Why PlayStation's Global Head, Jim Ryan, is wrong about Backwards Compatibility

First things first, look at the backdrop in the feature image: “This Is For The Players”. From a great library of exclusives, PS4 lacks one feature: backwards compatibility.

[Bigpappy]

No shit.

[darthv72]

Okay... seeing as he wants to double down on his position about older games then there is no other option.

Someone needs to get those ps1 and ps2 emulators that are on pc ported over to xb1. Then people can play those older "ancient looking" games on a current gen system. It just wont be ps4.

[Christopher]

Or we could do a Don Mattric maneuver.

[Eonjay]

This is the biggest nontopic ever.
Jim Ryan is right because PlayStation is number on and BC is NOT a deal breaker. It is, after all, quite sad for BC to be Xbox Ones greatest asset. You can do if for cheaper still on an actual 360.

[zackeroniii]

ps4 is the most successful console in history and there is a huge gap in sales between its competitors, the ps4 blowing the competition out the water. i'm pretty sure jim ryan isn't wrong because the sales says otherwise. nice try tho.

[mikeslemonade]

PS4 doesn't need BC. It's a waste of money.

[rocketpanda]

@zackeroni,

PS2 is the best selling console of all time. The PS4 is in track to be the best selling console of the current generation but it won't reach the 155 million number like PS2.

As for the competition, yes it is doing extremely well compared to the Xbox, although the Switch has had a very strong start and topping sales every weeks since release. Nice to see the competition keeping Sony on its toes.

[mark_parch]

what the hell has happened to the gaming community lol. i really really want ps5 to be back compat with ps4 so i can keep my digital library but it looks like that isn't going to happen to all you ps4 fanboys it doesn't matter if you don't want it, plenty of other people including myself do want it so stop ruining it for use just because of your stupid corporate loyalty. it doesn't mean xbox is better than ps4 or vice versa, it's just a FREE feature so stop acting like children and just admit its a good option to have a very consumer friendly for all of us

[snoopgg]

If you people want to play those old ps1 and ps2 games so bad use those emulaters. I just kept my old ps1 and ps2 consoles. You can buy the consoles used super cheap on the aftermarket if you want to play those old games. I think he is right.

[JasonKCK]

If it's not important then Sony needs to shut down the costly PSNow.

[rainslacker]

Sigh.

OK, so last gen, Sony had 2 gens of BC, and did they get praised for that? No, they got torn apart for having a $500-600 console. Now, people say they are in the wrong for making a business decision to keep costs down, and that they should offer a BC solution, because it's for the players?

You can't have it both ways.

Sure, Sony could offer some form of BC, even if it's not with PS3 games, but to say they are in the wrong is just hypocritical of the press, and a good portion of the community who didn't consider that before they criticized Sony last gen. It's expecting a feature which one was never entitled to, and Sony was the leader in making it an expectation.

The start of this gen, most people on the Sony and MS side said it wasn't that big of a deal for various reasons. While there were those who were vocal with wanting it, the vast majority were dismissive of the feature as insignificant, or at least saying that it wouldn't hinder their adoption of the console.

This alone is the one and only reason which proves that Jim Ryan was absolutely right in his comments. It's just people forget their stances, and want to make things into a console war instead of actually looking at it practically, or in the bigger picture of the overall market.

Last gen, if people were willing to not criticize the price, forcing Sony to look for ways to cut costs to be more competative, and seeing that only a small portion of players used BC, yet everyone had to pay for it, then maybe this gen, we'd have a fully BC PS4. That didn't happen though, and now we get people acting like MS is somehow the best company ever because they offer a feature which isn't doing anything for them.

The entitlement and stupidity surrounding this topic is astounding. I'm curious in the actual numbers, but most people seem more hellbent on getting away from the topics that were independently brought up in the past couple days.

[TheCommentator]

Um, the price of the PS3 was high because Sony shoehorned HW into the PS3 in order for BC to function. As they revised the system they removed part of the HW and ran partial emulation until they simply abandoned it for good. If price was such an issue last gen, maybe Sony shouldn't have made PS owners pay for an unnecessary Blu Ray drive to support Sony's success in the movie format war, which was the other reason price was high. I guess Sony forgot their stance last gen when they proclaimed, " As long as there is a Playstation it will support BC," and that, "MS was stupid for not including the feature because people want to keep their games library as they go forwards."

Also, it should be noted MS has catered to the demands from consumers and added the feature into two generations of consoles now, at no cost to the consumer, while Sony apparently doesn't give a 💩 about you as long as they have your blind loyalty.

make.believe

[Erik7357]

Who cares not having backwards compatibility sucks and you dont have to write paragraphs to understand that.

I cant tell you how amazing it is to be playing Sonic Adventure 2 HD on my pc in 2017, steam has GENERATIONs of games and its amazing

[DarXyde]

TheCommentator,

Blu Ray did increase the price of the PS3, but it is also why every game fits on a singular disc. Additionally, most of the major studios supported Blu Ray early on. It really just made more sense to get that over HD DVD. Had they gone the attachment route, that would not be enough to secure the support of the format those major studios supported. The economy was in a pretty bad place at the time too. Why risk what could easily be a collapse of the consumer electronics market at the time? It was a smart move.

