Top
350°

Should the PS5 Feature Backwards Compatibility?

Jett: We’ve had this discussion before but there’s just no escaping it (at least until we actually get it). So let’s take a look at how Sony deals with the whole Backwards Compatibility feature.

Read Full Story >>
sirusgaming.com
The story is too old to be commented.
DigitalRaptor201d ago (Edited 201d ago )

It's not a matter of "should".

It will. PS3 games didn't happen this gen because of the Cell's complexity. It was circumstantial. I like what Sony has done with PS1/PS2 remakes this gen but I think they've already exhausted the most popular ones.

PS4 has a community that Sony won't want to fracture going into PS5. They have much more to lose by not offering it day one on PS5, than offering a few remasters on next-gen. It's be ridiculously stupid not to not at the bare minimum include PS4 backwards compatibility. If anything, I'm expecting PS5 to work like XB1X and have built-in improvements to last-gen games, as well as developers making PS5 patches for the latest PS4 games.

darthv72201d ago

BC is always a great feature to have. Whoever thinks it isnt is lying to themselves.

Melankolis200d ago

Shuhei Yoshida stated clearly. Complex or not, BC on PS4 will take resources and Sony prefered to allocate them to other project. Looking at those exclusives, i can't complain.

And how he praised that MS has done almost impossible job to make BC on XBO. So i assume that BC on PS4 is quite complex.

Godmars290200d ago (Edited 200d ago )

Only BC was a feature on the PS3 day one. A number of factors, including an off comment quote taken a gospel, was used as excuse to remove one gen of BC.

@darthv72:
Why do I think that if I go back far enough I'd find you complaining about it being on the PS3?

Pantz200d ago

You think all the best PS1, PS2, and PS3 games have already been remade/remastered? Yeah right.

Rachel_Alucard200d ago

@godmars

They removed BC on PS3 because they wanted to cut the cost of the PS3 down from $600 to $400, so that and the layoff of some employees helped bring it down.

Fragnum200d ago (Edited 200d ago )

@Melankolis

"And how he praised that MS has done almost impossible job to make BC on XBO. So i assume that BC on PS4 is quite complex."

Microsoft is predominantly a software company, Whereas Sony is predominantly a hardware company.

Xbox One OS is based on Windows framework, MS simply has the ability to dedicate more human resources to the task of backwards compatibility.

I don't see this is a negative for Sony.

MS needed to give gamers something back after a shaky start this generation and a lack of investment in its development studios, and to an extent this has been successful.

Meanwhile a lack of BC doesn't seem to have affected Sony in any meaningful way, with 75 million + sales of the Playstation 4 they seem to be doing ok ;)

_-EDMIX-_200d ago

Agreed because of Sony's decision to make an architecture that is closer to PC and makes more sense I think it's more likely you're going to seem backwards compatibility.

@darth-agreed backwards compatibility is always going to be a great feature.

Melankolis200d ago

@fragnum
#Microsoft is predominantly a software company, Whereas Sony is predominantly a hardware company.#

I know, everybody here knows that

#I don't see this is a negative for Sony.#

And i don' t see anybody talks negative of Sony

#Meanwhile a lack of BC doesn't seem to have affected Sony in any meaningful way, with 75 million + sales of the Playstation 4 they seem to be doing ok ;)#

It's alright you don't have to defend anything...

Death200d ago

It’s complete BS to say it was the “Cell”. Sony spent hundreds of millions on Gaikai so they could charge gamers to stream “old” games. There is a financial reason to not allow b/c on PS4. 360 games were based on a modified PowerPC based system as well and Microsoft found a way to make these games work on weaker hardware.

StormSnooper200d ago

It would be nice but it’s not a deal breaker for me.

Wh1teLightning200d ago (Edited 200d ago )

Sorry but I have to disagree. It wasn't about complexity, but coming up with a new avenues for revenue. Why spend the time and resources to add backwards compatibility when you can come up with a whole new service that simplifies the process. Then charge consumers for said service, and remake/update games from past generations that consumers will have to pay in order to play on PS4. I don't like it, but from a revenue standpoint it's genius.

That's why I applaud Microsoft and there stance on backwards compatibility. Sure go ahead and re-release past generation games so that new generations of gamers can own and enjoy (who don't own), but charge people to play games they already own? Wasn't a problem on PS2 & PS3, but all of a sudden Sony abandoned. Why.....cause they knew they could charge for it instead of making it a system feature. I guarantee when the PS4 released if backwards compatibility was part of the system features they would have sold millions more.

