Cloud Gaming is no Match For True Backwards Compatibility

GR's DeShaun Zollicoffer writes:

The PS4 won’t play PS3 games, period. This was the only downer from yesterday’s PlayStation Meeting. But all hope isn’t lost – the PS4 will be able to play old games through Gaikai. Problem solved, right? Wrong, here’s why cloud gaming is no match for true backwards compatibility.

[DaThreats]

DeShaun, then don't get the next Xbox lol

[darthv72]

not particularly "gamers" are all about the most bang for the buck. Those who missed out on the PS3 and get a PS4 wont have that library of PS3 games to physically play on the PS4.

That may not seem like much to some but it represent extra value to the consumer if they can get more use out of it. It makes no difference to me as i am a hardware whore. I love to buy the platforms as well as the games.

But when i see someone in the store debating on getting a wii or a wii-u (just for example) I tell them to get the wii-u. Mainly because it will play all the newer wii-u games but also the slew of wii games that are already out.

I remember telling people the same thing when comparing ps1 to ps2. Ps2 was the better choice not just because of the obvious dvd and ps2 games but it could play all the ps1 games that were still on the shelves.

convenience, i would say, is the more important factor to the consumer as it represents them getting more for their $$.

[FragGen]

LOL.

Guess how many PS2 games I have bought or even played for that matter since I got my PS3? I think I played God or War once and KZ1 a couple of times.

I still own two functional and fully setup for play PS2s.

Guess how many original XBOX games I have bought and/or played on my 360? I played Doom3 several times. I played an old Splinter Cell game for a week or so. That's about it.

Backward compatibility is nice but I find that for me, it almost always sounds like a bigger deal at first than it ends up actually being in the long run.

And I do have some experience with it... I have huge libraries of Genesis, SNES, PS1, PS2, XBOX, X360, PS3, Vita, PSP, Wii, GBA, Android, and PC games.

I fully expect the same will happen for me when I buy both PS4 and X720. It rocks to have a good job/$$$. You don't have to get caught up in silly fanboy wars.

[sikbeta]

This is a real concern, if they said PS1 + PS2 + PSP, I'd believe it, even PSN games that don't push the HW to the max, but games like GOW3 (38GB), MGS4 (50GB), U2:AT (25GB) ++++ others (and not including intensive PSN games like Wipeout + Journey) will not be possible to be played via streaming... let alone TLoU and GOW:A aka PS3 swang song games...

[matgrowcott]

@sikbeta

I've played Arkham City via stream, Deus Ex and AC:R as well. None of those are as big as any of the games you mentioned, but there's no noticeable difference between playing it on a console and playing it via the cloud.

In fact, next-gen it might even save you some data, depending how big the game is and how long you'll finish it in. It'd be easier on my network and quicker for me to play LittleBigPlanet for a few hours via the cloud than for me to put the disk in and download all the patches.

[sonic989]

@sikbeta
dont worry buddy
the graphics doesnt affect the cloud experience because all the processing wont touch your system but sony's
plus didnt you hear about the world's fastest network that was like wooooow ps4 is next next next gen gaming ready with ps cloud alone

[ginsunuva]

Exactly, so that those dumb people who hoped to skip and ps3 and get a ps4 to play all the games they missed get their proper, well-deserved kick in the balls.
If ps4 was BC, ps3 sales would halt.

[3-4-5]

It's an issue but not a big one really.

When I want to play N64 or Gamecube, I still need to plug in those systems, which takes all of 20 seconds.

I have a 360, but most regular xbox games aren't even worth playing anymore aside from Deathrow and Crimson Skies.

[lilbroRx]

I agree completely. I'm also naturally opposed to online only games.

Your purchase it tenuous. Simply getting mad and swearing at someone only could potentially result in you losing everything you've bought(banning).

I want to hold what I buy in my hand.

[da_2pacalypse]

I don't understand. What's the big deal here? If you have old PS3 games, just play them on your PS3....

I'm buying a PS4 to play new games that uses the new technology. And I can't wait!

[Imalwaysright]

Because as Mr. Peter Moore pointed out a few years ago: "Y'know, Things Break". My 60 GB phat got YLOD for the 2nd time last November and i was forced to get a new PS3 slim (crap compared to my lovely phatty) and a PS2. If any of those consoles dies on me i'll have to keep buying old hardware because i'll be damned if I'm going to let all the money i spent building my library go to waste. If the PS4 had BC I would know for sure that the money I invested won't be going to waste if any of my old consoles dies on me.