As for backwards compatibility, well, obviously, it became too difficult to emulate Sony's past architectures that are just unusual. The PS4 is definitely a device for the players. Above all, it's a gaming console. It NEVER lost clarity in that purpose. Music His? Nah. DLNA? Wait on it. All that non gaming fluff came later. Sure, you can say that excluding BC hurt it, but think about it: gamers have a sweet spot for selling price. Sony launches at a great price. And you know what? You often have so many games to play that you couldn't use it even if you wanted to. I only take issue with reselling PS2 games and PS Now, but it makes sense to do so since it keeps that feature add an optional expense instead of paying for hardware. One more thing: you mention launching a PlayStation without BC, in their words, is stupid. Hard to critique when Sony themselves don't quite see PS4 as a successor so much as it is an extension of the PS family.

[nitus10]

@TheCommentator

The PS3 was launched in the NTSC regions (ie. USA, Japan .. etc) with all the PS2 hardware built in that is why you have almost 100% backward compatibility. On the other hand, the launch PS3 in the PAL regions (ie. UK, Europe, Australia, New Zealand .. etc) only had partial PS2 hardware with the rest being done with software emulation which at best could only give 85% to 90% backward compatibility. Guess which PS3 I have and it still works?

As for Microsoft's XBox360 well we should not mention the RRoD or maybe the fact that the original XBox360 did not have hard disk drive support (later on you could get an expensive add-on) while the PS3 allowed the owner to swap hard disks without voiding the warranty from day one.

Backward compatibility is a great value add feature and does make a new release console attractive to owners of a previous generation console, however prior to the launch of the PS4 and XB1 both Sony and Microsoft said that their respective consoles would not support backward compatibility. It wasn't until two years after the launch of the XB1 that Microsoft brought in limited BC in that you need your game disk to be able to download the XB1 compatible XBox360 game and you need that game disk to authenticate playing that game.

Basically, if you don't have that particular XBox360 game you either 1) Pay for the game (new or second hand), 2) Pay for a digital download if one exists. It's actually a pity that Sony did not do this but that is what I kept my original FAT PS3 for and since I purchased a PS4 (over 18 months ago) I have hardly played my PS3 (predominately used by my wife for Netflix) and I have a reasonably large (well over 100 games) PS1 (all PS3's play the disks), PS2 and PS3 library.

As for Microsoft catering to the demands of consumers all I can say as I roll on the floor laughing is "Windows 10 genuine spyware edition".

[Imalwaysright]

WTF? That €600 price tag above all else was due to the cell and the blu ray drive. The cell that was a failure for Sony and devs and the blu ray drive that was not needed last gen considering that most multiplatform games were superior on the console that had a DVD9 drive. The emotion engine cost a whopping $27 to produce. That's $7 more than 1 month subscription for PS now and that is a price I would gladly play for the ability to play GOW2 or MGS3 on my phat PS3. I would NEVER pay a cent to stream games.

Also, imo, journalists and gamers had the right to criticize that €600 price tag considering that the PS3 was being outperformed left, right and center by a console that cost € 200 less than the PS3.

"feature which isn't doing anything for them. "

It's for the gamers and me being a gamer and not a shareholder, I appreciate their effort in providing something that their costumers asked for.

"The entitlement and stupidity surrounding this topic is astounding."

Imo what is astounding to me is the corporate apologism especially when it comes from people that call themselves gamers. What kind of gamer says no or doesn't want BC in their platform of choice? Because Sony says so?

[meka2611]

Main reason ps3 was so expensive was from the cell and also they accomplished BC by actually putting ps2 hardware into the system, that's why it was so big, but it was breaking ps3's. I worked at gamestop for a couple years and the original ps3's would break very very easily. They should have gone with emulation, would have been cheaper and better. Plus cost came from the stupid blu ray that they didn't need, since blu ray tech was new.

[rainslacker]

@TheCommentator

Yeah, the same way they did with the PS2, and the only way that makes BC actually legal without going through an emulation option which requires publisher approval, which is the way that MS does it. MS doesn't actually have BC, they have emulation, which is a solution which takes the place of BC. The Vita does the same thing with PSP games, although it does have the PS1 chip in the system.

Sony had almost 100% BC compatibility in those early models through their inclusion of the hardware. It's about as good as it gets, because you didn't have to think about it, or be disappointed that the system didn't support a game.

I'm aware they removed hardware to save on cost, but looks at why they had to save on cost. They were being attacked relentlessly on the cost of their system, which wasn't all because of the BC chips, and had to compete against the 360 which was doing very well in the market, while Sony was seeing slower than expected sales, while also bleeding money. From a business perspective, if they know that the feature is not that used, it makes sense to cut it, because it means stopping the bleed.

