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.
yea it should
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.
BC is always a great feature to have. Whoever thinks it isnt is lying to themselves.
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.
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?
You think all the best PS1, PS2, and PS3 games have already been remade/remastered? Yeah right.
@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.
@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 ;)
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.
@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...
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.
It would be nice but it’s not a deal breaker for me.
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.
@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.
@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.
@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.
@ 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.
And if they keep an x86-64 arch, there is no reason why with some work it couldn't happen.
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.
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.
I think it should also I hope all the PS4 games I bought digitally will work on my PS5 when it is released
Agree 100%. I buy digital only so backwards compatibility with PS5 is a must have for digital content.
Absolutely agree, I also buy digital only and I would like to bring my current psn library forward to future gens and consoles.
Same here, after going nearly a hundred percent digital this gen backwards compatibility is a must.
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.
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.
Yes of course
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
Ignore the vice city thing...wrong article edit...too many drinks....ffs
Leave that stuff alone if you can't handle it.
It should to counter the inevitable remaster begging
Not really because companies will still look to remaster titles and give them extra assets, no amount of backwards compatibility is ever going to magically create or make an asset. We got remasters in ports of PlayStation 1 games for PlayStation 3 even with the PlayStation 3 actually being natively backwards compatible to PlayStation 1. Why? Because Publishers like Square Capcom Electronic Arts what have you could care less that you can play the original on PlayStation 3 they're still going to actually try to sell a port remaster would have you That has nothing to do with Publishers as I have no clue how some Gamers don't even understand the structure of this business they literally think that companies will suddenly want to make less money just because you have the ability to play the game natively 😂😂😂 Ok pal
It will need to, to compete with the next XBOX and what Microsoft is doing.
It doesn't have it now and Sony seems to be doing just fine.
Realistically, if PS3 didn't cost so much to develop, and if PS4 was powerful enough to emulate it or include it onboard, they probably would've done so already. But they made the smarter move and produced a [relatively] powerful console at an affordable price. Now, with PS4 and up using x86, and with PS5 presumably being that much more powerful, I don't think they have a legitimate reason to not include backward compatibility, especially with how popular PS4 has been, and still will be when PS5 releases. Again, not a deal breaking feature, but no reason it shouldn't have it.
They should if they don't want to be 1 up by Microsoft.
Yes and more importantly BC for PS1-3 as well
lol here we go again. XD
If they can cram it in then sure why not, but most definitely not at the expense of new next-gen features
Yeah would save the remakes and remasters to a massive extent don’t get me wrong I’m very happy with the majority but after all do want new games more than your old ones but luckily the majority of the remasters have been some proper classics
Next gen consoles probably won't have optical disc drives so the BC would only work with digital titles. They could alternatively sell an external USB optical disc drive for physical BC games.
Nah next gen atleast will still have disc drives. Market is still to big to abandon.
definitely bought too many ps4 games that i want to transfer to my next gen and hopefully they woud get patched to take advantage of more power hope games start getting designed to scale up with generation. though how silly is it that same people that troll on xbox one x backward compatibility threads saying how useless it is still want to have backward compatibility on ps4 ... its beyond me...
Why not? Every console should!
They should also have ps1 and 2 by default. Put the disc in and play. Not like this couldnt have been done right now on ps4 but Sony doesnt care about old games right now. Only if its a remake of a remastered game /s
Since x86, iterative hardware, and simpler development are all the rage, it damn well better be.
Too early for PS5. But yes backwards compatibility is always a good thing. And not some.... All games please
Not a big concern of mine—but it better play PlayStation 5 games.
hahahaha. U crack me up man
It better, my backlog is tremendous.
What argument can anyone really have against such a feature
Well a valid argument could be made that if a company spends its time focusing on BC it takes time away from focusing on new games and therefore you end up with little to no new games to play on your new console, sound familiar? Personally I dont care either way, if it has it fine I wont use it but if other people get some use out of it so be it, I just hope it doesn't shift Sony's focus away from what they've been doing best and giving us amazing new game experiences.
Will not necessarily especially if you understand that new games are being developed by game developers you don't really have someone like Naughty Dog working on backwards compatibility.... PlayStation 4 not having compatibility with PlayStation 3 is specifically based on the PlayStation 3 is architecture it is a special case it is not something that's really normal.
No it doesn’t. Including backwards compatibility in Game Boy Color, PlayStation 2, Game Boy Advance, Nintendo DS, PlayStation Portable, Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, Wii, & Nintendo 3DS. As for recent times, the libraries of Vita, Wii U, & Xbox One weren’t in any way affected by offering backwards compatibility. Idk how anyone would think that studios would halt work on new projects to preserve the past. So no there’s no real valid reason to actually be against the feature. Being indifferent yes, but to stand against it is absurd.
You asked for an argument I simply proposed one. I dont think anyone is against the feature just indifferent as you suggest.