[Jackhass]

Yeah, I agree.

[matgrowcott]

"None of this would be a problem if the PS4 could play PS3 games. Just pop the disc in and start playing. No fuss, no extra fees, no waiting for your favorite game to get cloud support — now that’s simple."

Let's pretend that this article wasn't rubbish to begin with - lag and poor image quality, indeed(!) - but this right here made me laugh out loud.

Yup - simple. Let's take this console, a completely different beast to its predecessor, and just MAKE it play PS3 games. That's how technology works. It's as easy as that.

If you've ever tried getting a game working on Linux using WINE, imagine that issue, only times a million. This is something that needs to be fixed - either through the return of a certain amount of funds or through actual support on the cloud - but it's by no means simple. Sony have done the right thing in abandoning complicated hardware, but the downside of that is that PS3/PSN games just won't work on it.

[darthv72]

meaning who buys a new console to play old games. i will say though, it does offer more convenience to the consumer. Especially if they missed out on the PS3 to begin with.

sony was somewhat a pioneer of BC when they made the PS2 compatible with the PS1 library. That meant those who only bought a PS2 could not only buy PS2 games but ALSO buy PS1 games they missed out on.

When the PS3 came out with it, it was considered a selling point. Then they changed that. My PS3 offers the software Bc instead of the hardware but i will say that playing a PS1 or PS2 game via HDMI presents a much better clarity than playing on component or SVideo.

Hell, even nintendo has always offered a generational level of BC on their handhelds and that transitioned to the wii with playing GC games and now wii-u with wii games.

It really does make a visual difference in playing a wii game on the wii-u via hdmi. Not to mention that you have just effectively quadrupled the number of playable titles on the newer platform. granted a majority of them are from the previous but hey....they can still be claimed to be played.

[matgrowcott]

It's not even an issue though. You might as well be saying "well, I'd like Dreamcast and Xbox compatibility on the PS4."

In fact, those are more likely on the PS4 than native PS3 compatibility is. I'm not sure the people complaining realize what it is they're asking for.

It would have been a nice feature, but they've sacrificed that for a better console. Now they just have to somehow make good for those who invested a load on the PSN and there isn't an issue.

[_-EDMIX-_]

Lol. I don't understand the problem. you're asking for compatibility of an existing system..... just keep your PlayStation 3 sony has no reason to keep an existing architecture for backwards compatible gamers.....you buy a PS4 FOR PS4 GAMES. Keep your PS3 for PS3 games.

like you yourself said this was a needed for having a new architecture. I don't think you would see games being made so quickly and the porting of Diablo III had the architecture not changed.

I'm sorry but it's an absolutely fair and understandable trade off.

[manman6]

If you want to play PS3 just keep your PS3. It doesn't have to go anywhere just because you have a PS4.

[creeping judas]

Logic on N4G, cannot be!!!!

[darthv72]

that isnt logic. that is common sense. So now we have established that, we need to understand that consumers (in general) do not have the common sense.

They will want the most they can get for their $$. The informed and educated consumer is the one who will have bought a PS3 and will know that it is still usable even after the PS4 comes out.

the uninformed consumer is the one who will ask, why cant this (PS4) work with my PS3 games or why cant this PS3 game i just bought not work on the PS4? Provided they bought the game but lack the PS3 to play it on.

We know there are people out there like that. I know of a few personally and believe me, i have a better chance of teaching my dog how to use the PS4 than some of these people.

[Imalwaysright]

What? Common sense for the average consumer is to make sure that the money he/she spent building their library of games won't be going to waste. BC ensures that and no this cloud gaming garbage is not the anwear to BC.

[nevin1]

I think it would of been much cheaper to just put PS3 parts in than spending $380 million. Plus the extra cost to maintain the service.

And I wouldn't be surprised if consumers have to pay.

And since it rumored PSN games won't work on PS4, than keeping your PS3 makes the most sense and thus making Gaikai pointless.

[IcicleTrepan]

The figure being thrown around the other day on n4g was $89 per year

[_-EDMIX-_]

done with the sole purpose of the purchase. its use to stream content throughout the entire system. that was just 1 of about a dozen features that this thing does.