Next paragraph is for @iamalwaysright also

While hindsight is 20/20 with the BR player, or even the CELL, once the system released, it was something that they couldn't go back and cut. As far as the inclusion of the BR player, it actually was good for distributing games. There were games which used the space, but most multi-plats were held back due to the DVD drive in the 360.

I'm not saying that the only reason the price was high was because of the BC HW, but it was one place they could cut to save on cost.

And this gen is no different. Sony wanted to come in at a target price, and they made their console this gen to meet that price. There were reports that they wanted to include a camera, but they felt coming in at that $400 price was more important, so they had to scrap it.

I do like that quote though. I"m wondering where you came by it. I can't seem to find it on google. Maybe it's a paraphrase? Can you link it or cite it?

Also the second quote if you could. I'd like to see the context of both, and who said it.

Are you saying that Sony hasn't added features to their consoles as time goes by? I'd have to disagree. While they may not include every feature that every person wants, they do support their home consoles.

@Erik

It's a minor inconvienance for me because I have to use a different console to play my older games. I'd love to have the feature, and I'm 100% sure that I spend more time playing older games than almost everyone here who goes on about the feature being so awesome. I like the feature itself, and use it where it's available, but it's hardly the end all be all of considerations of if to get a console or not. No one is entitled to BC, and a lot of people are acting like it's a feature that should be included without a 2nd thought, regardless of the business implications involved. While I am more concerned about the consumer side of things, I also understand that business has to do it's thing to remain in business, so I'm willing to give some, instead of just taking because I feel it's my right to have something.

@Meka

You're assuming that full emulation was possible back then. Even Sony's efforts into this after removing the PS2 hardware came up short, and full emulation was spotty at best. Same reason MS eventually gave up on the feature last gen for the OGXbox.

[DashArrivals]

GOD, no one cares. Why is this the 18th article I've seen? Jeez

[letsa_go]

haha seriously...I almost want sony to do BC just to shut them up

[IamTylerDurden1]

It's shocking how flustered MS is getting over a simple comment about BC.

[Aenea]

Yup, the damage control is real....

[meka2611]

WTF are you talking about, I want BC on my playstation. So many good games from ps1 and ps2 to play, don't really care about ps3. And you say it's MS fans? Your a dumbass, just because you don't want BC doesn't mean others don't. I had tons of old games on my vita, which is why I love the vita for that reason. FF7, 8, and 9, legend of mana, legend of dragoon, just to name a few.

[ninsigma]

You know PS3 had BC right?? So they had their own stats to go on to decide whether it was worth putting the resources in to make PS4 BC.

[IamTylerDurden1]

Exactly. Sony didn't even mention Microsoft and could very well be referring to internal data regarding the PS3. Yet, Microsoft is firing back in a whirlwind of PR and defense. Sensitive much? Man, i don't see Sony putting out a flood of PR every time a Microsoft company man directly insults PS4 Pro. I guess insecurities play a large role. This gen has really made Microsoft insecure and it shows.

[ninsigma]

I said this before, usually the one who's loudest is the one with the least to say.

[tyasia0]

I'm not saying if backwards compatibility is a good feature or not. I just notice that no one seemed to do the math that those 508 million hours do in fact represent about 1.5% if the 1 billion hours played in January (and some of the other usage claims) that Microsoft bragged about are also true when mathed out since launch.

So while 508 million hours is a big number in the bigger picture what Jim Ryan and the previous 1.5% article said are in fact accurate.

And I mean the summary that 50% of users haven't ever used it plus the fact that in the grand scheme of console usage it doesn't seem like BC is nearly as popular as Microsoft has made it seem

[Neonridr]

giving a gamer options is never a bad thing though. I mean even if I didn't use BC on my PS4, the simple fact that it was there wouldn't detract from my gaming experience. Just means if I choose to, I could revisit an older title. I kept a few gamecube games for that simple fact alone when the Wii came out, likewise I kept some Wii games for when the Wii U came out. There are some great games that I may want to visit again from time to time. Hell I still have an SNES in case I want to back and play Final Fantasy 2 (IV) or Secret of Mana in it's truest form.

[tyasia0]

Hey i'll be honest I was disappointed to hear Jim dismiss BC, I have hundreds of PS3 and PS2 and PS1 games. (I also have working consoles so i can play them as needed.) But I would certainly be happy if PS4 had BC. One of the reason I will always say that PC is actually the best platform is due to the fact it has unlimited BC all the way back to text based dos games. (though it seems like Microsoft is trying to push away from that with UWP and disabling securom in Windows 10)

And the truth is Microsoft's BC isn't that great anyways, the way they spoon feed games is really lame in all honesty. I had a 360 but I bought mostly niche games from smaller studios, because all the multi-platform games that are most often the ones that get BC I bought on PC. The vast majority of my games haven't even been converted and probably never will.

[343_Guilty_Spark]

How can you disagree with this.