Godmars290200d ago

@Rachel_Alucard:
Given that original hardware based BC, which involved PS2 parts, was $20 of production costs, it was hardly a dent. Less so when software emulation replaced it.

Nevermind that thinks to the Gamestop s**tstorm that happened back then, the whole thing has become more about legal issues. Original IP holders wanting money for used games.

darthv72200d ago

@God, you will likely find comments where I criticize Sony for removing it from the PS3. And I have been rather vocal about the lack of even PS1 support on the PS4 considering it has been something that has been a staple for 3 generations now.

Godmars290200d ago

@darthv72:
And again, largely because of greed and the used game craze, BC is more about legal that hardware.

Also about Sony removing CD support as its a dead tech - that should hardly be that expensive to keep.

DigitalRaptor194d ago

@ Death

Or you know... it makes sense.

Neither you nor I, know if Sony bought Gaikai to provide a solution to PS3's complexities or because they thought there was a ton of money in streaming subscriptions and could recoup an investment. Sony in my opinion could have made more just by selling PS3 games to PS4 owners, just like they can do to the same when it comes to PS5. And trying to compare the configuration of the X360's architecture to the Cell (as if they're remotely comparable), and say "well MS did it so...", is not going to work.

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 194d ago
Eidolon200d ago

And if they keep an x86-64 arch, there is no reason why with some work it couldn't happen.

notachance200d ago (Edited 200d ago )

I think both PS and XB will be BC from now on and have a smartphone-like cycle only with longer gaps, like how it is with PS4Pro and XB1X now. And instead of separating it by generations, future games will have minimum requirements e.g playable in PS4Pro and XB1X or later consoles.

Xenophon_York200d ago

Smartphone cycles certainly have molded consumers' expectations for technology. Once upon a time it was the same fever with upgrading laptops and computers every three or four years. Now it's iPhones and Galaxies every one or two years. Makes sense video game console makers want to take advantage of this loosening of consumers' pocketbooks.

I personally wouldn't go as far as to claim there will be games designed for minimum system specs for a dedicated game console, though.

richierich201d ago

I think it should also I hope all the PS4 games I bought digitally will work on my PS5 when it is released

TheRealHeisenberg200d ago

Agree 100%. I buy digital only so backwards compatibility with PS5 is a must have for digital content.

JackBNimble200d ago

Absolutely agree, I also buy digital only and I would like to bring my current psn library forward to future gens and consoles.

Magnetar200d ago

Same here, after going nearly a hundred percent digital this gen backwards compatibility is a must.

PhantomS42200d ago

Yes, I can see 3rd party stuff taking some time and having some issues at first because of licensing but all 1st party games should be day 1.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 200d ago
Chaosdreams201d ago (Edited 201d ago )

It should, as it would prove to be a considerate acknowledgement of the time/money spent during the ps4's reign. With backwards compatibility gamers could hop over onto their ps5, play their games with perhaps beefed graphics (for example, ps4 pro graphic enhancements on the ps4 games) and it would ease them into the transition of ps5 games without their ps4 backlog waving at them.

Mentality:
- Gamer sees ps5 is coming out with backwards compatibility. Looks at games he/she currently owns, decides to transition over because they can still play them, thus increasing the value of the ps5.
- Gamer sees ps5 is coming out but it doesn't have backwards compatibility. Looks at games he/she currently owns and decides that the ps5 can wait a year or two more at the bare minimum.

The ps4 has sold incredibly well, if Sony wants that instalment base to transition over smoothly, backwards compatibility is the key. Especially when games can be played digitally.

Having access and the ability to play games from multiple generations is a popular concept, and while the ps4 has a lot of remasters and PS Now (as there isn't backwards compatibility) I feel that it would be a serious mistake to take the exact same approach with the ps5.

-Foxtrot201d ago (Edited 201d ago )

You know what would also be nice...PS1 GAMES

You know the big collection they built up on the PSN during the PS3 days only for them to completely scrap it and not re-release them for the PS4 even though most of us paid for a lot of them.

GTA VI-CE City

-Foxtrot201d ago

Ignore the vice city thing...wrong article edit...too many drinks....ffs

TheRealHeisenberg200d ago

Leave that stuff alone if you can't handle it.