Video games increased in price this generation. From season passes, to "ultimate editions," to digital "complete" editions. Not too mention the frequency at which they were released this gen, so many of us have yet to even finish or start some gems. So the real question is, should your ps4/xboxone expensive backlog have forward compatibility through the next gen? Heck yes.
It's a nice feature, but personally, I don't care either way. I always keep my old consoles.
They better at least support PS4 games. I kind of doubt that they'll have any sort of BC for PS1, PS2, or PS3 games considering that they're already removing PS3 games from PS+. That tells me that they want to re-release BC games as new digital releases so they can charge people again like they have been with PS2 games on PS4. BTW PS3 games can be played on PC. There's no excuse why they can't be emulated on PS5 on a case by case basis.
It takes a computer that is significantly more powerful than any current console to play ps3 games on a pc. Even then, it's limited and can't play most games well. No consumer computer available today can process information as fast as the CELL SPE's could, except maybe in some high end gpus. But the user doesn't have the kind of access for gpu compute to make that easy, and gpus are structured much differently on the command level than the spe were on the CELL. There are a lot of people i notice have no clue what made the CELL so powerful. The reason we didn't get ps3 bc was because when Sony helped designed the CELL, they banked on it become a contender for future processors. That didn't happen, and it set back the bc that they typically had
Dude people already have PS3 games going in 4K and it doesn't take that powerful of hardware. I'm sure Xbox One X could run them in 4K right now
RPCS3 is the best emulator so far. It has the most playable games, and it requires a pretty beefy system. The PS4P and OGPS4 aren't as powerful as the minumum specs required to run it. The X1X may run it, except the CPU may not be up to snuff. Also, it requires much more than the base specs to achieve 4K with it, so you are wrong there. Even if a GPU can produce 4K with it, it doesn't mean the game itself will manage it. Looking at the compatibility list, only about 700 games are compatible, and 95% of them are indie games, 2D based games, or things that aren't likely to get people hyped up. Most of the games I saw, or bothered to look through on the list, probably didn't over-utilize the SPE's, as most of them were smaller games that had various levels of porting between different consoles. It's not that any console this generation can't emulate the SPE code, it's that it can't do it fast enough to keep up with the games that actually bothered to take advantage of the architecture. This is just a technical fact. There is really no discussion behind it. The SPE's could process about twice the amount of specific kinds of data about 4 TIMES FASTER than the current consoles. Terraflop power isn't going to make the code execute faster, just means more data can be executed at a time. There is a distinct different between those two principals. GPU"s releasing more recently, or soon to come will have the speed behind them to do SPE processing through GPU compute, but the X1X and either PS4 GPU's don't fall into that category.
You're right we have had this discussion before, I wonder how many more times we'll get to have it before the console comes out? I dont care rather it has it or not but at this point I hope it does for no other reason then we wont have to hear about it anymore.
Depends if it doesn't have PS1, PS2, or PS3 BC, then you will still be hearing about it.
And if it did we'd just hear about something else.
This is not about should or shouldn't, they MUST else it will be a massive advantage to Xbox and could seriously lead to another PS3 era. If they are smart enough and want to succeed like this gen they have to do it. This is why competition is always healthy for the consumer, without Microsoft they sure as hell would never consider looking at BC ever. Seriously, thanks, Microsoft.
You are wrong. Sony has BC from PS1 to PS2 back in the day. It isn't something Microsoft started. No you are wrong they already tried BC with PS3 to PS4 but couldn't make it work. You are wrong that the exclusion of BC will lead to another PS3 era because the PS4 is real and doesn't have BC and is destroying Xbox. PS5 will have BC simply because it will continue to use X86 architecture. Everything you say makes it sound like it has anything to do with Microsoft. It does not.
Don't get me wrong I used my PS4 more than my Xbox but I really like what microsoft is doing recently with the X enhanced BC titles, that's NOT just regular BC like the PS2 had. Did you know that the PS4 has a fully working and excellent PS2 emulator that was discovered only after people hacked the console? here's the article from DigitalFoundary : http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... now what's is preventing Sony from opening this to gamers and allowing us to use our old library with enhanced graphics? because they are greedy and would rather sell you the game twice than let you use your old disk they no longer profit from.
Except your example doesn't even make any sense because they're winning this generation without backwards compatibility which actually contradicts your entire point of them needing it to win the next Generation people primarily by new hardware to play new games.... If a user wants to play an older game they feasibly can buy the older system used at any damn Outlet to get what they want. So it would be great if it released with PlayStation 5 but if it doesn't I'm still buying a PlayStation 5 day one and I'm still keeping my PlayStation 4. I would argue Microsoft losing this generation by a landslide might show even further to there technical team that such a feature is not even really needed or wanted it that badly enough to affect sales So if you want a 360 or Playstation 3 or Playstation 2 or anything else like that Amazon has a bunch used Enjoy.