[nitus10]

The trouble of playing NES or even SNES games on modern TV really highlights how low resolution the graphics are considering most TV's in the 1980's to the mid-1990's were at best 15" to 26" (OK some heavy and expensive ones could be larger). If you are into so-called retro graphics (Note: I said graphics, not gaming) then you may find that the output of the SNES and NES are very pixelated compared to games that were on the PS1 (still pretty pixelated) to the semi-washed out look of PS2 games (still playable though) on a modern large screen TV.

IMHO the best way to play retro games is usually via emulator on your PC on a smaller monitor (need a green parrot and optionally sing "Yo Ho Ho" - rum helps too). Of course, you can also do this from your original NES or SNES if you can get a small monitor (24" to 26") which takes AV input.

[Neonridr]

@nitus10 - yeah playing the SNES on a flat screen looks really weird. Definitely need an old CRT just for this thing. But I will make do for now :P

[moegooner88]

His statement is rather accurate. Had PS2 BC been a success on PS3, things might have been different now, but it wasn't.

[psychometer]

The reason why the PS3 didn't manage to continue BC was not because it wasn't a success, it's because of the eumlator chips getting overheated when PS2 games were played. Bad hardware manufacturing, imo.

[tyasia0]

@psychometer

Ok, you just made that up.

I have never heard of anyone having this problem nor have i ever seen it reported as such. First off the only PS3 that had hardware emulation basically had a a literal PS2 inside them, And the later models used software emulation there is no such thing as an "emulator chip".

[darthv72]

The change from hardware bc to software was rather quick (within the first year i believe) and done to cut cost. Not because it wasnt used or unsuccessful.

In fact it wasnt until their next revision that reduced cost further is when units really started to move. So basically because they wanted to sell systems to be competitive they made some sacrifices. BC was among them and its sad more people missed out on a convenient feature.

Had they kept it... who knows. Maybe ps4 would have full if not partial bc unlike the current situation.

Then again, they did buy gaikai with the intention of delivering older games to other things.

[tyasia0]

@ImGumbyDammit

That's what I said in less detail.

I'm not sure why you are calling me out the only PS3's that I know of that had any problems were due to emulation errors not overheating. The original full BC PS3's have around 99% compatibility. And that 1% is a very few games that play fine but have small errors at certain points in in games.

And unless you can find some credible information stating that emulation caused over heating in any model of PS3 I am going to continue to say that was made up B.S.

[Omnislashver36]

PS2 BC looked absolutely terrible upscaled to HD... PS3 is already HD so looks far nicer. I'd definitely use PS3 BC on PS4... I mean, shit, it's no wonder games like FFX and KH got remastered for PS3, they hardly even looked playable because of the upscaling. PS4>PS3 BC wouldn't have that issue.

Also, used PS2>PS1 BC all the time and I'm sure everyone else did so this is a really crap argument.

[rainslacker]

@psycho

No, it was because those chips cost money. The PS2 chip didn't overheat. By the time the PS3 released, the chip was so small that it generated almost no heat. The later versions of the PS2 didn't even have a fan in them, and the ones before that the fan only ran on occassion.

The reason they were cut is because Sony was being bombarded by criticism on the price of the console, and they were bleeding money on every system sold due to selling it at the largest loss of any console of all time. They had to cut costs to remain competative.

The most obvious cut was the BC chips, because as Sony had stated on multiple occassions before the PS3 was released, BC is not a feature that is used by a significant portion of the user base. Basically, everyone had to pay for the feature regardless of if they wanted.....similar to having to pay for Kinect with the launch X1 even if you cared nothing for it. Same way MS cut the Kinect because they needed to drop the price to remain competative. It was a feature that wasn't really utilized, so it was the obvious thing to cut....and in some ways, about the only thing that could be cut beyond reduced costs of parts to manufacture.

If people wanted BC to continue on PS4, they should have not been so criticial of console costs in the past. We had a fully featured console in the past, and it hurt Sony. Why, from a business perspective, given that the feature doesn't have high demand, would Sony compromise it's competitiveness for such a marginal feature? Sony didn't even include a camera in the PS4 like they wanted because they wanted the price to remain competative. Why would they include expensive chips like the CELL, including the RSX whose code isn't directly compatible with the more standard GPU's in modern systems?

I have never once read any report that the chip overheated. The CELL chip could if it had poor thermal compound on the heat sink, but that is the only issue of overheating ever reported on PS3.

[Ding]

darthv726h ago
The change from hardware bc to software was rather quick (within the first year i believe) and done to cut cost. Not because it wasnt used or unsuccessful.

In fact it wasnt until their next revision that reduced cost further is when units really started to move.
============================= ====

Er no. PS 2 used the PS 1s r3000 chip to oversee the new MIPS R5900, which was a 128 bit custom chip made out of 2x 64bit supercalar to produce the Emotion Engine

============================= =====
The CPU core is a two-way superscalar in-order RISC processor. Based on the MIPS R5900, it implements the MIPS-III instruction set architecture (ISA) and much of MIPS-IV, in addition to a custom instruction set developed by Sony which operated on 128-bit wide groups of either 32-bit, 16-bit, or 8-bit integers in single instruction multiple data (SIMD) fashion (i.e. four 32-bit integers could be added to four others using a single instruction).