Reading.....its fundamental.

[DigitalRaptor]

Did you even watch the conference or take in the implications of what Gaikai will bring?

I'll outline it for you:

- Want to try a game? Play it, without downloading.

- If you want to buy a game, hit purchase and instantly play without it needing to finish or install.

- Stuck on a part of a game? ask a friend to jump into your play session remotely and take over for you.

- Let your friends see what you're playing whenever you want, share your last 15 minutes of gameplay socially.

- Play PS4 games on Vita through Remote Play with potential for expansion to tablets and other devices. The streaming library will expand to PS1-PS3.

- And there's more stuff I'm missing.

None of this would be possible without the Gaikai-Sony partnership.

This is revolutionary and is going to be massive for social and developing greater friendships with those you associate with online. Gaikai is the backbone to Sony's future distribution strategy and offering more to their consumers.

Streaming technology IS the future and both Sony and Gaikai have grabbed that by the horns and ripped the horns off.

If you think keeping the Cell, complicating motherboard circuitry and giving Sony another $599 is a good idea, then you're lost.

[MoreRPG]

those are great features but to be honest i dont think ill use any of those features.

maybe the ability to play ps4 games on the vita that is if the internet provider stop being greedy

[DigitalRaptor]

You say that now, but I don't believe that will definitely be the case when we try it for ourselves. This basically removes any barrier between the player and the game. No more waiting - at all. This is big. The jump in convenience will be mind-blowing. And of course you will use the feature to try out games before you buy them by streaming them. Of course you will. And of course you'll want to play a game before it's finished downloading. Who'd want to wait?? The literal "jumping in" to another person's game is only one aspect of what is possible with this sort of feature. Who knows the potential of what has been shaped by this partnership? Only Sony and a number of developers at the moment.

I don't think I'll use the share as often as some others will, but setting up a livestream also increases the interest for niche games. I'll definitely want to upload videos of games that I love to Facebook to show my friends - and there's no effort involved - it does it in the background. Also, It's like free marketing for games that might not be popular, and that's genius. If your friends see you playing an interesting looking indie game, they might ask you about it or comment on it.

These sort of things are more important than dwelling on old games for the sake of being able to play them on hardware not designed to play them. There are some clear downsides to lack of backwards compatibility which I can acknowledge, and I truly wish we could have it, but the new architecture is getting more developer and consumer buzz than is worth risking a console that is too expensive or unreliable because of motherboard complications.

I would TOTALLY be interested in spending more on a backwards compatible Cell chip-fitted model. I'd pay another $100 for that. Who knows if that will be an option down the line.

[Kappa Mikey]

I might be in the minority here, but I think backwards compatibility was the most overrated feature on the PS3. Sure I might have played my PS2 games on my 60gb PS3 for like a year after it came out, but after that I barely even used it.

[ziggurcat]

i've never cared for BC mostly because when i buy a system it's to play games that were made for that system.

if i want to play a PS2 game, i'll go find a cheap PS2 somewhere and play it on that.

[HeavenlySnipes]

Lets assume that we have to sell/burn our PS3's in order to play a PS4

Personally, I'm selling my 360, all its games and 3/4 of my PS3 library (only keeping the games I actively play today plus games like te Last of Us and GOW when they come out) to save money on my PS4 purchase.

I also never got why youd buy a new system to play your old games. If you're so hellbent on doing away with your PS3 sell the games also to make the most cash from it

[IcicleTrepan]

There are a few reasons.

1) older hardware fails eventually.
2) Consoles usually have very few games available at launch.
3) you could sell your PS2 and use that money to buy a PS3 at the time, and continue playing games you already own and love.

I still think MS is going to surprise and have software supported backwards compatibility, just like they did this gen.

[nevin1]

"This puts upcoming PS3 games in a weird spot. Will gamers buy The Last of Us for the PS3 or wait for the inevitable PS4 version?"

This a great question. Based on the PS4,who going to be dumbed enough to buy God Of War, The Last Of Us, GTA 5 via PSN?

[frelyler]

"Dumbed enough," I love irony.

