Time To Grow Up And Let Go Of Backwards Compatibility

"Now that the PlayStation 4 has been revealed, people have already given up on being excited for the console just for the sole fact that it will not play PS3 games. Now this is much more than haters on the internet bashing Sony's next big thing and is from the millions of people who think backwards compatibility is something every system should have. Backwards compatibility has become this feature that is rarely used by people, but almost everybody will complain if you don't include it."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Jadedz2105d ago

It isn't needed, but it's a welcomed feature that might persuade consumer interest for that said product (at times).

darthv722105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )

i mean, to have at least one generation of BC is usually doable. It does offer that transitional point of games you may still enjoy but the convenience of playing them through a newer system.

in some cases, there are improvements that can be had from such a feature. Like the wii-u having BC with wii games. Just last night, the kids wanted to play some wii sports and I had not really been using the wii-u for that game. I will say, it did look noticeably better via the hdmi 720p display vs the component 480p the wii originally was using.

Something like that isnt asking to much. I think when it comes to BC in general, many are focused at having the full back catalog of titles being playable. So in the case of the PS4, its as if many will want all the way back to the PS1 games playable. We already have that on the PS3 and I would doubt they could really look any better than that on a PS4.

Personally, I still use my PS1 for PS1 games as I found that playing them on the PS3 or even the PS2 led to some strange artifacts on the screen. But i do like the convenience it offers if needed.

A Ps4 playing the PSN/PS3 games that people already have should be a given but I can also accept that if such a feature were to compromise the abilities of the PS4 itself then by all means it can be skipped. That is why i would never get rid of my Ps3 just like I never got rid of my Ps2 or PS1 or any of my previous systems.

It just seems like an odd decision for sony to make now considering they always offered some type of BC in their previous platforms.

But hey, even Sega never really offered it other than special add-on (power base converter was the only one). They wanted each system to be its own unique platform dedicated to its own line of games.

Hellsvacancy2105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )

I can see why Sony hasnt added BC to the PS4 (although I would of liked it) If the PS4 could play PS3 games consumers would stop buying the PS3 and buy the PS4, the PS3 will be on the market for a few years yet, Sony knows this, they also know whoever buys a PS3 may possibly buy a PS4 at some point

Might aswel have two selling consoles rather than one

Anon19742105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )

It certainly worked for them this gen. When you look at the home console market, since the PS3 launched, combined PS2 and PS3 sales have outpaced home console sales from their competition. It's a mystery to me that when people talk about home console marketshare and what Sony's lost this gen, they always ignore the fact that Sony was selling not one, but two home game consoles the past 7 year. No one is saying that the Wii and Xbox 360 weren't successful and that Sony didn't enjoy a much larger share prior to the PS3's launch, but why they would choose to ignore the PS2 when talking about marketshare this gen just leaves me puzzled.

If the market can support a high end and low end gaming console, why wouldn't they sell two consoles? They have different stereo receivers aimed at different markets. They have different TV models aimed at different markets. I don't see why they wouldn't do the same thing with game consoles again.

As for BC...nice to have but it's not going to sway my buying decision one way or another.

Shnazzyone2105d ago

Well I understand why sony didn't do it. It's practically impossible to emulate an cell architecture on current PC architecture. Which is why they closest thing they can offer is cloud play of those games. I won't say they did it maliciously, but i will say it does reduce the value of the console at launch and means that if I do buy it, it's not going to be until a few years in.

SilentNegotiator2105d ago

Hardware changes, you can't have BC forever. Move on, keep your PS3.

MikeMyers2105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )

Should we all have kept our DVD players when we started getting into bluray or is it far more convenient having a bluray player play both? I have a lot of digital content I bought over the years and some are timeless classics and HD remakes that I still enjoy. Why would I want to keep my PS3 to play them when they should be tied to my Playstation account or Xbox Live account? I don't have this problem on Steam.

SilentNegotiator2105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )

Right, because the rendering of video and the complex programming/rendering of video games are identical processes. /s

MikeMyers2105d ago

"Right, because the rendering of video and the complex programming/rendering of video games are identical processes."

How much money do you think it actually saves Sony to remove the ability to play PS2 games on the PS3 hardware? It was more of a business move than actual costs.

What will be the excuse if they don't allow previous digital content on the PS4 when Gaikai is up and running and could stream the games?

SilentNegotiator2105d ago

All that's left of your argument is a "what if"

Because you don't know what Sony did or didn't save.

maniacmayhem2105d ago

What's so funny is the price of tech goes down as time goes on. The ps2 costs what...less than $99 dollars? the price of the ps3 was able to come down because the cost of production is lower.