Instructions defined include: add, subtract, multiply, divide, min/max, shift, logical, leading-zero count, 128-bit load/store and 256-bit to 128-bit funnel shift i
_____________________________ _______________________
n addition to some not described by Sony for competitive reasons.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^ ^^
Contrary to some misconceptions, these SIMD capabilities did not amount to the processor being "128-bit", as neither the memory addresses nor the integers themselves were 128-bit, only the shared SIMD/integer registers. For comparison, 128-bit wide registers and SIMD instructions had been present in the 32-bit x86 architecture since 1999, with the introduction of SSE. However the internal data paths were 128bit wide, and its processors were capable of operating on 4x32bit quantities in parallel in single registers.
============================= ==

Basically in was a Quad [4x32bit] Core Duo [2x chips]

The Cell was basically a 64 bit PPC, overlooking 8x SPEs which were basically Emotion engines running @ 4.8Ghz in local cache or 3.2Ghz in main RAM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

============================= =======
So basically because they wanted to sell systems to be competitive they made some sacrifices. BC was among them and its sad more people missed out on a convenient feature.

Had they kept it... who knows. Maybe ps4 would have full if not partial bc unlike the current situation.
============================= ====

No chance, the PS 2/ 3 used emulation, not this crappy drib/drab of a few games per month.. PS 3 also upscaled the games to 1080p as it did with DVDs, using checkerboard but PS 3 owners only complained that this game didn't have this feature or the sound warbled on that game.. Which meant teams were being dragged back off making 1st party exclusives to work on the emulation. As Sony don't own the copyrights to all the games, these clowns were asking the impossible.. So they just dumped it, as MS did last gen with their drip-drip b/c.

There is no way a x86 processor running @ 1.8ghz could emulate the cell running @ 3.2Ghz and no way Sony could have put a Cell in the PS 4 and keep the size down

=======================
Then again, they did buy gaikai with the intention of delivering older games to other things.

[meka2611]

@tyasia0
No psychometer is right, I worked at gamestop during the ps3 and the launch of ps4. We had tons of returns for original ps3's that no longer worked. Like he said it was breaking the systems because it wasn't emulation there was an actual ps2 in the damn thing, that's why it was so big.

[Bigpappy]

The man is trying to spin this as justification for not having BC and being constantly asked about it. Exec's make that mistake all the time. They try to justify something that does not need to be justified. All he needs to do is be straight with the PS gamers by saying it is too expensive too get into, with not enough perspective revenue gains, or just say if you want to play those last gen games just subscribe to PSnow service.

Attacking BC on Xbox is obviously wrong, buy it is also tasteless.

[rainslacker]

Isn't that what he said with less words by saying that it wasn't a highly used feature? That pretty much means that perspective revenue gains aren't going to be that good.

Why would he say anything about PSNow as an alternative? Sony has never once promoted PSNow as BC, and have even explicitely said it wasn't a BC solution. PSNow is a way to play older games, but the ability to play older games isn't BC in and of itself. Unless you can plug your PS1/2 game into the system, or use a digitally purchased game to play the PSNow version, it's not a solution to BC.

Did ryan attack BC on Xbox?

[Bigpappy]

Ok. He did not attack the BC on Xbox, but some of his defenders here are.

As far as Sony not promoting PSnow as BC, that is irrelevant if they offer that as your only option. That's like the government shutting down Public transportation, knowing that were I live I need to commute to work, then building a car dealership in front of my house. Note, they never told me I needed a car.

[Christopher]

If we're going to analyze 1.5% for BC, perhaps we should analyze every game sale that way. I hope we don't do that because I'd like to keep playing niche games rather than only play games that 5% or more of the market buys or games that only sell 1m or more. I need my Yakuza.

I honestly don't get how a guy having an opinion on it being a small market makes it less important to the individual or is a sign that Sony is #ForThePlayers.

[moegooner88]

Comparing new games to BC doesn't make any sense. Funding niche games on current gen hardware that don't necessarily sell well isn't the same as funding a feature that isn't that widely used and in all honesty, is not the point of newer console gens. New experiences > old feature. Want to play PS3 games, well you guessed it, keep your PS3.

[Christopher]

If they're used the same amount and help to promote the availability of games in your system at the same level, they absolutely are comparable.

***is not the point of newer console gens.***

For you. It's definitely a bonus for many others and a selling point. Just like niche games!

*** New experiences > old feature.***

Then why do old experiences get remasters and ports?

*** Want to play PS3 games, well you guessed it, keep your PS3.***

Not if a smart company creates a better solution. Think outside the box.

[343_Guilty_Spark]

You expect the usage to be what 50%? Come on.

[MilkMan]

Thought we established that already. He's full of poopoo.

[UCForce]

Like I said from beginning, BC is a nice feature but not a game changer.

