multiple instances of you saying something ignorant.
Too right! If only I could upvote your reply more than once.
Why would Sony port their exclusives to PC?
Not the most reasonable crowd on this site…
We simply don’t care for simple minded little trolls like yourself. Feel free to go cry for sympathy elsewhere. You won’t be missed.
You really have the balls to call somebody else a troll? That, or you’re just that ignorant.