So these arguments of the PS4 not having BS because of hardware and cost is laughable and if anyone believes this they are fooling themselves.

Sony like other businesses know they are sitting on a goldmine of back catalog games that nostalgic games are foaming to play again on their new system. Charge them again through a service because BC is not provided.

kaozgamer2105d ago


they saved quite a lot by removing the emotion engine chip from the ps3...

MikeMyers2104d ago


"On backwards compatibility: Jack explained that Sony looked at how to "not take a greater hit on production cost, without losing PlayStation's heritage ... Hardware / software for backwards compat wasn't all that expensive. ... but we're selling PS2 software to PS2 customers, and selling PS3 software to PS3 consumers." Still, Jack seems to feel like it may have been the wrong move. "I would like to have had it in there, but Sony's collective strategy determined we could afford to lose it. We've now gone down that road, and we're not going back."

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2104d ago
violents2105d ago

Would it peak your interest and/or sway your choice to buy one if your next gen console is like 800 dollars because you want 4 console built into one?

If you dont know why its not being included then do some research and its easily apparent why its immposible. Just keep your old systems people.

lapiopoop2105d ago

I don't care if it isn't included, I mean i already got my ps3 to play ps3 games and watch movies and my ps2 to play ps2 games. Like Jadedz said, it's a welcome feature

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2104d ago
PopRocks3592105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )

What the hell is immature about liking backwards compatibility? I think it's nice to be able to do away with old tech in order to make room and save money for new tech and still be able to keep and play my games. It's obviously not an essential feature, but it's certainly a welcome one.

I don't want to be that guy (again), but would anyone honestly be this forgiving if the Wii U didn't have backwards compatibility?

matgrowcott2105d ago

If the Wii U didn't have backwards compatibility - with basically the same modified components Nintendo have been using for over a decade - that would be cause for concern.

If the Next Xbox doesn't have backwards compatibility - considering the 360 is largely computer-like already and nothing is really changing on that front - that'll be cause for concern.

Sony have completely changed the way they've built the PS4. it's really, really difficult for anybody who know's what they're talking about to complain, because frankly there's absolutely no other intelligent solution to this problem.

PopRocks3592105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )

If you're implying I'm one of the people complaining specifically about the PS4's lack of backwards compatibility, let me clarify.

It's a disappointment that the PS4 doesn't have backwards compatibility, but it's by no means a deal breaker. However I still don't see what this article is getting at by suggesting that those who prefer having backwards compatibility in their next-gen consoles have an immature standpoint and need to "grow up."


While you make a sound point about the PS4 having a new infrastructure, the PS3 also has backwards compatibility with every model supporting PSOne Classics and with some models supporting PS2 models all of which is in spite of its Cell processor and overall different infrastructure. Why they can't at least bother to put out an additional SKU (even if the release is a limited one) with backwards compatibility in it makes little sense and your defense of it comes off as a double standard.

matgrowcott2105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )

I'm not implying anything, I'm just explaining why someone might be justified in complaining about it on other consoles, and not on the PS4.

It's not a case of fanboyism, it's a case of Sony making the biggest changes between systems.

EDIT: Those of you disagreeing with my above comment, feel free to try and explain. If it's really just "we want BC on PS4," you're more or less proving the article right...

matgrowcott2105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )


Because additional SKUs cost money. Even limited releases cost money. They have to first decide how best to house the additional parts (which will likely mean literally remodeling many components, including the board), then they have to pay extra to market it.

In the end you're looking at hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars on a product that will sell to such a small amount of customers that it's not even worth considering.

And how many people will pay full price for to cover those costs? You and your buddies? A few hundred folks on the internet? Or will some of them wait for the price to come down?

Just sticking the parts in is far harder than it sounds, and there's no way to do it and make it profitable. It's not just PS4 price + PS3 price. If it was, they'd have done it.

EDIT: Oh, and I forgot; they'd then have to make the Cell play nice with standard architecture components. I can't say I've looked into it, but I can't imagine that would be at all fun, if at all possible.

So add that to the list of costs, and the likely no-go makes it even less a smart idea.


Because the graphics card isn't a problem. The graphics card could be overcome relatively simply.

The problem is the processor. The cell can't be emulated, and it uses a unique architecture. While Microsoft had to issue a patch, to get a PS3 game playable on PS4 would require a complete remake.

darthv722105d ago

I get what you are saying. I mean there is a completely different graphics chip that will be used. It may have been different if sony went with a next gen nvidia part which could have led to BC due to the ps3 games developed using an nvidia chip in the ps3.