[AspiringProGenji]

He is not wrong by saying that feature is not as used as anyone would led you to believe. Now, does that mean they shouldn't try to bring the feature to PS4? I don't see the majority pressuring them over it; I don't see BC being a topic on the PS4 even...It might be a matter of prioriries to them now. Right now they are investing heavily in their studios and bringing the big guns, VR, and so on.

Also, I think it is too late to start researching ways for that. They should consider the idea for the PS5. And considering they may stick with AMD for the next processor, there shouldn't be any compatibility excuse. I would wait for that moment to start putting them down for the lack of BC, so saying they are not "for the players" because they are not letting you play old games while they are hard at work investing in curremt gens is pretty absurd

[WickedLester]

The reason it's a non topic is because the PS4's current library is so good. Nobody on PS4 is caring about playing old games because there's so many good new ones available to play. It's that simple.

[Kiwi66]

So should they stop having ps3 games plus the ps1 & ps2 remasters playable on ps4 then ?

[Imalwaysright]

@ Kiwi66

You said it all. PS4 has no BC because Sony wants to sell you those remasters. Simple as that.

[FallenAngel1984]

How's PS Now treating you Jim

[Goldby]

its a different service. let me know how your 360 games play on your pc

[Bigpappy]

No one told you? You can play all the games from your X1 (Yeah, that includes 360 games) on your PC and it is better quality than PS now!

[XabiDaChosenOne]

All Xbox exclusives are better on PC lol and they don't pay for online.

[Goldby]

@bigpappy,

ok, now how about you head over to your moms place, and play them there.

Its still different service, PS now is a rental service for PC players and PS4 gamers. aka not BC.

[FallenAngel1984]

I don't have a 360, only a PS3 & PS4

[rainslacker]

Apparently not so well according to most here, because people don't want to pay to play their older games. Obviously though, people will pay to play them through BC or emulation in droves. But I think what applies to PSNow, probably applies to BC as well, and the potential revenue stream may not be that high since the two services are different means to a similar end. If that's the case, then Ryan's assertion that the market isn't that big for the feature holds even truer.

[-Foxtrot]

Why don't you just put PS1 Classics on the store again and see how well they'll sell...and when I say put them on I mean put them ALL on, the ones you released on the PS3

I think they'll end up making people pay again and if they do then it would be a sly as hell...

[tyasia0]

Well actually I'm sure they have the numbers and they probably don't sell as well as you think or they would prioritize adding them.

And there is often a lot more legal wrangling when it comes to figuring out where the money goes to than you might think especially as time goes on.

[rainslacker]

I don't think they'd make people pay again. But potentially, they'd have to have publisher approval to allow those games to play on PS4. They could handle it like MS does though, and make it so if you want your game offered for PS4, then you have to allow the PS3 purchases to be used already.

PS1 classics are the most likely thing to actually get emulation on the PS4. It should be more than capable. I'd say PS2 also, but there were so few of those that it wouldn't be worth it unless they actually start bringing more to the store...and I don't mean the emulated versions with trophy and graphical updates.

[nitus10]

The problem with that is the PS4 will not read CD's which is what PS1 games come on, only DVDs and Blurays.

You are correct in saying that the PS4 can emulate PS1 and even PS2 games but is it really is not worth the effort remembering that Sony is a per profit company? Now PS3 game emulation on the PS4 that is a different story and one that is as far as Sony is concerned not worth it since they do make money selling remastered games.

Also, it is not like Sony lied to their users since both Sony and Microsoft stated prior to the PS4 and XB1 generation that they were not going to be backward compatible.

Even if you purchase PS2 games for the PS4 you not only get rescaling although the original may keep the same aspect ratio you do get achievements which original PS2 games did not have.

All that said, backward compatibility is a great feature but it is only a selling point at the start of the generation not two years into that generation. This is why I still have my old FAT PS3 (Still works) and over 100 PS1/2/3 games but since I purchased my PS4 I rarely play them. It takes me a minute to start playing if I get a nostalgia kick.

[rainslacker]

I know. I was speaking of digital purchases, which is what Foxtrot was referring to.

The profit of emulating the digital titles is potentially there. There is profit to be had from the sale of digital titles on the PS Store. Whether that's enough for Sony to make an emulator only they can decide, and I assume they have the numbers from the PS3 days to make a fair assessment.

I don't think Sony lied about anything with BC. They've been very up front about it since the beginning.

[Rimeskeem]

BC is a great feature. But his numbers are accurate and few people really utilize the feature. I remember when the PS3 came out with BC and I used it the first year. But when games started to come out I completely left the PS2 gen.

[snoopgg]

Ps4 gamers are busy playing new games, there is no time for ps1 and ps2 games. Xbox owners on the other hand have time for old games.

[MegaMohsi]

I personally don't care for BC, give me the latest and greatest in terms of graphics and gameplay. However some people do like it so having options is better than not having it at all.

[J_Holt2132]

Author clearly doesn't know what he is talking about. Jim Ryan is GLOBAL HEAD OF MARKETING for Sony. When he says backwards compatibility isn't used much, you better believe Sony's marketing department has backed that claim with solid data-- their data, not Microsoft's

You don't think that Sony did the market research ahead of PS4's launch to determine whether or not they needed to include BC? It is costly, would have priced PS4 out of the market, and they made the very correct decision to leave it out.

