Wouldn't those things go hand-in-hand? If Sony knew that the market was there, why wouldn't they prioritize that?
Sony has teams of people to analyze market data. If it made financial sense for them to focus on it, they would do it. There has to be a reason that they aren't.
Yep. No company has ever made a bad decision. After all, Microsoft obviously doesn't have any teams of people to analyze market data. Otherwise they never would have designed a system requiring always online DRM in the first place, and they'd never have wasted their time on implementing BC.
I'm not saying it would be worthwhile, it's probably a damned mess to do and probably wouldn't actually bring in the sales to justify the effort. But because they have "teams of people to analyze market data" does not mean that their decisions are correct.
We are seriously going around in circles here, on every page.
We'll all get along much better if we stop trying to downplay what the other side is doing. Sony's and Microsoft's solutions both have merit, and they're both doing all they can in their individual situations to bring more of their games to more players.
I took issue with his claim that the feature is "rarely used," and the lack of compelling evidence which has been given to defend that notion. If people could buy and play FF7 PS1 classic right now on PS4, it would likely be getting a lot of use.
Also, given that I was specifically referring to PS1 and PS2 support, it is almost certainly not an issue of relative expense, but rather one of priorities.
Actually, I believe they have enough data and experience to make this statement. BUT, like I said earlier, that data might be less relevant now that we're coming off a generation that had the first ridiculously huge digital library and introduced the expectation with smart phones that digital games and apps would carry on to the next device upgrade.
Not sure how that addresses what I said. Is there another solution for playing past generations on PS4? I agree that PS Now is more than BC or the PS4 and said as much, but it is the only BC solution on PS4. They've been pushing it as the alternative to BC on the console since they announced the PS4.
The key points to PS Now is that, it is not limited to the PS4 platform and also the fact that it is a game streaming service which costs money. This makes PS Now the very antithesis of BC which is supposed to be limited to a specific hardware and free of charge.
Regardless of its perception as an alternative method of BC, it's not actually BC.
Yep. No company has ever made a bad decision. After all, Microsoft obviously doesn't have any teams of people to analyze market data. Otherwise they never would have designed a system requiring always online DRM in the first place, and they'd never have wasted their time on implementing BC.
I love emulation but it's just not the same sometimes- and other times the PC versions are definitive enough in my eyes (Silent Hill 3 release). My last Xebra playthrough of Metal Gear Soild had purple snow particles, and the quasi-blur in action scenes didn't look quite right. I'd pay another ten to play it derictly again, fully intact.
Can someone throw down some reasons why BC is such a huge issue? There are so many games for current-gen consoles that I just don't feel this overwhelming urge to play something from last-gen that so many people seem to. I applaud MS for being able to work it into it's console, and following the announcement I was really excited for the possibilities, but after I thought about it I realized that honestly I don't care that much. For that rare occasion that I feel like spending some time with an old game I'll blow the dust off my old console and play, realistically speaking (at least on the Sony consoles not sure off the top of my head about MS) all the cables are the same and it's not that much hassle to just swap out the box. I also don't understand the mentality of stating that: "Because I can't play my old games I have no reason to buy the new console" In that case why is the new console even relevant? Wouldn't you just be dropping 350+ for no reason if the new hardware/software doesn't interest you enough to buy it on its own? After all if you're just playing PS3 games on a PS4 it makes way more sense to just keep the PS3
sidenote: I understand that it's possible that you may not have the funds to own both last-gen and current-gen consoles, but in that case you're not being entirely left out of the loop. There's plenty of current-gen games that have also been released on last-gen, and if it takes some time to save up for a next-gen console that you can't play old games on then that's just the way it is and you've gotta decide which you want more. Not really one company slighting you as a consumer by not supporting hardware that's quickly becoming outdated.
Sorry for the diatribe I'm bored while rendering at work
It helps alleviate the common launch drought problem which plague every game consoles. You can play some MGS4 while waiting for Uncharted 4, for example, especially great for those who doesnt have a ps3. There are also games which got released only for the ps3 during the transitional period of ps3/ps4, so again you can play them on the ps4. Also, it save spaces so you can just hook up only the ps4. And sell that ps3 for cash towards a ps4.
And then phase out BC after the initial year or two of the ps4 release, because by then BC wouldnt matter much anymore.
Remembering how little I used the BC on my PS3 I kind of get what he's saying. That was also a software solution on the EU consoles as opposed to actually having a full PS2 in your PS3 (like a certain number in US launch consoles). It didn't run very well for a lot of titles (Ratchet and Clank was a stuttering mess from what I remember) and it was never really fixed. It too was limited to a certain number of titles that actually "ran well". We'll see how much MS will actually build on the backwards compatibility solution.
However, we need some sort of long-term backwards compatibility solution for consoles. It would be great to have access to some obscure PS 2 titles (i.e. Shadow Hearts) on my PS4. BC not tied to hardware is important and if PS Now is a more longterm solution then I'll take it. "Remastering" to the n-th degree or making "HD collections/definitive editions" countless times is just not really viable for people who already bought the software once...