But why not take the same approach Ms did when they had to change chip vendors between systems? Granted we do not have 100% bc on the 360 with all xbox games but patched emulation is still better than nothing.

im sure sony could have their teams come up with the patches to adapt nvidia based rendering on the new amd gpu. Then again, the time to create the patch would cost $$ that maybe they can put into dedicated development instead.

The lack of BC isnt a deal breaker to me if it means the system will be more stable. I just liked that convenience they offered for so long that its a strange twist they changed their mind now.

I guess it would be like a bluray player that comes out that explicitly will not play dvd's even though we know the laser is capable of doing so.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2105d ago
GalacticEmpire2105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )

Although not mentioned in the article, I think the immaturity lies not in the opinion of BC but in the way it's worth is exaggerated and used as a weapon in fanboy rants.

Like you say, there's nothing wrong with liking BC but claiming you aren't going to buy a console because you simply can't live without it does come off a tad immature.

I always see people who demand BC as wanting to 'have their cake and eat it too'. They demand BC but at the same time demand a low console price and, due to technical reasons, it's usually one or the other.

SilentNegotiator2105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )

Did YOU do any complaining when Wii U's dropping of Gamecube support became official? Suggest that remastered gamecube games are a "scam" because they dropped the BC? I doubt it.

PopRocks3592105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )

Actually for your information, yes I did complain about that. I said it was a damn shame and I was pretty unhappy about it at first, but it at least had backwards compatibility to Wii, both physical and digital games, and could potentially add GCN games to the virtual console in the future just like how the PS3 slim models (and some fat ones) don't support the PS2, but do support the PS1 (sans some emulated downloads). That's better than having NOTHING at all and I still say it's a welcome feature.

The next time you want to try and make me look like a hypocrite, why not do some research? Oh wait, it's you and you're incapable of forming an argument that doesn't involve facts or not using some sort of attack on the person you're replying to.

PopRocks3592105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )

I can't believe I forgot to touch upon this subject before.

I think it's incredibly laughable you will refer to the remake of Wind Waker as a "scam" when as a Sony fan I've never heard a cross word from you about HD collections for the PS3 which are literally nothing but resolution upscales with trophies for PS2 games that came out a single generation prior.

Yet somehow a game from the Gamecube era being completely remade with new graphics and retooled with gameplay upgrades akin to Ocarina of Time 3D is a scam. You are either delusional or a complete hypocrite. Or perhaps both.

aLucidMind2105d ago

It was kind of obvious they were gonna drop BC for Gamecube on the Wii-U since a few years after the Wii's release, Nintendo began releasing models of the Wii that wasn't backwards compatible. That said, it did stop me from selling more of the Wii's to customers since the BC seemed to be a pretty good selling point. Not saying I didn't stop trying to sell them, but I sold a lot less after that. I'm speaking mainly of non-gaming parents buying a console for their little kids or late teens that just got into gaming during the PS360 gen.

miyamoto2105d ago (Edited 2105d ago )

I think the best solution is to buy a less expensive PS3 for PS3 games down the line (if you still don't have one) even if you have a PS4.

At least when one breaks down the other is still functional.

PS3 has pretty decent graphics even when 1080p or 4K is the norm.

And PS3 ain't like the PSOne or PS2 wich are in SD and doesn't look very good on HDTV.

Plus the wife can watch Netflix on PS3 or the kids can play LBP on PS3 while the hubby plays the man-games on PS4 all at the same time.

Also there is Gaikai service as an alternative solution to this problem.

I wish PS4 games also have 720p display mode bcos my HDTV although it said 1080p on the box can only display GT5 at 1080i.

I tried my PS3 on other 1080p HDTVs and I get the same results.

Is that an issue with my Ps3 unit? pls help. thanks.

Thepcz2105d ago

how tunes change. hilarious!

Aclay2105d ago

Backwards compatibility for me is usually really nice to have early on in the console's lifecycle for the first year or two, but admittedly after that I rarely take much use of backwards compatibility.

When the PS4 comes out, I know I'll still be buying some PS3 games b/c there were a number of them I just never got around to buying-- and by the time the PS4 does come out, many of those games are going to be cheap.

Would've been nice to be able to play all those games on the PS4 and have one PS console that could play my entire PS library like the launch 60GB PS3 I still have, but I guess I'll just have to leave the PS3 out on my TV Stand a while longer alongside the PS4.

Only reason why the PS4 not having BC will be a small hassle for me is, I'll have to do some rearranging on multiple shelves of my TV stand to make room for PS3, PS4 and my Sattelite Receiver on the Top Shelf.