This article is a joke.

[NapalmSanctuary]

Sony is just butthurt that PSnow isn't doing as well as they wanted it to. The only data they have related to BC is PSnow, and all it has is ps3 games and a terrible value proposition.

[ChickenOfTheCaveMan]

Any of you guys played their PS1 games on your PS3, I know I didn't even think about it for 1 second. At this point in the gen, I don't even play cheap remasters that I didn't play the original on PS3 just because I can't keep up with the new awesome games flow. BC is a neat feature, but it's almost useless at that point.

[NapalmSanctuary]

i played more ps1&ps2 games than ps3 games on my ps3.

[nitus10]

All PS3's can play PS1 games but only the FAT PS3's can play PS2 games and depending which version of PS3 you have NTSC (USA etc) has full PS2 hardware while PAL (UK, Europe, Australia etc) only had a partial PS2 with the rest being emulated in software (only 85% ~ 90% of PS2 games work).

[NapalmSanctuary]

@nitus10
Whats your point?

[ElementX]

Makes you wonder if they designed PS5 without BC

[nitus10]

If the PS5 still uses x86_64 hardware I can't see why not.

[Ryuujinjakka]

But... but... I bought a new console to play old games!

[feraldrgn]

BC is a convenient feature that raises the costs of the hardware & it's something that I would rarely (if ever) use, as the original console can play them better without needing patches or experiencing glitches.

Not to mention the fact that you buy a new console to play new games.

[Retroman]

Ps4 NEED!!!!!! BC when ps5 come out and we Traded our Ps4 console what the Hell we going to do with our Ps4 games??? BC is VERY!!! important .

All in one console is NEEDED. already have ps2,ps3 for BC but we NEED BC for Ps4 games for ps5

[343_Guilty_Spark]

The truth is coming to a head. Sony isn't as Pro-gamer as they make themselves seem. You know I have a Sega Nomad Saturn PSone 360 and a D.C. I had tons of awesome games on all those devices and despite my usage being maybe 1 hr per year it's still great to boot up Radiant Silvergun on the Saturn, Power stone on the Dreamcast, Panzer Dragoon Orta on the 360 (thanks BC), Sonic the Hedgehog 3, etc etc. My usage time is irrelevant. My experience is more important.

[objdadon]

They're giving me great new games to play on my new console i spent hundreds of dollars on while my Xbox one s collects dust to go with those dusty old games they're trying to get me to play again after a generation of playing them for 8 long years. That's as pro- gamer as it gets.

[343_Guilty_Spark]

There are new games on Xbox, maybe not ones you're interested but don't sit there and say Xbox doesn't offer new games because that is a lie. Even if the number of exclusives is not as great as the PS4s the majority of gaming hours are spent on multiplats. Go to sleep, you sound sick.

[Saranya]

I wonder why he's only said PS1-PS2 games but, the most of Sony fans want PS3 games on PS4.

[Warshade]

Jim Ryan is too busy counting his money to pay attention or give a S$%@ about gamers or little things like the truth. He likely was told the PS3 proves nobody wants backward compatibility.

[DashArrivals]

GOD, no one cares. Why is this the 18th article I've seen? Jeez Louise

[GNCFLYER]

Holy crap.

It's sad if this has become the X1 selling point. So many threads in gaming forums, articles by websites, and comments here.

I had backward compatibility last gen on my phat PS3 and after playing PS3 games couldn't go back.

I still own a PS3 and can barely play it after PS4 games. No one really buys a current gen system and spends mass amounts of time playing old games do they?

[ShadowWolf712]

>Global Head
He runs the Marketing division.

That said, he's also not wrong. It's a nice feature to bolster a launch, and it's a nice feature to have around, but it's not a necessary one, and not worth the time, money, and manpower they'd need to try to create a working PS3 emulator on PS4 hardware. It realistically couldn't be done without costing far more than its worth.

[MunchMiller00]

Just fire the guy, and replace him with someone who isn't a condescending a##hole. Problem solved.

I mean how old is this guy? Judging from the picture, I'd say he was already a ripe old age when these ancient games were brand new.

Just retired buddy. Go open a variety store or somethin. You know, something that won't matter when your stupidity gets in the way.

[GameBoyColor]

He's not wrong, MS's own stats clearly show that he isn't wrong but they put big numbers out like they always do to fluff it up a little bit.

[MunchMiller00]

There's zero reason Sony can't software emulate the majority of PS1 and PS2 games keeping their copy protection in check on PS4. Zero reason aside from them bending morons over even harder to pay their stupid prices for "classics" and "streaming".

[GameBoyColor]

well I could name a few reason:
1.Market Lead
2.Cutting Costs

Though I get it, "Cutting Costs?! PS NOW yada yada money loss". PS now is a different service that playstation wants to be more mainstream in the next decade, not only playing older games on your current playstation(which some would say is sony's bc) console, but on phones, tvs, computers, fridges anywhere at anytime.