[kunluncat]

But cloud gaming may provide long time value. Think about you can have a library for games from all generations and hardware BC may only work for the last gen games. With clould gaming BC may not be a problem for any future consoles. Also you can enjoy your games in other platform like mobile phone and pad. It is good Sony takes risk to develop cloud gaming earlier and I believe clould gaming will be their true selling point for ps4 several years later.

[IcicleTrepan]

It's a cool idea, but at the end of the day you don't actually own anything, which is a big deal to a lot of people..

[kunluncat]

If people can pay Netflix, why they cannot pay clould gaming? I do not think it is a problem from business model point. Sooner or later, gamer will accept clould gaming.

[C-Thunder]

Bacwards compatibility is nice, but it's not a major feature unless you're on the internet desperately seeking bullet points to help you tear down a console. 360 wasn't bc, snes, n64, the newest PS3s.

People complain that they want to trade the PS3 towards the PS4, but if keeping the PS4 requires the internals of the PS3 be added, thus increasing the cost, then you haven't gained anything over keeping your PS3 with a new Non-BC PS4.

I have an original FAT 60gb PS3, I played all of 2 PS2 games on it and if it wasn't bc, I would have just played them on my PS2. I really don't think BC is a problem for the average consumer. It's a new console, play the new games, that's what it's made for.

[Williamson]

I'll still keep my ps3 and use that. I rather have the ps4 keep BC out if its going to drive the price up.

[SpinalRemains138]

BC is becoming ridiculous now.

If you're so obsessed with playing old games, God bless and don't buy the new system.

Next gen is about moving forward and old systems are old systems. Old games are old games. New games are new games.

[Jek_Porkins]

Obviously it wont be popular around these parts, but if the next Xbox is backwards compatible with physical disks, that would be a huge win for Microsoft.

I personally believe that having to re-buy games you've already bought, just for the right to stream them over the internet isn't backwards compatibility at all. Not sure what that is, but backwards compatibility it sure as hell isn't.

[BLow]

We'll to have BC would mean that it would increase cost. So, maybe Sony should have maybe dropped the RAM to 4gigs and then put in the PS3 chipset. Which one whether you have, 8 gigs of RAM or BC? People are gonna complain if the launch price is high but you also want the console to pump out Avatar graphics and be fully BC with PS1,PS2, and PS3 games. Namely with the PS3 having a nonstandard architecture. All for $299 or $399, for a device that's going to sit under your TV for 8 years or maybe longer. You do know this is a business right? Oh boy, what's the point of even trying to explain..........

[optimus]

Cloud gaming has it's pros and cons... It obviously saves space in your living room and you can play the games almost anywhere. But the fact remains that highspeed internet doesn't exist EVERYWHERE so there is a good portion of people that will miss out on that service, not to mention that many providers still have a bandwidth cap for those that have highspeed internet...

Having hardware compatibility is great if you don't have the previous system plus for parents that do buy the console for their kids for Christmas do you think they would score bigger points buying 1 or 2 ps4 games along with 6 or 7 ps3 games that they found for 10-15 bucks by then? Of course they would...

The argument of "just keep/buy a ps3" is ignorant cause you're assuming everyone is rich or can afford to do that. A ps3 is still $250, maybe $175 by Christmas but you're still having to pay for that plus a ps4. Not really fair is it?... And lets say it's not a problem and you buy both, i personally no longer have room on my entertainment center for it so now i would have to buy a larger entertainment center that will disorient my living room setup...it's a lot to handle just to make room for a new system, decisions,decisions.

[ironmonkey]

Its not the end of ps3 but it is for xbox

[haggishurler]

I am more than happy to trade 'true backwards compatibility' with PS3 titles, in return for PS, PS2 and PS3 backwards compatibility with the awesome Gaikai service on what appears to be multiple platforms as well as the PS4.

The silly thing is the extra cost of adding backwards compatibility makes it pointless to consider. Most people will be happy, the majority of those who are not I assume have PS3s already and if they sold them after PS4 launch second hand would not get much more money than the extra cost to the consumer for backwards compatibility.

I am sure the majority of people who purchase a PS4 will opt to use the Gaikai service rather than switching back to their PS3.

[NaotaChannel]

So . . if people want to play the Playstation games they've bought over the years, old and new, they have to hook up 3 different Playstations (2,3,4) to their TV?

That's beyond stupid.