People badging sony here please explain how sony could do it any other way? Ps3 having unique architecture like cell meant BC was not going to happen in the traditional manner without a 700 dollar console. Two different situations. 360 and x1 are both x86 and very similar
People badging sony here please explain how sony could do it any other way? Ps3 having unique architecture like cell meant BC was not going to happen in the traditional manner without a 700 dollar console. Two different situations. 360 and x1 are both x86 and very similar
People badging sony here please explain how sony could do it any other way? Ps3 having unique architecture like cell meant BC was not going to happen in the traditional manner without a 700 dollar console. Two different situations. 360 and x1 are both x86 and very similar
People badging sony here please explain how sony could do it any other way? Ps3 having unique architecture like cell meant BC was not going to happen in the traditional manner without a 700 dollar console. Two different situations. 360 and x1 are both x86 and very similar
And no one here is badgering Sony for doing what they're doing. Due to the Cell architecture of the PS3, streaming games to newer and other hardware is the smartest thing they could be doing, and will probably pay off in the long run.
YEah it allows for BC but it does a heck of a lot more, it is not just for BC..............Unless X1 BC I can play games on TV's without a console? They gave people the option on ps4, it does a heck of a lot more.
Not surprised with that response and I don't expect Sony to react. I feel that though it is always good to have BC, the general public may not take full advantage of the feature. I rarely go back and play old games, though I do get an itch time to time. There are just so many great titles out now and I have limited time to enjoy it all.
Be it 10 years or 100 years it will inevitably become a cloud service, at some point in the future. That's why I only said it is the foundation for cloud gaming. It's just the starting point, it doesn't mean that Gen 9 or 10 will be based on this.
Nobody cares about old games, that's why we've spent millions on a service let you stream PS3 games and publishers keep releasing current gen versions of old games.
People seem to feel that PS Now is the PS4's solution to not having native BC but in reality, it is the start of a platform that will launch SaaS (software as as service) to the type of people who don't want to buy traditional consoles. It obviously doesn't function the same as BC normally would (in a technical sense and the fact that PS3 can use PS Now as well).
People will already own the TV, tablets, and so on regardless if they want to buy a traditional console. The line of thought here seems to be to get those people playing Playstation games. In a similar sense, you already have a smartphone, why not get these games for it now.
So...they don't care, or the people who haven't upgraded from 360 to xbox one aren't actually part of the real world gaming population? Or is this back to Microsoft not having those magical marketing wizards that can see the future.
They also have the option of letting me play the games that I do own through PSNow. I don't expect them to but man that'd be very cool. Hell, I'd even talk limited time per month to play them and maybe I'd think about renting some games that I don't own so Sony would get a little something out of it too!
It's in my post lol. Can you play xbox games on tvs tablets without the console? This is the beginning eventually it won't just be ps3 games they decided to launch with this. It is a whole new platform.
Cell is a hybrid CPU/GPU; comparing it;s raw stats to the Jaguar core is miss leading. However I agree, EMU of that thing is going to take a while and a lot of effort. I expect the PC EMU to take 4-5 years still.
It would eliminate the need for owning any other PlayStation consoles, controllers, memory cards, power cords, etc. That convenience alone is totally worth it to me, and no doubt plenty of others. The fact that I have to have my PS2, PS3, and PS4 all plugged in is incredibly inconvenient. Offering a "premium" system with 20 years worth of games available to play in one box would be a "one-up" on Microsoft, yes.
Obviously a SKU like that wouldn't sell nearly as well as the base $400 one, but pretty much every single person I know that is into gaming but doesn't own a next gen console said the only reason is backwards compatibility.
So...they don't care, or the people who haven't upgraded from 360 to xbox one aren't actually part of the real world gaming population? Or is this back to Microsoft not having those magical marketing wizards that can see the future.
MS would be stupid to not try to retain those customers. And it must have been cheap and easy for them to enable, or again, they wouldn't have done it.
How hard is it to rationalize that Sony looked at the number and said "nope." and MS looked and said "well, this helps us retain X % of market share, and it only costs X, we should do it."?
Agree, it's like people are happy to abandon the money they spent last gen on digital titles... Or are they happy rebuying everything as remastered?
I hate having my last gen machines hooked up, and when they eventually die or Sony or MS turns off network support for these last gen systems then what?
Last gen changed everything when it comes to games ownership,comparing any previous generation to last is stupid.
As others have said, BC works really well in the games I played.
Think about this fall when BC is ready for the public. MS can advertise BC and people can trade in their 360s for 150 off a X1 while still having access to all their 360 content.
That will be huge to people on lower to mid budgets. They get to get an X1 for in essence $150 dollars and keep access to all their 360 content including movies and music. Its a true upgrade as opposed to losing all that content going over to the PS4.
The key points to PS Now is that, it is not limited to the PS4 platform and also the fact that it is a game streaming service which costs money. This makes PS Now the very antithesis of BC which is supposed to be limited to a specific hardware and free of charge.
Regardless of its perception as an alternative method of BC, it's not actually BC.
Well thats great that it's not limited but I don't care, I own a PS4 and as the PlayStation 4 is a PlayStation how about "some" PlayStation legacy title support.
Even the Vita can play PSone Classic's, And this is the thing that's not getting through to people, why doesn't the PS4 in it's simplest form support PSone Classics .
Then we can talk about disc PSX/PS2 native support and eventually where PSNow fits in to it all.
But at the moment there is not reason as to why there is 0 PlayStation legacy titles playable on PS4.
I'm bored while rendering at work