[rainslacker]

I can think of two reasons.

No CD reader in the PS4 cutting out all PS1 games, and a good number of PS2 games.
Not many digital PS2 games on the PS Store to actually play on any emulator, so it'd be a slow burn to getting games up there.

While playing digital for PS1 and potentially having something like MS has for PS2 is certainly feasible with the hardware, it's not something that is likely worth it to make happen on a large scale.

[Markusb33]

Oh my god, so many sad losers on here,he is not wrong but not 100% right, some like be some couldn't care less. If anyone chooses a new system based on bc, I believe they should never upgrade. It's cool feature but not for me, i move forwards with my experiences not backwards, a bit like time really.

[objdadon]

Hmmm, so i suppose to spend hundreds of dollars on a 4k tv and scorpio with 9 gigs of ram and all this supposed "power" to play 360 games? Yeah, I'll pass....

[itsmebryan]

You don't get that you can also play 360 games on the Scorpio. Plus the games you just bought for X1 can be played on your new Scorpio along with all the new Scorpio games. Scorpio will have one of the largest libraries at launch.

[agent4532]

Finally an article that actually checked its and it was worth reading.

[Ristul]

I give credit to MS for trying to do BC, even if I prefer to run the games off of the original disk (via 360), at least people without a 360 have the option to play a lot of their last gen games on Xbox One. Sony are not even trying to do BC, and while its not a big deal to me, I can see that some people might like to go back to older games.

The reason I think it is less of an issue is that - YES, we can always keep our old hardware. It is an option, even if people like to forget it. Then there is emulation, and PS1+PS2 emulation has come a long way, even PS3 emulation is an option if you have a powerful PC.

In short, credit to MS for trying hard on BC, but in the end it's not a dealbreaker for most people either way. It's just a nice feature, thats all.

[chris235]

just because 200 people out of millions are trapped in the past doesn't mean a backward compatibility is justified. with indie titles flooding the consoles and rehashing every single game there ever was there is no need for this option. i say it's only a very small niche of people who think that this is a feature that should be a thing.

[pyroxxx]

Don't care for it,.. but I really want PS5 to have BC,.. And I want Demon's souls remake pronto.

[BeOpenMinded]

Holy smokes, how many of these articles are they going to post. Beating a dead horse... people already have opinions and have chosen if they care or not. Who are these articles trying to convince anyway? I could care less about percentages or what a certain exec wants... I want what's best for myself... more and possibly free :)

[itsmebryan]

If no one wants BC., Why does Sony charge the customer to play old games? I like BC because I haven't got around to playing every game I wanted. They maybe old but, they are new to me. It will also save space for me because I can get rid of my 360, X1, and just replace both with the Scorpio.

[GNCFLYER]

Good question.

Honestly I don't see PSNOW getting a ton of subscriptions though. I don't know the numbers but I could see it as something breaking even. Maybe a future thing.

[rainslacker]

Ever consider that the people paying don't actually own the old games, so likely BC wouldn't be a useful feature for them anyways, so they'd actually have to buy the game anyhow? Or consider that PSNow is not a BC service, but another service that can be used to play older PS games. Sony has never marketed PSNow as a BC solution or alternative. Has never once said people should use it if they want BC. Has explicitely stated that it is not BC.

Do you think MS or Nintendo don't charge people to play old games they don't own?

While there are benefits to BC, but given your anecdote, it seems that you don't own some of the BC games that you say you are playing....so why is MS making you pay for them?

[Tross]

I'm pretty sure Sony never argued that B/C is a bad thing. It just wouldn't be profitable for them to do right now. If they rolled it out in the first year or two of the PS4, then maybe it would have been worth it, but right now not so much. The Switch is doing fairly well in spite of not having a VC up yet (which I think they should get on ASAP). Of course it's getting Wii U ports but those are akin to upgraded PS4 ports of PS3 titles. All I'm saying is, don't hate the players, hate the game. Having B/C on XB1 is nice, but it's also the system that's constantly criticized for not having enough exclusives, so if it's a tradeoff I'll stick with the system that has more modern day exclusives.

[King_Lothric]

1. Market sales data and worldwide PlayStation domination shows how MS is wrong on relying on BC.

2. PlayStation already had BC on PS3 and statistics proved it was an unused feature on PlayStation.

3. When a console I is lacking exclusive games as Xbox is lacking, its user base has no choice but to look for other uses, in this case, BC.

4. And that is why that, if BC is being used on Xbox, it doesn't mean is going to be used on PlayStation because they have a strong stream of amazing games so PlayStation gamers will rather invest on its amazing library of new exclusive games than play old games as on Xbox.

[EricHonolulu]

Move forwards! Not backwards.

[SaveFerris]

Although I'd love for the PS4 to have BC with my PS3 games, it isn't the primary reason I and many, many others have purchased the console for.

[Moe-Gunz]

Still have my OG PS3 with full BC...never use it.